Lens advice for a Nikon Z8 please...

[David H. Hartman]

Lens advice for a Nikon Z8 please...

In the basket at B&H I have a NIKKOR Z 24-120mm f/4 S Lens but I'm getting cold feet. Mostly I don't like the construction, the dual telescoping barrel when zoomed. According to photographylife.com it's an excellent lens in many ways but they say the bokeh is a bit busy and note the way it extends when zoomed makes it vulnerable to bumps.

I've got a AF-D 35-70mm f/2.8 that has a decentering problem such that it needs to be stopped down to f/5.6~f/6.3 for good results. I don't need that issue again. Rather than have that lens repaired I bought a AF-D 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 which I've been quite happy with but it doesn't AF on the Z8.

What I should have done is bought the Nikon Z 8 kitted with a Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/4 S but I didn't. The cost when kitted with a Z8 would have been about $600.00 USD. New from B&H it's something like $1,096.00. At keh.com this lens sells used for around $500.00. According to photographylife.com this lens isn't quite as good as the 24-120/4.0 S but it's still a very nice lens.

Another lens on my list is the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro. I already have the older AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR which I consider a pretty good lens with a few optical faults that make it less desirable to other 105mm Micro-Nikkors that I own. It offers VR which is good but it's a honker. I also find its resale estimated by keh.com is pretty low. I'm considering buying the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro.

Do any of you read photographlife.com's reviews? Are they reliable?

Are there any mid-range zooms in the $1,000.00 range I've missed? Probably so.

If you will please help a fool spend his money.

Thanks!

Dave

[pluton]

I owned a Z 24-70/4 S for a week.  At the time I had only a Z6II.  The images were excellent, but I couldn't get used to the idea of a "normal" range lens that opened only to f/4.  A bit later I acquired the Z 24-70/2.8 S (Mk 1).    It's imaging is fully comparable to modern good primes, but it's heavy and awkward for [focus-by-wire]manual focusing.  It has allowed me to learn that I'd like a nice 40mm prime lens.

[Wally]

See for yourself, not too bad imho!
Z7, 24-120 Z at 56mm f/4

[Ian Watson]

Sorry for the late reply.

PhotographyLife is a good site. Their reviews are fair and reliable.

The optical difference between the 24-70/4 and 24-120/4 in their shared range is small enough that it should not be a factor in deciding. They both share the same construction. The 24-70/4 collapses for storage and therefore takes up less space in your bag. However, you have to remember to extend it for use. The 24-120/4 offers the extra range and an extra function button.

The prices for new examples are close, so you may as well go for the 24-120/4. On the other hand, as you discovered, the 24-70/4 is readily available used for a lot less.

Good luck!

[Lars Hansen]

Delete

[ColinM]

David, have you considered renting the lens?
Then you could experience the reality instead of trying to interpret the reviews of others.

In the USA, several rental places will deliver & accept rental items by courier.
A long weekend would give you enough time.

Even better, rent several items you're considering and compare
(Obviously only practical for popular lenses.)

In the UK my experience has been that most Nikon Z (and previously F) mount lenses were available to rent.

[David H. Hartman]

I've never rented lenses. I should consider this.

Dave

[David H. Hartman]

For now I did the safe thing: I pulled the trigger on a Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro Lens. I Guess if I have a favorite focal length it is 105mm. When I bought my first serious camera, a Nikkormat FTN my first lens was a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor followed by a 105mm f/2.5.

The Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is a bit smaller and lighter than the Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G VR and thankfully lacks the latter's longitudinal chromatic aberration. I consider the old 105/2.8 lens to be somewhat at the mid to lower end of a good lens for that aberration.

The new 105/2.8 is a substantial lens. I wish the girth and length were a bit less but it's not the honker that the old lens was.

I'm still considering my options for a mid range zoom.

Dave

[Nasos Kosmas]

For now I did the safe thing: I pulled the trigger on a Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S Macro Lens. I Guess if I have a favorite focal length it is 105mm. When I bought my first serious camera, a Nikkormat FTN my first lens was a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor followed by a 105mm f/2.5.

The Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S is a bit smaller and lighter than the Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G VR and thankfully lacks the latter's longitudinal chromatic aberration. I consider the old 105/2.8 lens to be somewhat at the mid to lower end of a good lens for that aberration.

The new 105/2.8 is a substantial lens. I wish the girth and length were a bit less but it's not the honker that the old lens was.

I'm still considering my options for a mid range zoom.

Dave

I've got 24-70 f4, I find it very good for every day use , its small (collapsible) and light but f4 is limited to have bokeh in your photos
The 24-120 f4 is a very nice choice but again to big to carry around, I prefer my Iphone
I use my Z 40 f2 light /plastiky but wonderfull lens

[John Geerts]

The 24-70/4.0 is not so usefull when you already have the 2.8S version.  It's only marginal smaller in size. What's very frustrating with the f/4 lens you have to 'open' the lens, otherwise it won't work.

[golunvolo]

The 24-70/4.0 is not so usefull when you already have the 2.8S version.  It's only marginal smaller in size. What's very frustrating with the f/4 lens you have to 'open' the lens, otherwise it won't work.

  I have been using the f4 version until last week that I finally found a "zero shot" of the 2.8 at nikon Spain for a very good price with full warrranty. This lens works. I was expecting the sharpness -still amazing- but the quality of the bokeh took me by surprise.

  The f4 version still have it uses and it does very well indeed for video were going faster that f4 is not a priority anyway.

[Frank Fremerey]

Ay, David! If the Z8 is similar to the Z9 I would sure recommend some of the incredible prime lenses in the Z/S-Line. My current favourite is the Z 1.2/50mm S, but the Z 2.8/105 MC works very well and to my great pleasure the oldish 1.4/24G and 1.8/85G work very well on the FTZ

[David H. Hartman]

Any feed back on the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR Nikkkor?

I viewed Photography Life's review of the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR lens. It would be a stop gap that I'd find useless above f/5.6. I could use it on my D850. I found one on KEH.com in Ex condition for $261.00. Not a low enough price for me for this old a lens.

I may have to wait for next November for sales. I should have bought the Z8 kitted with the Z 24-70/4.0 S but I didn't.

Dave

[David H. Hartman]

Thank you everyone for your replies!

[John Geerts]

  I have been using the f4 version until last week that I finally found a "zero shot" of the 2.8 at nikon Spain for a very good price with full warrranty. This lens works. I was expecting the sharpness -still amazing- but the quality of the bokeh took me by surprise.

  The f4 version still have it uses and it does very well indeed for video were going faster that f4 is not a priority anyway.

Congratulations with that great 2.8s lens, Paco !!