Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 62 of 62

Thread: Nikon Z lens roadmap

  1. #51
    Senior Member KeithL's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    912
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Thorkil, you raise another interesting point. The little zoom is so good, it obviates primes in that range for me since I don't need optical speed with ultra and wide angle. The 24-70/4 is as good or better, and will likely suffice for travel and all-around, but for the shallower DoF look I want some optical speed and these little 1.8S primes are simply killing it performance-wise! Point is, one can get by with a whole lot less than before if they choose wisely to suit their needs. On that topic, if I'm honest I do not need the 85 --- but I still want it for the look it renders
    When I bought into the Z system I intended to wait for the 20 S but got impatient and bought the 14-30 zoom. Could be my best buy ever!
    https://www.keithlaban.co.uk
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    A bit north of Copenhagen
    Posts
    2,176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    789

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Thorkil, you raise another interesting point. The little zoom is so good, it obviates primes in that range for me since I don't need optical speed with ultra and wide angle. The 24-70/4 is as good or better, and will likely suffice for travel and all-around, but for the shallower DoF look I want some optical speed and these little 1.8S primes are simply killing it performance-wise! Point is, one can get by with a whole lot less than before if they choose wisely to suit their needs. On that topic, if I'm honest I do not need the 85 --- but I still want it for the look it renders
    Yes, but I still want the 20/18.S, but I honestly really don't know why, so I better be patient to look at some carefull made reviews to state if I need it or not. And I tend to walk with only one lens on, and if its the 20, I could not stumble over and do a courtyard-picture like my last one from Copenhagen, so...like Keith, I presume.. the 14-30 might be my most used lens

  3. #53
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,786
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1054

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorkil View Post
    Yes, but I still want the 20/18.S, but I honestly really don't know why, so I better be patient to look at some carefull made reviews to state if I need it or not. And I tend to walk with only one lens on, and if its the 20, I could not stumble over and do a courtyard-picture like my last one from Copenhagen, so...like Keith, I presume.. the 14-30 might be my most used lens
    Firstly, I am the absolute last guy who should be lecturing on not giving into wants; if I want something bad enough, I will figure out a justification to get it! But for me, the only logic I had toward wide primes was I wanted the best possible image quality for landscape shots. But at the same time, I knew there was a negative side to them; and that is their inability to adjust framing from a fixed position often mandated in landscape imaging.

    My story: I sold my favorite landscape zoom at the time -- a particularly good copy of the 17-35/2.8 AF, very sharp centrally but fell off to just "pretty good" in the outer third, to virtually unusable in the very corners. But the rest of it was so good, I learned to shoot it a little loose and crop the bad corners out when I needed good corners. What was interesting is a majority of the images I made with it were closer 24mm after the crop than they were 20mm. So I sold the 17-35 and bought a Sigma ART 24. An exceptional lens, perfectly sharp corner to corner. And a beast. First workshop out with it, I was left wanting the 17 end of the zoom I had sold... So before the next trip, I bought a 20/1.8 G -- another very good lens, but not quite as good as the Sigma, though not as massive either -- a good compromise. I liked the 20G so much, I sold the Sigma ART and bought the 24/1.8G -- it wasn't as good as the 20/1.8 and I never really connected with it. And most of all? I still missed that 17-35 zoom... Should have never sold it, and have felt remorse until now -- the 14-30S has finally assuaged my guilt of letting that 17-35 go... I respect your needs and desires may vary from mine, but I felt my story may be relevant
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #54
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorkil View Post
    I was convinced that the new 20/1.8S would be the one I just had to buy, but on the other hand, what can it offer that the 14-30 don't offer?
    Focus separation where you allow objects partially obscuring one another to separate from each other by limiting the DoF so definition varies subtly by distance. A 20mm f/4 doesn't provide a whole lot of separation in something like a cityscape.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    A bit north of Copenhagen
    Posts
    2,176
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    789

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Firstly, I am the absolute last guy who should be lecturing on not giving into wants; if I want something bad enough, I will figure out a justification to get it! But for me, the only logic I had toward wide primes was I wanted the best possible image quality for landscape shots. But at the same time, I knew there was a negative side to them; and that is their inability to adjust framing from a fixed position often mandated in landscape imaging.

    My story: I sold my favorite landscape zoom at the time -- a particularly good copy of the 17-35/2.8 AF, very sharp centrally but fell off to just "pretty good" in the outer third, to virtually unusable in the very corners. But the rest of it was so good, I learned to shoot it a little loose and crop the bad corners out when I needed good corners. What was interesting is a majority of the images I made with it were closer 24mm after the crop than they were 20mm. So I sold the 17-35 and bought a Sigma ART 24. An exceptional lens, perfectly sharp corner to corner. And a beast. First workshop out with it, I was left wanting the 17 end of the zoom I had sold... So before the next trip, I bought a 20/1.8 G -- another very good lens, but not quite as good as the Sigma, though not as massive either -- a good compromise. I liked the 20G so much, I sold the Sigma ART and bought the 24/1.8G -- it wasn't as good as the 20/1.8 and I never really connected with it. And most of all? I still missed that 17-35 zoom... Should have never sold it, and have felt remorse until now -- the 14-30S has finally assuaged my guilt of letting that 17-35 go... I respect your needs and desires may vary from mine, but I felt my story may be relevant
    I'm totally with you here, specially your statement "if I want something bad enough, I will figure out a justification to get it!". I have always had that romantic vision, just one camera, one lens, I'm sure if that was the circumstances, one would be just as lucky, if not even more, instead of this consumption-circus we all are a part off.
    Your words encourage me to (for a while at least) be fully satisfied with the 14-30, while its just so much more mature than it's size let you know, more crisp than the old 14-24/2.8G, more interesting. Even though I think Jan is right with the statement above, you might always be able to separate enough, if you just get close enough. If it is street, trying to catch people, getting close, it's almost always a matter of being in the sufficient mood (which not always are there, but one can try to dig it out) to throw your inhibitions overboard, meeting people with an optimistic childish smile, hipshooting, and 95% of the time you will get the same childish smile including forgiveness back (apart from: the more educated or wealthy people are, the more difficult it often is to, for the needed seconds, to establish that rewarding ping-pong featherlight interaction, sorry to say, often a matter of willingness to play your whole human existence (also from the "victims") into the game without being afraid of status-loosing). With buildings I often have traditional and perhaps a bit boring approach wanting it all to be fairly sharp , and the 14-30 just deliver.
    But yes, Jack, as you remember, I bought the 17-35 on your recommendation, still got it, didn't use it that much (too much choices, too many disturbing dreams, I guess), but on the Df it certainly did deliver, in a way I in one word would call: smooth (and charming). just a revisit back (and just to step in your wound..) to one posted in 2017 (but at f8, and the Df sensor certainly is guilty in the (in my eyes) delicate drawing too), would the 14-30 on the Z7 be able to draw in the same way?, I doubt:


    but I have just weighed them: the 17-35 is 764 grams and the 14-30 is just 512 gram, both with filter but without caps. 252 grams less, or in another way: the 17-35 weighs 49% more than the 14-30. So I think there is still no reason to regret... , its so handy and communicating, the Z7/14-30 combo..
    Likes 5 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #56
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Haven't shot much with the 85/1.8 S yet, other than to make sure it doesn't suffer from decentering.

    It did get put to use a moment ago though; I put the Z7 with it (in P&S Auto Eye-AF mode) in the hands of my wife to capture a shot of me to use on linkedin. M 1/60 f/4 ISO 110. I wanted it to look casual, spontaneous, open, inviting, warm, friendly.

    Likes 6 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,032
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Jack,
    Enjoy the Z50mm 1.8, I knew you'd love it. I've decided to demo a Canon EOS R for the incredible f/1.2 and f/2 zoom RF lenses. Sony's are nice, but I don't need 60mp and prefer the ergonomics of the EOS-R. Actually, the build quality (EOS R) is outstanding. I think Nikon should have made at least a 1.4 prime at launch or a battery/ grip that actually works in portrait mode. Otherwise, it's a great camera. I watched a video recently, where someone said you buy Canon for the lenses and Nikon for the cameras, but the EOS R has me thinking otherwise

  8. #58
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,786
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1054

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by jdphoto View Post
    Jack,
    Enjoy the Z50mm 1.8, I knew you'd love it. I've decided to demo a Canon EOS R for the incredible f/1.2 and f/2 zoom RF lenses. Sony's are nice, but I don't need 60mp and prefer the ergonomics of the EOS-R. Actually, the build quality (EOS R) is outstanding. I think Nikon should have made at least a 1.4 prime at launch or a battery/ grip that actually works in portrait mode. Otherwise, it's a great camera. I watched a video recently, where someone said you buy Canon for the lenses and Nikon for the cameras, but the EOS R has me thinking otherwise
    For sure! Enjoy the EOS system -- it's great too!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #59
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Got my 20/1.8 S, but unfortunately is shows a high amount of spherical aberration along the right 10-15% closest to the edge. The center and left side are stellar though. EXCELLENT optic, except I need to exchange it.

    Form my very quick testing it shows nice bokeh, and very "classic" looking - probably from out-of-plane spherical aberration. (And, I suspect the defect in mine is excessive field curvature, since the edge improves when I explicitly focus on it, but then the rest of the image goes out of focus.)
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #60
    Senior Member Darin Marcus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    512
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Quote Originally Posted by Jan Brittenson View Post
    Got my 20/1.8 S, but unfortunately is shows a high amount of spherical aberration along the right 10-15% closest to the edge. The center and left side are stellar though. EXCELLENT optic, except I need to exchange it.

    Form my very quick testing it shows nice bokeh, and very "classic" looking - probably from out-of-plane spherical aberration. (And, I suspect the defect in mine is excessive field curvature, since the edge improves when I explicitly focus on it, but then the rest of the image goes out of focus.)
    Sorry to hear that Jan.

    I see that Jim Kasson is currently testing this lens, starting with https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/2...itial-testing/

  11. #61
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Mine was sharp as a tack across most of the field wide open, and the bad edge looked like his center.

  12. #62
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Nikon Z lens roadmap

    Here's the only "real" shot I took with it before packing it up, to check color, rendition, bokeh, etc. As you can see from the crop, it's an excellent lens. ISO 64, f/1.8 1/15s handheld. Not the best light or anything. I think the performance is absolutely stellar for a 20mm lens at f/1.8. The left side performance was very close to center, while the right side had a nasty "fuzz" to it. Bokeh looks okay, should be workable. (This is a visually cluttered subject, so I think it'll be just fine.) Can't wait to get my hands on one that performs across the frame. And, yes, there is slight chromatic aberration in high contrast lines, especially around the plane of focus, but it's not particularly severe.





    BTW, I screwed up the crop. I meant to make it 1100px wide but made it 1100px tall, and it gets downsized when inlined like this. Right click on it and open the image in a new tab to see it at 100% for the full pixel peep!
    Last edited by Jan Brittenson; 1 Day Ago at 18:10.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •