RoamingScott wrote: Ross Martin wrote: Xysterz wrote:
A bit off topic, but why the hell are seemingly all of the Sony 50mm 1.4 or faster E lenses so dang expensive and BIG? I really liked that my Nikon F 50mm 1.4 was something like $500, small, light, very portable, almost like a lens cap (well, not that flat), etc. That was my carry around lens. Just ranting.
Nikon Z 50’s are all bigger than their F predecessors (but also optically superior, especially at wider apertures and outside the frame center). For example, comparing Nikon’s F 50/1.8G with their current Z 50/1.8 S:
This is always a bit of a disingenuous comparison simply because of how the mounts worked and how much farther back inside the body the sensor was in the DSLR cameras. The F lenses didn't HAVE to be as long, and if the Z mount stood as far away from the sensor as the F did, the lenses could be a LOT smaller.
The camera size site normalizing on the eyecup placement is also not helpful at all, wish they didn't do that.
Either way, lots of tiny third party options for very major brand except for Canon ()
Yes, I understand what you’re saying. The visual comparison was shared for the OP who expressed shock at the size of mirrorless lenses compared to what he owned in F mount. I also noted to him that the image quality of something like Z 50/1.8 is so much better than the F 50 he has used in the past, and I imagine the OP will enjoy the IQ improvements if he chooses to go Z. I know I certainly have! I have owned 4 different version F 1.8 and 1.4 50’s and now would not go back to any of those compared to the Z 50/1.8. Anyway, I deleted the image from my post.
Mar 31, 2026 at 06:53 PM
Previous versions of Ross Martin's message #17013294 « Any Nikon converts here? »
)