I tested that lens and wasn't impressed at all. It gets to 6.3 very soon, after 60mm or so. And the autofocus was also very slow in comparison to Z "S" primes. Sharpness, bokeh and contrast is also far behind the "good" Z lenses. For general purpose zooming a bridge camera is probably cheaper and better.
@@BarisYener Not sure about that. The tests and reviews I've seen delivered quite good results for such a zoom. Even a few pro landscape photographers use it from time to time. The photo magazine I read rated it with a "95,5" (best lens ever testet is "118" or so), that's a much better result than similar lenses from Canon and Fuji got. I'm sure auto focus isn't as good as with some "S" lenses but if it is at Fuji level I'll still be happy with it. And for landscape I never need something below F6.3 (okay, almost never :) ) For hiking this could be the only lens I need.
@@patrick.771 maybe for a lens like the Z 24-200 is, it might be good, yes. But from the perspektive of a Z-System owner with Z20, Z35,Z50/1.8, Z85, Z24-70/4 - I'm confident to say it's no where near as impressive as those lenses mentioned. But as you said, it might be good for what it is. Regards
What's interesting to me is that the Nikon 50mm f1.2 is bigger and heavier than the Sony's. I was expecting it to be the other way around considering the size of that mount that restricts lens designers on the Sony.
@@theizza68 I imagine the size of the Z lens has to do with gathering more light (higher T-stop than Canon & Sony) and over corrections for improved image quality, and the the type of stepping motors used in conjunction with the larger mount size. Thus far, ALL of the constant aperture lenses f/4 and wider have been EXCELLENT. The main reason youtubers thumb their noses at Nikon is because most of them are sponsored (paid) by Sony/Canon.
Please do a comparison video with all 3 of these lenses on their respective high end bodies. Would be interesting to see just how minor the differences are across the offerings
It's already been done on another channel. Its not the best comparison because it's coming from a former Sony ambassador and now Canon fanboy. He even contradicts himself in his own comparisons. All three are awesome lenses for their respective body brands. All have a lot of pluses and some minuses. In my opinion, the least perfect lens is the Sony. It has massive focus breathing and its not even a true 50mm. It's 47mm masquerading as a fifty 1.2.
@@demarcusdavis1257 Hence why I asked Christopher to do it. While he certainly has a preference for a brand just like we all do, his reviews are very unbiased and uses good testing methods.
Wonderful bokeh on that lens! Also impressed by the suppression of CA, minimal focus breathing and sharpness. From the shape of the lens I suspect that a lot of the r&d from the 58mm f0.95 Noct went into this lens.
I think I’ll stay with Nikon. Have a D750 now, will eventually get a Z body. Reasons are the better AF coverage, exposure preview and size/weight advantage of the body and at least some zoom lenses. I think they’ll be alright. But for now my DSLR is more than I need, and for a price that can’t be beaten.
I think for size/weight sony really kills it, especially with the a7c, but even the highest end a1 is super small and compact and so are the lenses. But nikon do have some superb lenses recently big + for getting them
Thanks a lot for this excellent review. It shows how good the Z-Mount works for Nikon. Always very high sharpness, best CA correction and smoothest bokeh. It's the same for every other Z lens too. I hope we will see a Z 35mm 1.2 S soon. That would be my most used lens. Nikon Z is really impressive to my eyes. :) Cheers!
I was wondering what that little screen on the lens was, reminded me of some toys with card readers built into them. I won’t lie, even though I read the title, my head kept telling me that was an 85mm lens, it looks enormous 😱
I have this lens and I have to say it renders more beautifully than any other 50mm lens I've tried. I still have the original 50mm AIS and the 50mm f1.8S, both great in their own way but in a different class with image rendering.
I really hope in the next 20 years the cost of manufacturing metamaterial lenses will significantly come down so that they can make their transition over photography lenses. Imagine having a f1.2 lens of this quality but at the size of a pancake lens. Metamaterial photography lens design is going to be very exciting.
Every time you say "review the living daylights out of it", I immediately think of that A-ha James Bond tune and start singing "Ooooooooooh, the living daylights" etc. Catchy tune!
The 1.8 isn't a better choice. The 1.8 and 1.2 are two totally different tools for different types of photography. The 1.8 is a take around lens; landscape, street, general run & gun. The 1.2 is a portrait, special event, studio lens due to its size, weight, and ultra fast aperture.
@They Caged Non All the information given by Davis are known by everybody. However, I wanted to highlight the fact that you can have 90% of a 50 F1.2 when using a 50 F1.8 (at a quater of the price and half the weight). Especially when you notice 2 things : 1- This lens gives its best at F4. 2- The Z 50 F1.8 is one of the best in its class.
Pardon my lack of knowledge in lense design but, why did the lenses get so huge? I came from F mount to Z with the assurance that a smaller flange distance to the sensor would equate to smaller lense design. I know they released pancake lenses at 2.8 but my F 50 1.8 is half the size of the Z 50 1.8. Did i miss something? I will end up getting the Z 50 1.2 because of the resolving power. I just wished it was shorter, wide i don't mind.
Thanks for the review! I’m wondering if you’d be willing to review a medium format 80mm lens adapted to a mirrorless camera with a speed booster for the equivalent focal length of a 50mm? I’ve been looking at the mamiya 645 to Nikon Z adapter by kipon for a while now.
Great review, thanks! Question: why were in camera corrections left on for some of the tests? Wouldn’t that mask some optical flaws like chromatic aberration?
I decided a long time ago to keep them on for the resolution tests. The reason why is that virtually everyone in the world today uses optical corrections either in-camera or in editing
@@christopherfrost thanks for clarifying your reasoning - that does make a lot of practical sense. I think the geeky side of me is just curious about the ‘Raw’ output from a lens even though in the real world that may not make much of a practical difference. Thanks again for your great work 🙏
I realize I'm very late in responding to this, but here's my two cents: if optical flaws are being "masked" by in-camera corrections, that to me just means they can be corrected losslessly and shouldn't factor into a buying decision.
Thank for this honest review! no doubt it's a fantastic lens with good sharpness and beautiful bokeh. Sadly it's big and expensive. Not very "street photography" friendly... Hope they will offer us a 1.4 version smaller and cheaper... For the moment I keep my money and wait for the 85mm 1.2. I hope it will be an outstanding piece of glass...
Ricci talks has a comparison video where he shows results side by side... and the short answer is yes ... The long one would be that 1.8 lens is so sharp and way lighter to be used at f/2 than this 1.2 lens ...
@@trym2121 I see photographic/image capability as the first and last consideration of any lens. Price , of course, being the material and therefore consequential barrier. Have fun with your weight scale. lol
Wow... that thing is enormeous... at first glance (i just click on your videos first, and then see what comes :D ) i thought its something of a 100-150mm prime :O
It really does depend on what you're looking for: if you are positive that you need a super clean razor sharp studio lens, then you might want to consider upgrading to that monster, otherwise, I can't see the point, especially if you're shooting stills. With the sigma you get shorter, lighter lens with a physical focus ring and the impeccable usm focus motor (I'm mentioning this because all of the native Z lenses are focus-by-wire), at half the price new, It would be very difficult to justify that upgrade to me.
Get the Z50 1.8S or this 1.2. Z´s are 5 time superior than Sigma ART 50mm 1.4. I´ve tried the Z1.8 and Sigma´s 50 and the Sigma gets close to image equivalence at F5.6 vs Z50mm wide open at 1.8
I’ve been using Sigma Art 50mm f1.4 for so many years. After I got this Nikkn 50mm f1.2, I haven’t gone back to Sigma. The bokeh just feel more natural, where Sigma’s bokeh is distracting. Sigma make the photo look flat and so digital. Nikon more like film or organic feel.
With the 50 1.2 being this enormous, I guess the roadmapped 85 1.2 will be the size and weight of the 58 0.95 with a 95mm filter. At what point are Nikon users going to say 'maybe we should compromise image quality slightly so we can have some kind of respect toward usability'. Canon and Sony 50 1.2 are compromised in some way, but they are at least not enormous.
The roadmap sizes are accurate. 85 1.2 will be smaller than this monster and near the size of the 24-70. Still big but about the same size of canon’s 85 1.2. I don’t think Nikon users will care about an 1.5in and 100g since this is a specialty lens, they could always go to the excellent 1.8S or adapt the older canon 1.2L or adapt the Sony 50 1.2.
No focus breathing and no distortion. That's why. Sony GM is almost like a 45-55mm zoom lens. There's always a penalty to optical performance when you aim for size and weight reduction.
Good luck caring and shooting with 1kg 50mm all day. Optically great but at the cost of usability... On the other side, I'm surprised that Canon RF 50mm 1.2 feels so cheapish when you work wit it.
These modern 1.2 lenses have been really spectacular. Hoping Nikon UK sends the 70-200 next.
for sure, check out how well it peformes for portraits th-cam.com/video/YXvNYcXHTbk/w-d-xo.html
Please Nikon send this great guy the 24-200 for testing ... :)
I tested that lens and wasn't impressed at all. It gets to 6.3 very soon, after 60mm or so. And the autofocus was also very slow in comparison to Z "S" primes. Sharpness, bokeh and contrast is also far behind the "good" Z lenses. For general purpose zooming a bridge camera is probably cheaper and better.
@@BarisYener Not sure about that. The tests and reviews I've seen delivered quite good results for such a zoom.
Even a few pro landscape photographers use it from time to time.
The photo magazine I read rated it with a "95,5" (best lens ever testet is "118" or so), that's a much better result than similar lenses from Canon and Fuji got.
I'm sure auto focus isn't as good as with some "S" lenses but if it is at Fuji level I'll still be happy with it. And for landscape I never need something below F6.3 (okay, almost never :) )
For hiking this could be the only lens I need.
@@patrick.771 maybe for a lens like the Z 24-200 is, it might be good, yes. But from the perspektive of a Z-System owner with Z20, Z35,Z50/1.8, Z85, Z24-70/4 - I'm confident to say it's no where near as impressive as those lenses mentioned. But as you said, it might be good for what it is.
Regards
@@BarisYener okay, thanks. Not owning Z primes at the moment, just the 24-70 F4.
I'll wait a few weeks and read more reviews.
@@patrick.771 I have some Z Lens Reviews on my channel too, with lots of pictures... but it's german. :)
It's awesome that you're finally getting to try out so many Nikon lenses :D
That focus breathing test @2:59. This lens will be a staple for videographers, almost all Nikkor S-Line lens are!
Would videographers prefer a declickable aperture ring? Just thinking they could have replaced the electronic display....doesn't seem that functional.
@@Michaelpai1230 i think they're more for a one-man operation. Set the camera and rely on AF. Not sure about monitoring tho
What an absolute unit of a 50mm. Reminds me of the sigma 40mm.
It is kind of sad Nikon mirrorless is dismissed by some TH-camrs, the z lens are truely outstanding.
The esthetics are so unapologetically business that I think that might play a part as to why people don't show them off a lot.
What's interesting to me is that the Nikon 50mm f1.2 is bigger and heavier than the Sony's. I was expecting it to be the other way around considering the size of that mount that restricts lens designers on the Sony.
@@theizza68 I imagine the size of the Z lens has to do with gathering more light (higher T-stop than Canon & Sony) and over corrections for improved image quality, and the the type of stepping motors used in conjunction with the larger mount size.
Thus far, ALL of the constant aperture lenses f/4 and wider have been EXCELLENT. The main reason youtubers thumb their noses at Nikon is because most of them are sponsored (paid) by Sony/Canon.
@@demarcusdavis1257 I think that the TH-camrs aren't giving Nikon as much attention as other brands is because Nikon isn't offering anything special.
@@theizza68 McDonald’s bags full of cash?
Please do a comparison video with all 3 of these lenses on their respective high end bodies. Would be interesting to see just how minor the differences are across the offerings
It's already been done on another channel. Its not the best comparison because it's coming from a former Sony ambassador and now Canon fanboy. He even contradicts himself in his own comparisons.
All three are awesome lenses for their respective body brands. All have a lot of pluses and some minuses. In my opinion, the least perfect lens is the Sony. It has massive focus breathing and its not even a true 50mm. It's 47mm masquerading as a fifty 1.2.
@@demarcusdavis1257 Hence why I asked Christopher to do it. While he certainly has a preference for a brand just like we all do, his reviews are very unbiased and uses good testing methods.
Wonderful bokeh on that lens! Also impressed by the suppression of CA, minimal focus breathing and sharpness.
From the shape of the lens I suspect that a lot of the r&d from the 58mm f0.95 Noct went into this lens.
I hope Nikon sends you the 70-200mm 2.8 S VR soon :)
I think I’ll stay with Nikon. Have a D750 now, will eventually get a Z body. Reasons are the better AF coverage, exposure preview and size/weight advantage of the body and at least some zoom lenses. I think they’ll be alright. But for now my DSLR is more than I need, and for a price that can’t be beaten.
If you're into portraiture, you'll should stick with Nikon. The color science Nikon uses is much more pleasing on skin tones.
I think for size/weight sony really kills it, especially with the a7c, but even the highest end a1 is super small and compact and so are the lenses. But nikon do have some superb lenses recently big + for getting them
top notch review!. .looking at the very minor weakness of this lens vs. the strength...im getting one for my shiny new Z7ii. cheers :D
That DigitalRevTV BG sound outro
My though as well, miss their videos. But we got Christopher now instead :)
Kai has his own channel. But it's just not the same.
I love that tune!!! And yes it’s because of Kai, Lok and Alamby.
@@jimmynordstromphotography Hmmm... Christopher or Alamby, tough choice. ;)
@@starbase218 Kai and Lok are reuniting, so expect content to improve.
Thanks a lot for this excellent review. It shows how good the Z-Mount works for Nikon. Always very high sharpness, best CA correction and smoothest bokeh. It's the same for every other Z lens too. I hope we will see a Z 35mm 1.2 S soon. That would be my most used lens. Nikon Z is really impressive to my eyes. :) Cheers!
It’s going to be out of stock for two years if it does.
@@jamesjackson4264 I can buy any current Z lens in Europe, no backorders.
I was wondering what that little screen on the lens was, reminded me of some toys with card readers built into them. I won’t lie, even though I read the title, my head kept telling me that was an 85mm lens, it looks enormous 😱
The new Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4 has a digital readout as well. It's actually quite cool and useful
A head to head comparison with Sony G 50mm and Canon RF 50mm would be interesting!
I have this lens and I have to say it renders more beautifully than any other 50mm lens I've tried. I still have the original 50mm AIS and the 50mm f1.8S, both great in their own way but in a different class with image rendering.
its one of my wishlist lens,, i hope can buy this lens later
I really hope in the next 20 years the cost of manufacturing metamaterial lenses will significantly come down so that they can make their transition over photography lenses. Imagine having a f1.2 lens of this quality but at the size of a pancake lens. Metamaterial photography lens design is going to be very exciting.
Every time you say "review the living daylights out of it", I immediately think of that A-ha James Bond tune and start singing "Ooooooooooh, the living daylights" etc. Catchy tune!
Thanks. Excellent review overall. Looking forward for z 70-200 review w/ RF counterpart.
Not everybody would be pleased to carry a 1kg lens every where.
For many reasons, the excellent Z 50 F1.8 is really a better choice in my opinion.
The 1.8 isn't a better choice. The 1.8 and 1.2 are two totally different tools for different types of photography.
The 1.8 is a take around lens; landscape, street, general run & gun. The 1.2 is a portrait, special event, studio lens due to its size, weight, and ultra fast aperture.
@@demarcusdavis1257 Really ! I didn't notice this 😂
@They Caged Non All the information given by Davis are known by everybody. However, I wanted to highlight the fact that you can have 90% of a 50 F1.2 when using a 50 F1.8 (at a quater of the price and half the weight). Especially when you notice 2 things : 1- This lens gives its best at F4.
2- The Z 50 F1.8 is one of the best in its class.
"My Pinto can do 90% of what that Porsche can do anyways!!!!" Lol
Brother, you are very welcome in the Nikon fan club!
Nice shot of Jn. 1:1-2!
Love the reviews Chris! Any chance we'll get some more tutorials?
Looking forward to a three way comparison once you get your hands on the Sony lens
perfect optics. NIKON
Massive lens. NIKON.
So glad you reviewed it
So glad that this lens impressed you!
Does anyone know HOW to disable the rings but still be able to switch aperture using your camera?
Because of the Z glass Chris is slowly becoming a Nikon fanboy :)
Astonishing
Very nicely done. Can you please do a review of nikon z 85 1.2 Lens and the plena Lens Nikon z 135
Now we just need Sigma to make one to pair with their E-mount 35mm f/1.2.
Great review, like always!
Pardon my lack of knowledge in lense design but, why did the lenses get so huge? I came from F mount to Z with the assurance that a smaller flange distance to the sensor would equate to smaller lense design. I know they released pancake lenses at 2.8 but my F 50 1.8 is half the size of the Z 50 1.8. Did i miss something? I will end up getting the Z 50 1.2 because of the resolving power. I just wished it was shorter, wide i don't mind.
Very nice, but the motor make sound that camera record it?
Thanks for the review! I’m wondering if you’d be willing to review a medium format 80mm lens adapted to a mirrorless camera with a speed booster for the equivalent focal length of a 50mm? I’ve been looking at the mamiya 645 to Nikon Z adapter by kipon for a while now.
Ah finally nikon lenses
Could you review Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM? Can’t wait to see your comment on that one!
What about the 1.2 85mm Nikon? Still no test lens?
I love watching reviews of lenses I'll probably never be able to own
I wonder what the t stop of this is compared to the Sony, no one has been able to tell me this...
Will you say this is the only lens I really need? I dislike having to change lenses.
Great review and to the point. Looks like it's sweet spot is at f2.0
waiting for the comparison between the Canon, Nikon, and Sony's 50mm f1.2.
Nikon z mount lens has really built quality.
Seems like everyday everything gets bigger and bigger, except out wallets
true story
🤣🤣
They had a year to improve and or better the RF 50mm 1.2!! Nikon is a top notch company when it comes to photography, I’m not surprised
Thanks for another great review!
please review the nikon 14-30mm f4 lens！
Yes!!
Great review, thanks! Question: why were in camera corrections left on for some of the tests? Wouldn’t that mask some optical flaws like chromatic aberration?
I decided a long time ago to keep them on for the resolution tests. The reason why is that virtually everyone in the world today uses optical corrections either in-camera or in editing
@@christopherfrost thanks for clarifying your reasoning - that does make a lot of practical sense. I think the geeky side of me is just curious about the ‘Raw’ output from a lens even though in the real world that may not make much of a practical difference. Thanks again for your great work 🙏
I realize I'm very late in responding to this, but here's my two cents: if optical flaws are being "masked" by in-camera corrections, that to me just means they can be corrected losslessly and shouldn't factor into a buying decision.
Thank for this honest review!
no doubt it's a fantastic lens with good sharpness and beautiful bokeh. Sadly it's big and expensive. Not very "street photography" friendly... Hope they will offer us a 1.4 version smaller and cheaper...
For the moment I keep my money and wait for the 85mm 1.2. I hope it will be an outstanding piece of glass...
There is the 50 1.8 S that is incredible and a lot cheaper.
Thank you for review.
If I will stop it to F/2, will it have better bokeh than Nikkor Z 1.8 S on the same F/2?
Ricci talks has a comparison video where he shows results side by side... and the short answer is yes ...
The long one would be that 1.8 lens is so sharp and way lighter to be used at f/2 than this 1.2 lens ...
I wish I didn't see this video... only because I want this lens badly now!
Complete lack of LOCA and LACA alone makes it better than other brand's 50mm 1.2
This lens is infinitively more practical than the Noct lens. Autofocus, better balance.
Different purposes.
Great review. RS. Canada
It looks exactly like Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art from outside.
Please review the NIKKOR Z 20mm f/1.8 S next. Thanks.
The LED displays would be so helpful for me doing concert photography.. I would not say it is gimmicky at all!
So is it better than 50 1.8s except the maximu aperture?
You should do the Sony 50mm f1.2 next to see the real winner. I think it might lose though since it's smaller and lighter
I see that as absolute win
@@trym2121 I see photographic/image capability as the first and last consideration of any lens. Price , of course, being the material and therefore consequential barrier. Have fun with your weight scale. lol
I thought you could program the front rubber ring.
Nikon perfected this lens.
Tbh it shines at f2.0 so basically it performs best just like the cheaper 1.8 version 😅.
At f2.0 it has perfect sharpness throughout the frame into the corners. This is not the case with the 50mm f1.8 S.
Great as always,,, i gues samyang 24mm 1.8 will come next, thank you chris
When will this lens be available
Please test the Z 70-200 f2.8
and please test its coma limiting performance
voigtländer 65mm f2 macro apo-lanthar test Please
this was good stuff!
Great review as we are used to :-)
Oh, look at my small compact mirrorless camera with bazuka sized 50mm lens...
Wow... that thing is enormeous... at first glance (i just click on your videos first, and then see what comes :D ) i thought its something of a 100-150mm prime :O
a superb lens
thats a very good result even f16 was kinda ok
Great review..
OMG ... it is a huge 50mm lens
Dear please test fujifilm 16mm 1.4 and 70 to 300mm
how about the new sony 501.2 gm?
Thank you sir!!
I am currently using Sigma 50mm 1.4 on z6 ii with FTZ.. will you recommend me this?
It really does depend on what you're looking for: if you are positive that you need a super clean razor sharp studio lens, then you might want to consider upgrading to that monster, otherwise, I can't see the point, especially if you're shooting stills. With the sigma you get shorter, lighter lens with a physical focus ring and the impeccable usm focus motor (I'm mentioning this because all of the native Z lenses are focus-by-wire), at half the price new, It would be very difficult to justify that upgrade to me.
There would be benefits shooting video. Stills only I don’t think it would be worth it, the sigma 50 art is a great lens.
Get the Z50 1.8S or this 1.2. Z´s are 5 time superior than Sigma ART 50mm 1.4. I´ve tried the Z1.8 and Sigma´s 50 and the Sigma gets close to image equivalence at F5.6 vs Z50mm wide open at 1.8
I’ve been using Sigma Art 50mm f1.4 for so many years. After I got this Nikkn 50mm f1.2, I haven’t gone back to Sigma. The bokeh just feel more natural, where Sigma’s bokeh is distracting. Sigma make the photo look flat and so digital. Nikon more like film or organic feel.
pls tamron 28-200 test
A f1.4 lens is half a stop difference isn't it ?
Beast lens
OMG ... it is a huge 50mm
how about rf 50mm f1.2 vs z50mm f1.2 ?
I'll wait until I've tested the new Sony lens and do a group comparison
Damn, and I just bought the Tamron 1.8 :))
Is there not a slight price difference between the two lenses?
Being that mirrorless cameras got smaller and lighter, I was hoping the lenses would do the same. But it just seems to get bigger and heavier:/
the future photographer have to spend more hours in the gym building muscles
I would like to see a Nikon z 50 mm 1.8 vs Canon rf 50mm 1.8
If
Hi! Any chance to give me your opinion on Sony FE 50mm 2.8 macro lens?
Love this lens but if Nikon made a 35mm F2 with this same kind of build and image quality that would be my preference.
Massive compared to the Canon and Sony versions.
no focusing breathing’s issues.
With the 50 1.2 being this enormous, I guess the roadmapped 85 1.2 will be the size and weight of the 58 0.95 with a 95mm filter. At what point are Nikon users going to say 'maybe we should compromise image quality slightly so we can have some kind of respect toward usability'. Canon and Sony 50 1.2 are compromised in some way, but they are at least not enormous.
The roadmap sizes are accurate. 85 1.2 will be smaller than this monster and near the size of the 24-70. Still big but about the same size of canon’s 85 1.2. I don’t think Nikon users will care about an 1.5in and 100g since this is a specialty lens, they could always go to the excellent 1.8S or adapt the older canon 1.2L or adapt the Sony 50 1.2.
This or the 58mm f/1.4G?
Haha! Forget that old 58mm lens, this should be miles better
The 58 1.4g wins with rendering although technically it’s no match.
$2100 and so heavy. But it is a F1.2
Nice but too expensive
wth? why is it so huge?
17 elements in 10 groups
No focus breathing and no distortion. That's why.
Sony GM is almost like a 45-55mm zoom lens. There's always a penalty to optical performance when you aim for size and weight reduction.
That is what she said...
1.2 aperture
Incredible compact formula? Ehh.. Do you even watch the news these days?
Good luck caring and shooting with 1kg 50mm all day. Optically great but at the cost of usability... On the other side, I'm surprised that Canon RF 50mm 1.2 feels so cheapish when you work wit it.
A 70-200 is heavier than this, still people carry it all day long.
@@NVIK5 yes it is but it's far more versatile than 50mm and pro's knows why they cary it...
@@mralexlex this is a pro lens and pros will carry it if they need it. 200g difference does not matter as much.
Better get in the gym
@@NVIK5 At the end of the shooting day, 200gr may look to your hands and shoulders as kilos...