Am I the only one who wants an E-Mount 350g 1.2 AF Nifty Fifty?
philip_pj wrote:
B&H's blurb summary says: 'Aspherical Element Reduces Aberrations' as though we are dealing with the still-difficult processing of such pieces
Perhaps you should finally learn to distinguish between what is actually written and what you maliciously interpret into it in your delusion. According to your flawed logic, we could conclude from the advertising statement (quote from the Thypoch website) "Another benefit of our M mount lenses is their versatility. Thypoch offers a range of focal lengths and designs, from wide-angle to telephoto, giving photographers the tools they need for various shooting situations." that Hypoch wants to make us believe that producing different focal lengths and designs is something very special.
philip_pj wrote:
and they tell you the truth right at the very bottom of their web blurb, under 'Additional Details': 'One precision-molded (PMo) aspherical element..'
How many would enjoy being told: 'One phone-style molded plastic aspherical element'?
Why would a manufacturer write such nonsense that doesn't correspond to the facts? Because of some crazy influencer? You're really funny.
philip_pj wrote:
And even the mixed case is intended to fool you, why not just 'PM'?
Your confusion is neither Canon's fault nor the fault of any other company or abbreviation. And why PM instead of PMo? This artificially created discussion about abbreviations and the ulterior motives behind them is absolutely ridiculous and only shows that you're grasping at straws to discredit everything that doesn't come from China.
philip_pj wrote:No, it has to roll off the tongue nicely.
So, why did the Chinese name their company Thypoch (for "Thy" and "Epoche") and not TE? Or even better, CL (for China Lenses)? Because it sounds good? Then they could have chosen Leico (for Leica Copy). That might have been less misleading.
philip_pj wrote:
Besides all the chicanery from Canon, a simple search reveals:
'PMo (plastic-molded) aspherical photo elements are durable enough for consumer-level camera lenses but are *not as durable as glass-based elements* like ground or molded glass aspherical lenses. They are *cost-effective and lightweight*, and their durability depends on the lens's overall design and construction, but *they lack the scratch and heat resistance of glass*.'
They should carry a warning indicating how long the material will last in harsh conditions, amid an extended warranty..but no. So: caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.
It is known that Nikon has been using plastic elements since at least 1991, and I have not heard of any problems arising from this. Furthermore, I am convinced that modern plastic elements last longer than, for example, the peculiar Typoch aperture ring mechanisms, which vary from lens to lens even in their factory state.
philip_pj wrote:
Imagine if the Chinese used this stuff? You'd never hear the end of it.
Oh, I see it differently. If the Chinese were to do what Canon did and launch lenses alongside their premium line that offered acceptable performance at half the size, a quarter of the weight, and a quarter of the price, then these lenses would be snapped up in no time, regardless of whether they called the plastic components PM, PMo, or pmO.
And just so you know: The only thing I've ever owned from Canon was a flatbed scanner. So I couldn't care less about the brand.
Nov 18, 2025 at 11:49 AM
Previous versions of Nifty Fifty's message #16931256 « Am I the only one who wants an E-Mount 350g 1.2 AF Nifty Fifty? »
