Z7-Z6 Lenses

rmprmp Posts: 483Member
edited December 2018 in Nikon Z lenses
I love my Z7 with its 24-70, F4 lens. It is small, light, and has great IQ. I have looked at the "lens road map." I see the 70-200, f2.8 coming next year. But, I'm afraid of the size and weight. And, just how much better that the F-4 can it be. If I were Nikon ruler for a year, I would put out a 70-200 f4 as soon as possible.


What Z7-Z6 lens would you want first? Do you think the 2.8 series will have higher IQ that the f4 series?
Post edited by spraynpray on
Robert M. Poston: D4, D810, V3, 14-24 F2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 80-400, 105 macro.
Tagged:
«13456789

Comments

  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Definitely the 14-30 for me. I want a small, native mount ultra wide so I don’t have to lug my Sigma ART tank around and mess around with swapping out the adapter which is a bit of a nightmare when doing tripod work.
  • KnockKnockKnockKnock Posts: 368Member
    Mass market budget primes, f/2.8: 24mm, 35mm, 50mm. <$300 each. Thinking about the AF-D series, updated.
    D7100, D60, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.4, 18-105mm DX, 18-55mm VR II, Sony RX-100 ii
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,915Member
    edited December 2018
    Considering that the nifty fitfty (50mm F1.8S) is more expensive than the 50mm F1.4G, that doesn’t seem very likely. I doubt we’ll be seeing many lenses with a price tag under $1k.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    They claim there will be another line of lenses that will be cheaper than the "S" line but I'll believe it when I see it.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,982Moderator
    Z bodies and Z lenses categories added now guys.
    Always learning.
  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,055Member
    Impressive 50 mm f1.8 S line lens.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,835Member
    The new S line looks promising. I laugh at the dimwits that decry the 50 1.8S because it is much more expensive than the 50 1.8G. As if aperture is the only thing that determines quality.

    I do think that the Photography Life article did not compare apples to apples when they could have, such as against the 1.8G lenses instead of the 1.4G lenses. I think that was an oversight on their part. This is too bad. The comparison is very favourable. The 1.8S lenses blow away their 1.8G counterparts.


    I will invest in the Z mount when a suitable camera is available for the 58 0.95 Noct. To me a suitable camera is something with the ergonomics and size of a D5 or D850 with the grip. I tried the Z7 with some of my manual focus lenses (I have 7 that see regular use) and with the focus peaking, I think that the improved manual focussing is an excellent reason to buy a Z.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,835Member
    Nikon just posted the new 14-30. Here is an MTF chart comparison:

    https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/z-mount/z_14-30mmf4s/spec.htm

    https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/lens/f-mount/zoom/widezoom/af-s_zoom14-24mmf_28g/index.htm

    While somewhat misleading because it compares 2.8 to 4.0, it is still pretty impressive. Sharp corner to corner in a way that the 14 - 24 2.8, ground breaking in this regard when it was released, does not even succeed at.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Looks good. A bit more $$ than I was hoping but still reasonable overall.

    I’m curious about field curvature. It’s pretty noticeable on my Sigma ART 14-24 at wider apertures. Are all ultrawides like that? Any hope for this lens to be better?
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,835Member
    mhedges said:

    Looks good. A bit more $$ than I was hoping but still reasonable overall.

    I’m curious about field curvature. It’s pretty noticeable on my Sigma ART 14-24 at wider apertures. Are all ultrawides like that? Any hope for this lens to be better?

    THAT will be interesting to see. My 14-24 2.8G has field curvature and it is a bit of a trick to deal with. Fortunately, I rarely shoot an ultrawide wide open.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 584Member


    THAT will be interesting to see. My 14-24 2.8G has field curvature and it is a bit of a trick to deal with. Fortunately, I rarely shoot an ultrawide wide open.

    The 14-24, and subsequently the 8-15 fisheye, have convinced me that the most fun I have is ultrawide. I am very happy to see the 14-30 is coming. I was on a trip to Japan last week and went to visit Sakurajima. With the 24-70 I just couldn't get wide enough to take in the volcano and surrounding sea. I was backpacking, so I left the 14-24 at home.

    My next trip was to be to Ikushima, scheduled for April, but I had to cancel, so now I'm planning a trip to Shiretoko in July. I should have the 14-30 by then!

    In the mean time, the 35 1.8 and the 105 macro, along with a few other of my F lenses with FTZ, work well for on the job. I just finished a training manual for by a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute and all the new photos were done with the Z7 and F lenses.

    BTW, When are you coming to LA? I owe you some Ramen!
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Looks like some folks already have the 14-30. Maybe it will be out sooner than we thought.
  • retreadretread Posts: 492Member
    The Z lenses have the largest mount opening and shortest distance from lens to sensor. How would it work for 3rd party lens makers to make a lens to fit the Z mount and then just put a different mount on it for other camera brands? A little smaller and a little longer to match other brands.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Yes optically they should be able to use the same formula for all the mirrorless cameras, I think. The difficulty is in the electronics and software. Really depends on how locked down Canon and Nikon made their mounts. Realistically I think they could have made it near impossible for unlicensed third party lenses. Whether they chose to do that - who knows.

    Thinking about it a little more - there does seem to be an exploit possible since third party lenses work (for the most part) on the FTZ or R adapters. So maybe they make lenses that fool the camera body into thinking it is an adapted lens. You woudn't get all the benefit of native glass but it should work.
  • retreadretread Posts: 492Member
    If the 3rd parties can "hack" their way into the F mount and others given time I think the will get into the Z mount and others.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 584Member
    retread said:

    If the 3rd parties can "hack" their way into the F mount and others given time I think the will get into the Z mount and others.

    Since we are already seeing third party FTZ type adapters, and the Z lens comms are the same as with the F lenses, it should be pretty quick work for third party lenses to be coming soon. The only thing stopping them is market size, as it does take capital investment to tool up. Right now the only maker who has the market size to justify the production of pure Z lenses is Nikon. But as they sell more bodies, it will be hard to keep others away.

    Having said that, making lenses that take full advantage of the Z mount--not just adaptations of current mirrorless lenses-- is not likely to happen for some time. Nikon did themselves a favor by making a technically superior mount.

    I just came back from the Nikon museum in Tokyo. Very cool. I got a Nikon Museum strap for my Z7 while I was there.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Aren't all the current third party adapters “dumb”? Meaning no electrical contacts? I haven’t seen any with functionality.

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 2,835Member
    Symphotic said:


    THAT will be interesting to see. My 14-24 2.8G has field curvature and it is a bit of a trick to deal with. Fortunately, I rarely shoot an ultrawide wide open.

    The 14-24, and subsequently the 8-15 fisheye, have convinced me that the most fun I have is ultrawide. I am very happy to see the 14-30 is coming. I was on a trip to Japan last week and went to visit Sakurajima. With the 24-70 I just couldn't get wide enough to take in the volcano and surrounding sea. I was backpacking, so I left the 14-24 at home.

    My next trip was to be to Ikushima, scheduled for April, but I had to cancel, so now I'm planning a trip to Shiretoko in July. I should have the 14-30 by then!

    In the mean time, the 35 1.8 and the 105 macro, along with a few other of my F lenses with FTZ, work well for on the job. I just finished a training manual for by a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute and all the new photos were done with the Z7 and F lenses.

    BTW, When are you coming to LA? I owe you some Ramen!
    Sakurajima is lovely, but in all the times that I have been to Japan, Ikushima and Shiretoko are two places that I have never been, though I have been to Nagano a few times. Shiretoko should be very nice in July and your 14-30 would be perfect. It will probably be far superior to the 14-24 2.8 - sharper across the frame. And in all the images that I have taken with my 14-24 2.8, any I can find that I shot in 2.8 I would have likely only done that if I did not have a tripod. And so many of them would have been better with a filter.


    I have no immediate plans to get to southern California, but I will be sure to try out some ramen when I do.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 806Member
    I would like to see a long z lens on the roadmap. Maybe a 600/5.6.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 584Member
    mhedges said:

    Aren't all the current third party adapters “dumb”? Meaning no electrical contacts? I haven’t seen any with functionality.

    For now, I think you are correct, but as my Sigma Lenses work fine on my Z7 with the FTZ, there seems to be no magic about the electrical contacts. The parts are in place, and I think there are prototypes on a workbench in China somewhere due to the irresistible appeal of making a knock-off FTZ adapter for 1/5 the price that Nikon is asking.
    The four components of a working FTZ adapter are the housing, the two mounts, the locks, and the electrical contacts. They don't have other mechanical parts such as a drive screw.
    Maybe by Summer?
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 835Member
    Symphotic said:

    mhedges said:

    Aren't all the current third party adapters “dumb”? Meaning no electrical contacts? I haven’t seen any with functionality.

    For now, I think you are correct, but as my Sigma Lenses work fine on my Z7 with the FTZ, there seems to be no magic about the electrical contacts. The parts are in place, and I think there are prototypes on a workbench in China somewhere due to the irresistible appeal of making a knock-off FTZ adapter for 1/5 the price that Nikon is asking.
    The four components of a working FTZ adapter are the housing, the two mounts, the locks, and the electrical contacts. They don't have other mechanical parts such as a drive screw.
    Maybe by Summer?
    They do have some mechanical parts - the activator for the aperture lever. Otherwise you would only get aperture control on the "E" type lenses.

    Sure the sigma F mount lenses work but I'm not sure how much of a lesson you can draw from that. Nikon has such a rogues gallery of implementations on their F mount AF lenses that I think it would have been very hard to lock it down more without losing compatibility with their own product. But for Z mount since they are starting from scratch they could have put in much tighter security.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 584Member
    Good point. One more lever and activator.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • moreorlessmoreorless Posts: 117Member

    Mass market budget primes, f/2.8: 24mm, 35mm, 50mm. <$300 each. Thinking about the AF-D series, updated.</p>

    I'd guess your more likely to see that when Nikon are selling some kind of budget body as well, either a new release of when the Z6 is superceeded, also perhaps when 3rd party options come on the market and force them to compete?

    In the end I went with a D850 upgrade from my D800 as it was just too much of a money saver relative to a Z7 but the 14-30mm definitely has me jealous.

  • donaldejosedonaldejose Posts: 3,055Member
    Thom Hogan comment: "However, both Canon and Nikon have produced new mirrorless primes that outperform the equivalent DSLR prime (reviews of the Nikon 35mm and 50mm f/1.8 coming shortly)."
Sign In or Register to comment.