Some of their last kickstarters were for sure scams (like the rebranded Russian camera). Since this obviously is a high quality lens one has to ask if it’s possible that this also is something rebranded.
They are actually scam... because they used to take old lenses with great optic parameters and refurbished it for way bigger price under their brand... So the scam here not in the quality but in representation and price.
B&H is selling it for $2000 and it is "expected" to release in the new year? For such a crappy lens I wouldn't even buy it for that price. Sigma and zeiss have better image quality and lower prices than Meyer.
Scam or not, the kickstarter just overpriced a very niche product. The quality might be there but it's not a very fast lens nor does it have a bokeh that appeal to most (bubble bokeh). Just like people who spent a fortune on Leica, they thought their reputation & name would justify a high price point. However, it was just too overpriced for what it was in the end.
Did they also sent you a Kinoplasmat? This was a lens I was really looking forward to. Too bad to hear what happened to the CEO and the company in general. They had some incredible projects going and and I agree with you, the images look stunning.
It looks like many other vintage lenses (including the original Primoplan). Trying to sell them for 2000 when there is an infinite number of 200 $ lenses (even 20 $ lenses) was... Brave...
The company went down, when the CEO had a serious car accident rendering the company construct paralyzed. Obviously there was no second plan, no chain of command for hat case. So it got killed, as it became de facto without leadership. The funds were drawn back, the companies died...
His companies in Holland were closed by the Dutch government before all this started. Very much doubt the car accident theory and the truth is difficult to uncover due to German privacy laws.
That's the official explanation but (i) there is no record of such 'traffic accident' and (ii) the CEO was present at the hearing that declared the company bankrupt and also at the hearing that decided to liquidate the company. So...
I always say: get the original vintage lenses. These are just companies that trying to prey on hipsters that are eager to get rid of their money and already have every Apple product there is. Same with the Handevision Ibelux 40mm f/0.85. It was such crap and so expensive. It then was on sale a couple of times for like $799 or so. Now Kipon (the original was a collaboration between I/BE Optics and Kipon, they also did the BAVEyes focal reducers (BAV for 'Bavaria', Germany)) has released a II version in a different color. Expensive of course once again.
Hello Mathieu, I've been watching your videos of weird lenses and I seriously love your style! I would like to ask you if you can possibly get your hands on the Kamlan 50mm f1.1, I've heard many good reviews and it's very cheap but I would love to get your point of view:)) Merci et bonne continuation!:)
I thot kickstarter is supposed to hold the money for their supporters & give it back if the maker doesn't deliver? Guess it doesn't pay to support these projects at all
Breaking news - Meyer Optik Gorlitz Admits Nocturnus was a Modified Chinese Lens. Back around 2015, photographers began pointing out that the $3,000 Meyer Optik Görlitz Nocturnus 50mm f/0.95 was surprisingly similar to the $849 Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95. When asked whether the Nocturnus was based on the Speedmaster, Meyer Optik representatives denied it, but photographer Ori Cohen did some digging and found that the internal optics and specs of the lenses were identical.
It seems like some well-meaning people got mixed in with some people who are terrible at business. Sad story for a lens I wouldn't mind paying *some* amount for. Thanks for sharing!
I'm thinking about buying this lens, I use fuji X bodies, so crop CMOS sensor. They have it in X mount, but would I be best to buy it in M42 mount and use it with adapter and also a speedbooster to have more options? Or is it just best to use the x mount? The whole 75mm is what makes this lens I think.
The other day, I read up about the history of the Petzval lens. That was the first design. Based on laws of physics/optics, prof. Petzval had a team of army engineers to make the calculations. Or, lens design is labor intensive. And even with computers today, expensive.
@@MartinAraka- I appreciate the fun in your point, but seriously, are you sure about the "human" adjective? BTW from Latin principles, the word computer is wrong, it should have been computator - a word that could have been used, say, 2,000 years ago. "Somebody who counts" from the verb "computare", "to count".
Really sad. MOG had some really interesting lenses in the past (way back), and this 75 mm lens has some of the characteristics that the old lenses had. But $2000? No, they aimed too high on the price scale. Below $1000? It could've been a success story. On the other hand - there are lots of old MOG lenses out there, and some are quite cheap. If you want the MOG look, try those! My favorite is the 14 (or so) blades Orestor 2.8/100. Mine will stay - I like it more than the famous Trioplan 2.8/100 (that might stay too ;)) …
4y later the company seems to be bought by someone else and sell lenses, at least on paper, this videos made me question if i should spend over 1000 for a biotar 58
Mathieu Stern The Steve Huff review of the two lenses suggest they are not identical, even if they are similar. He also posted a reply from Meyer asking if it was the same design.
It must be a copy of the old Meyer design. Made in China and sold for 2000 instead of 500 for example because they say it is a Meyer not a Mitakon for example... All those people who gave money ... I do not understand why :) but yes the lens looks fine.
You are so right. I'm not sure whether this Meyer is under Mitakon, but surely they have some kind of relationship. Some products from this Meyer are just rebranded Mitakon products, you can easily tell from the official optical design.
the quality of this lens from the photos to the build quality should be FAR LESS than $2000. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for that kind of quality. For $2000 I can get like a Sony G Master for my a7r2 lol
The way the lens-buying public responds to particular lenses reputed to have certain intangible near-magical qualities is a pretty fascinating study in mass psychology. It doesn't have much to do with aesthetics IMHO. The first time I said, "Wow, creamy bokeh," it was looking at images from a Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm 2.8-3.5. I had a copy from back in the day with messed-up aperture blades. Just bought a new-used one for like $40 USD. Optically first rate. Vignettes like a mofo but that bokeh ooh baby. I have other fancy lenses I like a lot. Never paid two grand for one.
Their CEO nearly died in a car accident. For those who already paid and felt scammed, contact the bank to see what can be done. For paypal payments, get paypal involved and you should be able to get the money back.
That's the thing people tend to forget about crowdfunding. If you are croftfunding a product you are not making a purchase. You are making a donation in return for a promise that when *and if* the company is succesful in taking their product to market, you will receive a copy of the product. Maybe this company was planning a scheme to never release any products and scam you all. Maybe they managed to build great preproduction units and do a lot of good and honest research work, but found themselfes trapped in a corner and not being able to produce at scale.
Please all you hipsters out there buy this lens and STOP buying old vintage lenses sending the prices way Way WAY up! 1970's era Olympus Zuiko lenses used to be so cheap they were practically giving them away on Ebay now the prices keep on creeping up as more and more as hipsters are buying them all and don't mind paying over blown premium prices too.
Earlier days, lens making required lot of mathematical calculations and wihich were done without the aid of computer and even calculators... The lens body was mostly done with manual labour on lathes etc. In short it required lots of manpower and time.. Then the cost went up which is agreeable... Now, commanding a premium on yesteryear design done on good CNC machinery and other modern assembly technique is not felt fair... Making a living on the legacy of a vintage popular name is indeed not good and it's bad ethic... Naturally doomsday befall...
I have the Jupiter 37a and its awesome. Mine is in pristine condition (some scratches on the paint, but other than that, looks really good, also has the smoothest focus ring I've ever seen) and came with the manual certifying its centre sharpness to be 45.5lp/mm. Surprisingly, my old banged up Jupiter 11a is sharper. Although both lenses are so sharp that the images from both are practically identical in sharpness, even when pixel peeping. The only difference is that the 11a works so much better with focus magnification. I guess its because the 11a has less axial CA. With vintage lenses like that, and new companies like Zhongyi, Venus Optics (Laowa, or "old frog"), Kamlan, Meike, and Zonlai. Who needs lens brands like this? Isn't Leica enough?
Anyone can get their hands on the rights to an ancient brand. Look at that Yashica Digifilm Y35. Nothing to do with the original Yashica and they just made a crap camera everybody was disappointed with. Well people, use common sense perhaps? And the company Net SE that tried to fund the one project with the next, because of money mismanagement, just had the rights to all these brands with such a rich legacy... Meyer Optik Görlitz, Emil Busch, Oprema Jena, C.P. Goerz, Ihagee Elbaflex & A. Schacht... and they were just out to make a quick buck on those good names that now have been dragged through the dirt.
Heyy mathieu, i wanna ask, i just got a nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non ai (after the nikkor s&sc but before nikkor ai/ais) from about 1976 with production number around the 3.7 milion mark, is this lens radioactive? Thanks
The radioactive element on the surface of the lens is Lanthane, which was used in many lenses during the 60-70-80' in lens hard coatings to boost contrasts ans colour rendition. Lanthane is one of the less radioactive materials, it is nearly as radioactive as the environment you live in so yes it's radioactive but nothing dangerous. Many lenses are radioactive this way.
@@redacted2871 but didn't they stop producing radioactive lens in 1970? also from what i heard, only nikkor s and s. c. 50mm f1.4 that's radioactive, and those are produced back in the 60s. my lens doesn't show any yellowing, which it should be if it's radioactive, right?
@@RD5500 There are few canon lenses and a lot of soviet lenses too, like the industar 50 L/D or L/Z but I doubt of that last one, and some other I can't recall right now. 'sorry for my poor english by the way.
Haha you sir, should be the voice of reason for all those canon fanboys, like myself, you don’t need to spend $3000 for a f2 zoom lens when you can pick up a f2.8 for only $1400 😂
It's part of a scam to send out Review-Products to Influencers. That way the Influencers can tell everyone about this "amazing product" and will add fuel to the hype-train. Funny enough, that you didn't take part in that by just forgetting about the lens xD
You are biased man. Maybe because your are a reviewer. The bokeh of this lens is really poor for its price tag. It is too nervous, the bokeh balls are oval while it has about 100 blades and the colour looks washed out. At this price you can get like a nikon 105mm 1.4 with autofocus which is considered as one if the best portret lenses ever. So I am not sure what you are refering to as soft shitty lenses in your video.
the point of a review is to have bias. otherwise its not a review, its a list of specs and boring sharpness tests. while i do agree with you in regards to the nikon i dont think that takes away from this lens. not that anyone shoud buy it. but i guess you could say im biased to cheaper lenses that make sense
The nervous bokeh vas a part of the original Primoplan and is the reason they are so valued today, so is the low contrast (the "Vintage look if you will").
I tried out their 58mm f1.9 for review, absolutely loved it. Every photo i took with it was a keeper. You can find my review here mpex-experience.com/2018/09/10/creating-primo-optik-al-images-the-meyer-optik-gorlitz-primoplan-p58-written-by-connor-quinn/
U can sell this lens now for 20k€ 🤣👍
More like 200K... if it's one of the rare ones...
Or you buy the original for 3,50€
@@leeeeni where ?
The original one isn't so ex. It's less than 1.5k, unless the condition is mint.
Price has even got higher now, 6 moths later, with better world economy and Only One of the Kind item on the planet!
The images taken by this lens look like images you could of taken by any good vintage lens from the 80s thats about 100$ now.
no
Some of their last kickstarters were for sure scams (like the rebranded Russian camera). Since this obviously is a high quality lens one has to ask if it’s possible that this also is something rebranded.
@Fx Even if it's not made by Zhong Yi Optics, their lenses are a little bit more realistically priced.
@tyr628 indeed the rendering looks very similar to mitakon lenses.
Which of their kickstarters was a rebranded russian camera?
You basicly win a lens for free
They are actually scam... because they used to take old lenses with great optic parameters and refurbished it for way bigger price under their brand...
So the scam here not in the quality but in representation and price.
@Hoc Est Pseudonym The meyer optik primoplan
Interesting! You now have a unique relic!
B&H is selling it for $2000 and it is "expected" to release in the new year? For such a crappy lens I wouldn't even buy it for that price. Sigma and zeiss have better image quality and lower prices than Meyer.
Keep doing honest reviews! We need more of these
Scam or not, the kickstarter just overpriced a very niche product. The quality might be there but it's not a very fast lens nor does it have a bokeh that appeal to most (bubble bokeh). Just like people who spent a fortune on Leica, they thought their reputation & name would justify a high price point. However, it was just too overpriced for what it was in the end.
Did they also sent you a Kinoplasmat? This was a lens I was really looking forward to. Too bad to hear what happened to the CEO and the company in general. They had some incredible projects going and and I agree with you, the images look stunning.
Quite a change of pace from the affordable lenses you normally play with. What are the alternatives to this one? Zeiss?
It looks like many other vintage lenses (including the original Primoplan). Trying to sell them for 2000 when there is an infinite number of 200 $ lenses (even 20 $ lenses) was... Brave...
The company went down, when the CEO had a serious car accident rendering the company construct paralyzed. Obviously there was no second plan, no chain of command for hat case. So it got killed, as it became de facto without leadership. The funds were drawn back, the companies died...
His companies in Holland were closed by the Dutch government before all this started. Very much doubt the car accident theory and the truth is difficult to uncover due to German privacy laws.
That's the official explanation but (i) there is no record of such 'traffic accident' and (ii) the CEO was present at the hearing that declared the company bankrupt and also at the hearing that decided to liquidate the company.
So...
I always say: get the original vintage lenses.
These are just companies that trying to prey on hipsters that are eager to get rid of their money and already have every Apple product there is.
Same with the Handevision Ibelux 40mm f/0.85. It was such crap and so expensive. It then was on sale a couple of times for like $799 or so. Now Kipon (the original was a collaboration between I/BE Optics and Kipon, they also did the BAVEyes focal reducers (BAV for 'Bavaria', Germany)) has released a II version in a different color. Expensive of course once again.
02:55 - 😂😂😂 so true. It's not a thing! hahaha!
Hello Mathieu, I've been watching your videos of weird lenses and I seriously love your style! I would like to ask you if you can possibly get your hands on the Kamlan 50mm f1.1, I've heard many good reviews and it's very cheap but I would love to get your point of view:)) Merci et bonne continuation!:)
Thanks for this! This is awesome. You also now have an extremely rare awesome lens
I thot kickstarter is supposed to hold the money for their supporters & give it back if the maker doesn't deliver? Guess it doesn't pay to support these projects at all
Breaking news - Meyer Optik Gorlitz Admits Nocturnus was a Modified Chinese Lens.
Back around 2015, photographers began pointing out that the $3,000 Meyer Optik Görlitz Nocturnus 50mm f/0.95 was surprisingly similar to the $849 Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95. When asked whether the Nocturnus was based on the Speedmaster, Meyer Optik representatives denied it, but photographer Ori Cohen did some digging and found that the internal optics and specs of the lenses were identical.
It seems like some well-meaning people got mixed in with some people who are terrible at business. Sad story for a lens I wouldn't mind paying *some* amount for. Thanks for sharing!
I'm thinking about buying this lens, I use fuji X bodies, so crop CMOS sensor. They have it in X mount, but would I be best to buy it in M42 mount and use it with adapter and also a speedbooster to have more options? Or is it just best to use the x mount?
The whole 75mm is what makes this lens I think.
The other day, I read up about the history of the Petzval lens. That was the first design. Based on laws of physics/optics, prof. Petzval had a team of army engineers to make the calculations. Or, lens design is labor intensive. And even with computers today, expensive.
They called them human computers, isn't that cool!?
@@MartinAraka- I appreciate the fun in your point, but seriously, are you sure about the "human" adjective? BTW from Latin principles, the word computer is wrong, it should have been computator - a word that could have been used, say, 2,000 years ago. "Somebody who counts" from the verb "computare", "to count".
Really sad. MOG had some really interesting lenses in the past (way back), and this 75 mm lens has some of the characteristics that the old lenses had. But $2000? No, they aimed too high on the price scale. Below $1000? It could've been a success story. On the other hand - there are lots of old MOG lenses out there, and some are quite cheap. If you want the MOG look, try those! My favorite is the 14 (or so) blades Orestor 2.8/100. Mine will stay - I like it more than the famous Trioplan 2.8/100 (that might stay too ;)) …
Christian Augustin i bought a MOG Lydith 30mm f/3.5 with 10 blades for 3,50€
0:55 The look on your face is like when kids are so excited, waiting to open their Christmas gifts!
😄😄😄
I love your photography. The models you shoot have a very unique look too. It reminds me of my trip to paris. That was amazing
4y later the company seems to be bought by someone else and sell lenses, at least on paper, this videos made me question if i should spend over 1000 for a biotar 58
Hi Mathieu, I read somewhere that these Meyer Optik Lenses were just rebranded Mitakon Zhongyi Lenses, is it true?
It’s pretty possible for the noturnus
@@MathieuStern I got some information from Social Media, It's different with zhong yi Lense. CMIIW
Mathieu Stern The Steve Huff review of the two lenses suggest they are not identical, even if they are similar. He also posted a reply from Meyer asking if it was the same design.
What a shame about the company, and what a win for you having an amazing quality one of a kind lens!
love the results
It must be a copy of the old Meyer design. Made in China and sold for 2000 instead of 500 for example because they say it is a Meyer not a Mitakon for example... All those people who gave money ... I do not understand why :) but yes the lens looks fine.
You are so right. I'm not sure whether this Meyer is under Mitakon, but surely they have some kind of relationship. Some products from this Meyer are just rebranded Mitakon products, you can easily tell from the official optical design.
You can get its lenses for 900-1000 euro now
the quality of this lens from the photos to the build quality should be FAR LESS than $2000. I wouldn't pay more than $200 for that kind of quality. For $2000 I can get like a Sony G Master for my a7r2 lol
Yeah well that's said I've seen a lot of G Masters Fall Apart
And what focal length is it? 75mm?
It's nice to see that Meyer-Optik survived its business problems, and now this lens is available for about $1000 on BH and no doubt other sites!
Here in Germany one big photo newspaper even reviewed this lens around a year ago
The way the lens-buying public responds to particular lenses reputed to have certain intangible near-magical qualities is a pretty fascinating study in mass psychology. It doesn't have much to do with aesthetics IMHO. The first time I said, "Wow, creamy bokeh," it was looking at images from a Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm 2.8-3.5. I had a copy from back in the day with messed-up aperture blades. Just bought a new-used one for like $40 USD. Optically first rate. Vignettes like a mofo but that bokeh ooh baby. I have other fancy lenses I like a lot. Never paid two grand for one.
Their CEO nearly died in a car accident. For those who already paid and felt scammed, contact the bank to see what can be done. For paypal payments, get paypal involved and you should be able to get the money back.
Wait, bcs I'm not really understand about crowdfunding, so you got it for free (to review) while those people who fund them didn't get the lens?
That's the thing people tend to forget about crowdfunding. If you are croftfunding a product you are not making a purchase. You are making a donation in return for a promise that when *and if* the company is succesful in taking their product to market, you will receive a copy of the product. Maybe this company was planning a scheme to never release any products and scam you all. Maybe they managed to build great preproduction units and do a lot of good and honest research work, but found themselfes trapped in a corner and not being able to produce at scale.
Please all you hipsters out there buy this lens and STOP buying old vintage lenses sending the prices way Way WAY up! 1970's era Olympus Zuiko lenses used to be so cheap they were practically giving them away on Ebay now the prices keep on creeping up as more and more as hipsters are buying them all and don't mind paying over blown premium prices too.
Your copy now worth tons of money
Well... Probably as all German product , it was offensively expensive to be world success of sales or even Acceptable $ by the current market ...
Sh**** project but, wow you have a very rare and truly wonderful lens!
Wish I somehow could get my hands on one of these..
There's a very old Meyer Optik ones that's a really great that you can get for cheap and I'm not telling anybody😀😅
So did you invest in this company and lose money?
nope they sent it for free ... to me, i never paid anything
A preview so beautyful i cannot resist...
Good job on this Matthew. I reviewed the trioplan on my channel and I spoke also about the controversy.
Earlier days, lens making required lot of mathematical calculations and wihich were done without the aid of computer and even calculators... The lens body was mostly done with manual labour on lathes etc. In short it required lots of manpower and time.. Then the cost went up which is agreeable...
Now, commanding a premium on yesteryear design done on good CNC machinery and other modern assembly technique is not felt fair...
Making a living on the legacy of a vintage popular name is indeed not good and it's bad ethic... Naturally doomsday befall...
Now you have another special lens to add to your collection of rare lenses
It is so in other European brands also...
Living on the name someone established...
Front cover with Aliexpress. )) Thanks, but I will use my old "Jupiter 37A" for 45 USD. ))
I have the Jupiter 37a and its awesome. Mine is in pristine condition (some scratches on the paint, but other than that, looks really good, also has the smoothest focus ring I've ever seen) and came with the manual certifying its centre sharpness to be 45.5lp/mm.
Surprisingly, my old banged up Jupiter 11a is sharper. Although both lenses are so sharp that the images from both are practically identical in sharpness, even when pixel peeping. The only difference is that the 11a works so much better with focus magnification. I guess its because the 11a has less axial CA.
With vintage lenses like that, and new companies like Zhongyi, Venus Optics (Laowa, or "old frog"), Kamlan, Meike, and Zonlai. Who needs lens brands like this? Isn't Leica enough?
I'm quite happy with my Canon L series prime lenses.
My friend: Not everything that is a great item sells well. And not everything that sells well, is a great item...
Anyone can get their hands on the rights to an ancient brand.
Look at that Yashica Digifilm Y35. Nothing to do with the original Yashica and they just made a crap camera everybody was disappointed with. Well people, use common sense perhaps?
And the company Net SE that tried to fund the one project with the next, because of money mismanagement, just had the rights to all these brands with such a rich legacy... Meyer Optik Görlitz, Emil Busch, Oprema Jena, C.P. Goerz, Ihagee Elbaflex & A. Schacht... and they were just out to make a quick buck on those good names that now have been dragged through the dirt.
So maybe you're one of the only one to have the next generation of an amazing lense!
Looks soft even in 1080p...
I want that lens
a cursed lens!
When you say shitty soft focus are you referring to the nikkor 105/135 mm DC?
I have the 135mm DC it's a very good lens.
And I had two 105 F2-DC. Nice quality lens.
Another victim here. This Meyer is a Chinese brand. The quality isn't shit, but definitely worth much less than 2k.
For sure overpriced but all the other lenses were "good" in both build quality and optically(reviews say)
OK, this lens was too good to be true.
Heyy mathieu, i wanna ask, i just got a nikkor 50mm f/1.4 non ai (after the nikkor s&sc but before nikkor ai/ais) from about 1976 with production number around the 3.7 milion mark, is this lens radioactive? Thanks
The radioactive element on the surface of the lens is Lanthane, which was used in many lenses during the 60-70-80' in lens hard coatings to boost contrasts ans colour rendition. Lanthane is one of the less radioactive materials, it is nearly as radioactive as the environment you live in so yes it's radioactive but nothing dangerous. Many lenses are radioactive this way.
Not radioactive enough to hurt you.
@@redacted2871 but didn't they stop producing radioactive lens in 1970? also from what i heard, only nikkor s and s. c. 50mm f1.4 that's radioactive, and those are produced back in the 60s. my lens doesn't show any yellowing, which it should be if it's radioactive, right?
@@RD5500 There are few canon lenses and a lot of soviet lenses too, like the industar 50 L/D or L/Z but I doubt of that last one, and some other I can't recall right now. 'sorry for my poor english by the way.
0:47 😂
0:48 Cute hahaha
Well well, seems to me you're now the only owner of a unique lens and a piece of photography history.
I wanna buy the lens lol
ll give ya twenty bucks for it!
Haha you sir, should be the voice of reason for all those canon fanboys, like myself, you don’t need to spend $3000 for a f2 zoom lens when you can pick up a f2.8 for only $1400 😂
It's part of a scam to send out Review-Products to Influencers. That way the Influencers can tell everyone about this "amazing product" and will add fuel to the hype-train. Funny enough, that you didn't take part in that by just forgetting about the lens xD
You are biased man. Maybe because your are a reviewer. The bokeh of this lens is really poor for its price tag. It is too nervous, the bokeh balls are oval while it has about 100 blades and the colour looks washed out. At this price you can get like a nikon 105mm 1.4 with autofocus which is considered as one if the best portret lenses ever. So I am not sure what you are refering to as soft shitty lenses in your video.
the point of a review is to have bias. otherwise its not a review, its a list of specs and boring sharpness tests. while i do agree with you in regards to the nikon i dont think that takes away from this lens. not that anyone shoud buy it. but i guess you could say im biased to cheaper lenses that make sense
The nervous bokeh vas a part of the original Primoplan and is the reason they are so valued today, so is the low contrast (the "Vintage look if you will").
cool video mec
No it's just shitty focus hahaha 😄
The bokeh is so soft!
I tried out their 58mm f1.9 for review, absolutely loved it. Every photo i took with it was a keeper. You can find my review here mpex-experience.com/2018/09/10/creating-primo-optik-al-images-the-meyer-optik-gorlitz-primoplan-p58-written-by-connor-quinn/
La meilleure phrase à la fin ! Genre : "ah merde j'ai oublié insta" :'D
4th!
1st