NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Wally on January 03, 2022, 21:01:55
-
Shipped already on Dec 26 but I was traveling overseas.
Surprised how compact it is!
-
That is definitely smaller than expected. I look forward to your impressions of it.
-
I have the F-Mount 24-120mm f/4.0 lens and got curious as to the relative weights and dimensions of it and its new Z-Mount sibling.
Here they are:
F-Mount: 710g, 84mm (D) x 103mm (L), 77mm Filter.
FTZ-I: 140g, 70mm (D) x 30.5mm(L)
Total F-Mount: 850g, 84mm(D) x 133.5mm (L)
versus
Z-Mount: 630g, 84mm (D) x 118mm (L), 77mm Filter.
Australian prices for the Z-mount lens only are about 10% lower than the F-mount lens on its own and about 25% less weight when the combined F-Mount and FTZ weights are considered.
Correction: Length of FTZ (ignoring the bayonet length) is just the difference in the F & Z mount register distances = 46.5mm - 16mm = 30.5mm.
That is definitely smaller than expected. I look forward to your impressions of it.
-
Congrats!
Waiting for mine. I have no idea when (as for the 100-400).
-
Congrats, the range in combination with the close focus ability makes this a highly versatile lens, curious what it can do :)
-
I have the F-Mount 24-120mm f/4.0 lens and got curious as to the relative weights and dimensions of it and its new Z-Mount sibling.
Here they are:
F-Mount: 710g, 84mm (D) x 103mm (L), 77mm Filter.
FTZ: 140g, 70mm (D) x 80mm(L)
Total F-Mount: 850g, 84mm(D) x 183mm (L)
versus
Z-Mount: 630g, 84mm (D) x 118mm (L), 77mm Filter.
Congrats on your new lens
If at least is the same quality as 24-70 f4 it is excellent
I thing the 80mm (L) is not correct , the added length from the FTZ adapter is 30.5mm
-
Congrats!
Waiting for mine. I have no idea when (as for the 100-400).
I ordered mine on launch day, within 5 mins of preorders becoming available ...
-
Congrats, the range in combination with the close focus ability makes this a highly versatile lens, curious what it can do :)
I will pitch it against the AF-S equivalent (passed on to my daughter) and some F and Z primes ...
First impression: built quality very good, no zoom creep, zoom ring is turning much firmer than AF-S version, excellent balance also when fully extended to 120mm
-
Nasos, thank you - yes you are quite correct, since the register distances of the F and Z mounts are respectively 46.5mm and 16mm, it follows that the flange to flange length of the FTZ must be 30.5mm or ~30mm rather than 80mm.
I will correct my original posting (and make an urgent appointment with my optician! ;))..
Congrats on your new lens
If at least is the same quality as 24-70 f4 it is excellent
I thing the 80mm (L) is not correct , the added length from the FTZ adapter is 30.5mm
-
I will correct my original posting (and make an urgent appointment with my optician! ;))..
You dot have to :) it’s written 80mm in the Nikon imaging site and elsewhere, I checked it before posting and also measure my own FTZ
Do you thing this 80 is referring to other measurement ?
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/accessory/camera/ftz/spec.htm (https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/accessory/camera/ftz/spec.htm)
-
I have checked on my FTZ-I, and its "height" from the bottom of the tripod mount to the top is 80mm - that is when measured from six o'çlock to 12 o'çlock.
Maybe on the new FTZ-II it will be 70mm all round. However I should be more careful, as the flange to flange length is 30.5mm - it has to be to preserve infinity focus for F-Mount lenses. So thank you for picking up on my error.
You dot have to :) it’s written 80mm in the Nikon imaging site and elsewhere, I checked it before posting and also measure my own FTZ
Do you thing this 80 is referring to other measurement ?
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/accessory/camera/ftz/spec.htm (https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/accessory/camera/ftz/spec.htm)
-
The error is uncertainty as to the axis to measure ....
-
Brad Hill just published his findings:
http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html
I have nothing to add 8) ;D
-
Nice
You have to add your photos :)
-
Hi Wally, congrats on your new purchase. Looking forward to seeing samples.
-
Z7, f/4, @24mm, NL profile
Focus is on the yellow door frame
Processed w NX Studio 1.1.1, standard settings
It's interesting to note you can't deactivate the Auto Distortion
-
I don’t know how anyone is getting this lens :-(
Here in Japan it is still on pre-order. The global ‘policy’ of actually releasing recent Nikon gear seems to be random at best.
-
Processed w NX Studio 1.1.1, standard settings
It's interesting to note you can't deactivate the Auto Distortion
Neither NX Studio nor Adobe allow you to disable the distortion corrections. Other converters do. If you send me the file then I can process it with Capture One and offer a comparison.
-
Review from Richard Wong:
https://youtu.be/G5l27LRD7aE
-
Z7, f/4, @24mm, NL profile
Focus is on the yellow door frame
Processed w NX Studio 1.1.1, standard settings
It's interesting to note you can't deactivate the Auto Distortion
Hey, the old Alviso marina, since silted in and turned to marsh. Mission Peak is in the background to the right. I've spent most of my life living in areas in the far background, not necessarily immediately in view though. I also worked on a project to restore some areas in the nearer background to tidal marsh.
Looks good.
-
ePHOTOzine reviewed the 24-120S including MTF charts:
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikkor-z-24-120mm-f-4-s-lens-review-35864/performance
-
ePHOTOzine reviewed the 24-120S including MTF charts:
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikkor-z-24-120mm-f-4-s-lens-review-35864/performance
Those MTF graphs are amazing for this type of a lens.
-
Absolutely, when reviewers have to extend the chart to accommodate for the highest ever measured figures you know Nikon has hit a homerun once more.
The high optical performance combined with the change from the initially forecasted 24-105mm to a much more appealing 24-120mm range makes this lens also a brand differentiator compared to Sony and Canon so all in all a very good lens for Nikon and the Zee platform marketing wise.
-
Completely agree. I´m thinking of exchanging the 24-70 f4S for this one or maybe just get this one. Looks like a fantastic travel and walk-around lens
-
That's quite a positive review.
Can't wait to get mine. :)
-
Looking good in the lab....
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikkor-z-24-120mm-f-4-s-lens-review-35864/performance
-
Completely agree. I´m thinking of exchanging the 24-70 f4S for this one or maybe just get this one. Looks like a fantastic travel and walk-around lens
I expect the new 24-120 will become the new standard zoom on my Z6. I previously passed on the compact 24-50mm f/4-6.3 on the basis of so-so optical quality and slow speed, and I'm also going to skip the 28/2.8 and 40/2 choices. The 24-70 f/4 that came with my Z6 will likely be my new compact alternative for those times when I'd like to carry a smallish lens of limited zoom range but excellent optical quality.
-
A positive review from Christopher Frost just popped up in my queue:
https://youtu.be/dq7LFJ808Fc
-
Looking good in the lab....
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/nikkor-z-24-120mm-f-4-s-lens-review-35864/performance
Indeed, although I suspect that they did not succeed in disabling distortion correction. It is a very tempting lens for travel and priced only a fraction more than the 24-70mm f/4.
-
A 120mm f/4.0 lens, probably more like 95 to 100mm f/4.0 lens, is better suited to a head and shoulders candid from the standpoint of image perspective and background blurring will be greater compared to a 70mm f/4.0 lens which would be insufficient for me for lack of the ability to isolate the subject from the background.
Dave
-
Indeed, although I suspect that they did not succeed in disabling distortion correction. It is a very tempting lens for travel and priced only a fraction more than the 24-70mm f/4.
Indeed - I don't see why they didn't use a non-Adobe/Nikon raw converter if they wanted to see the actual distortion.
However, maybe it's a moot point, how many of us use a non-corrected raw image as a starting point? I certainly don't. (Now waiting to be shot down in flames . . . .)
John
-
The video review from mister Frost shows uncorrected distortion which is of the very common pincushion on the wide end, neutral in the middle and barrel at the long end.
-
Completely agree. I´m thinking of exchanging the 24-70 f4S for this one or maybe just get this one. Looks like a fantastic travel and walk-around lens
I combined this new lens with the F 8-15mm or Z 14-30mm, F 28mm1.4E, F 105mm1.4E and 300mmPF for a great and fairly compact travel kit 8)
-
However, maybe it's a moot point, how many of us use a non-corrected raw image as a starting point? I certainly don't. (Now waiting to be shot down in flames . . . .)
It bothers me to think that there has been a big correction just to reach the starting point. Perhaps it should not. As long as it is not too severe I can accept it as the price of convenience.
-
Another very positive review, by Nigel Danson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMjiDjUyops
-
It bothers me to think that there has been a big correction just to reach the starting point. Perhaps it should not. As long as it is not too severe I can accept it as the price of convenience.
A fair point. It's just occurred to me, maybe the trade-off for a lens essentially uncorrected for distortion (which is then corrected by software) is much-improved sharpness. The Z family of lenses certainly seem to be very very sharp.
-
Straight into the sun - Z7, 24mm, f/9
A warm day in San Francisco, 65 F 8)
-
I am in Tokyo, but it seems we are the last to eat the pie :-)
Hopefully I will get mine before a trip to Yakushima island in a month - assuming travel is still ok then.
-
Thom Hogan's review of the 24-120 f4S
https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/nikon-z-mount-lens-reviews/nikon-24-120mm-f4-s-lens.html
and related comparison of Z zooms
https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/which-mid-range-zoom-for.html
-
Making a lens cheaper by not correcting issues that can be mitigated by electronic means is a quite rational decision especially if it ties the customer to a particular camera make. Only purists will abstain from correcting the rawfiles.
p.
-
Unfortunately, having to use lens-specific distortion profiles to correct the images ties us to those raw converters that recognize the lens and can apply the relevant profile. Some raw converters don't support some lenses in this way. Cross-brand use of lenses on certain cameras can also mean no correction profile is available.
Of course, it's possible to do one's own profiles using targets but since the distortion is distance-dependent, applying the profile can introduce complicated additional workflow steps. I'd rather have the lens optically adequately corrected so that the use of software correction is strictly optional.
-
Making a lens cheaper by not correcting issues that can be mitigated by electronic means is a quite rational decision especially if it ties the customer to a particular camera make. Only purists will abstain from correcting the rawfiles.
p.
Distortion correction can affect microcontrast in areas that are stretched to compensate for distortion. Most often these would be outer areas for barrel distortion correction at shorter focal lengths, and central areas for pincushion distortion correction at longer focal lengths.
Since digital photos are composed of discrete pixels that contain all the information, recomputing new intermediate pixels from old ones is going to cause some losses at the finest level of detail. If photo resolution is later reduced greatly for final display then the initial distortion correction likely won't have an effect; at high display or printing resolutions it may matter.
-
Unfortunately, having to use lens-specific distortion profiles to correct the images ties us to those raw converters that recognize the lens and can apply the relevant profile. Some raw converters don't support some lenses in this way. Cross-brand use of lenses on certain cameras can also mean no correction profile is available.
Of course, it's possible to do one's own profiles using targets but since the distortion is distance-dependent, applying the profile can introduce complicated additional workflow steps. I'd rather have the lens optically adequately corrected so that the use of software correction is strictly optional.
Thought that lens specific distortion profiles are embedded into the RAW files when the option is turned on in the camera and will be implemented automatically when a RAW editor is used which can read those correction profiles provided by the camera.
I use Affinity on the iPad which can not recognize those embedded profiles as they are usually in the proprietary parts of the RAW files and the app also does not have its own library of profiles like LR, no issue for me personally as I also prefer using lenses without too much distortion.
Does anybody know which RAW editors do support the embedded distortion profiles for the Nikon Zee cameras?
-
Does anybody know which RAW editors do support the embedded distortion profiles for the Nikon Zee cameras?
My understanding is that e.g. Capture One only supports some Z lens profiles (and some F lens profiles are provided by the software). It was not adequate when I tried the trial version of the software, currently may be improved but not complete.