Nikon Z lenses roadmap (October 2021)

[Ilkka Nissilä]

On the other hand, looking at the glass half-full, Nikon will hopefully release more "pancake" primes - 85 f2.8 and 105 f2.8. A 105 f2.5 will carry significant appeal, especially it is a Classic build like the new 28 f2.8 SE.

I agree and hope the compact prime lens line is expanded towards short to medium teles.

Back on the niche for a 400-800 Super-telephoto zoom (or similar focal range), bear in mind the Sigma 300-800 f5.6 and Nikkor 360-1200 f11 were designed decades ago. Nikon has new materials (SR, Super ED etc), lens-coatings, and lighter alloys / composites. Above all, Nikon has the proven engineering knowledge to design a much more compact telephoto. I am also hopeful they exploit use their phase-fresnel technology ina compact, lighter zoom.

Modern high grade zooms tend to be packed with elements so there is not much weight reduction apparent. For example the Nikon 120-300/2.8 is only very slightly lighter than the earlier Sigma version. The 180-400/4 is not lightweight, either. Nikon have noted that although they explored PF zoom designs, bokeh would be adversely affected and only a slight weight reduction would be possible.

The 100-400 and 70-200/2.8 have experienced some weight reduction from some earlier versions of similar focal length and aperture, but the difference is not all that large (and one can find even lighter versions of 80-200/2.8 from the past).

[Roland Vink]

The new Sony 70-200/2.8 zoom is significantly lighter than the Nikon Z-mount version. Part of the weight reduction is because Sony managed to get the element count well down (while improving optical performance compared to their earlier version), but I suspect they have also used other light-weight materials in the lens barrel.

[MILLIREHM]

Just a few remarks from my side

SR glass is newto Nikon, Super-ED glass is - by far not. The latter one is rarely used, the AF-S 200/2 VR I and II was the only lens with Super-ED Glass until the AF-S 80-400. Both lenses are either superheavy or at least not lightweight. The new 100-400 mm lens is the third lens known to use Super ED (maybe an evolved design?).

The Z 105 mm MC is the best Micro-Nikkor so far but it is rather lightweight- so lightweight that it feels "cheap". It is not small (like most of the Z-lenses can't be called small).
The AI-S Micro Nikkor was my fourth lens ever and accompanied me in the  "first line" over years. When I later got the 105 mm f/2,5 i wondered how much smaller and more compact it is. The Micro also cant replace what the f/2,5 can do for portrait work (and vice versa).

[Roland Vink]

On the other hand, looking at the glass half-full, Nikon will hopefully release more "pancake" primes - 85 f2.8 and 105 f2.8. A 105 f2.5 will carry significant appeal, especially it is a Classic build like the new 28 f2.8 SE.

A 20/3.5 with similar dimensions as the current compact Z primes would be a welcome addition. That would be a worthy update of the tiny AI 20/3.5 which remains one of my favorite lenses. Some compact telephotos would also be good, something like a 75mm or 80mm f/2 and a 135/3.5 would be nice.

Actually my ideal would be for a set of lenses with 1.4x ratio between lenses. The exact focal lengths aren't that important to me, we could have a set which builds on the current primes:
20/3.4, 28/2.8, 40/2, 56/2, 80/2, 110/2.8, 160/4
 or
21/3.4, 30/2.4, 42/2, 60/2, 85/2.4, 120/2.8, 170/4
 or
20/3.4, 25/2.8, 35/2, 50/2, 70/2, 100/2.4, 140/3.4
 or
24/2.8, 32/2.4, 45/2, 65/2, 90/2.4, 130/3.4, 180/4
 etc
The resulting lineup would avoid large gaps between lenses such as 50mm and 85mm, or focal lengths too close such as 20-24-28, or 85-105. Such a lineup would work equally well on FX and DX formats, the lenses simply scale up or down one step to give the same field of view depending on which format you are using. The DX format would need to be an additional DX only lens to cover the wide end, something like a 16/2.8 or 14/3.4. I just can't understand why manufacturers don't take a more systematic approach to lenses like this, especially now they have a chance to build a new set of mirrorless lenses from scratch. They just repeat the traditional lenses with different sizes and shapes and no consistency in filter sizes and other accessories. The closest anyone got to my ideal was Nikon in the 1970s, which is why I like my AI kit so much

Some of the resulting focal lengths may look a bit strange but that never bothered me, I will happily use 40mm, 45mm, 50mm or 55mm, or anything between as a standard lens, I just adjust my working distance and composition to compensate. I also would prefer intermediate lens speeds like f/2.4 and f/3.4 which are exactly half a stop either side of f/2.8. Aperture settings like f/2.5 and f/3.5 always seemed a bit strange to me as they are neither 1/3 or 1/2 stop values unless the numbers are badly rounded. Maybe manufacturers think the .5 values look nicer, but that hasn't stopped them from making f/6.3 lenses. Anyone want an f/6.5 lens?  

And if they are going to give them classic styling like the 28/2.8 SE, please make the lower part a functional aperture ring!

[David H. Hartman]

I would be very happy with a 20/3.5 to 20/2.8 compact z mount FX lens. I have wanted a compact 105mm f/2.5 AF lens with somewhat close focus but not macro focus forever. What I want is a lens for candid photos of people, a head and shoulders lens that is close to 2x the normal (51.6mm) or 100mm to 110mm. I'm partial to 105mm as a matter of tradition. To plug the gap between 20mm and 50mm a 28mm lens but please a 28mm f/2.0 as f/2.8 is just too slow. Please a standard filter size of 52mm or 62mm and specifically not 58mm for one and 67mm for another. Standardizing on 52mm and 72mm and then adding 62mm made a great deal of sense and simplified the use of filters.

Dave

[Jack Dahlgren]

Standardizing on 52mm and 72mm and then adding 62mm made a great deal of sense and simplified the use of filters.

Dave

I think I will live to see the day that ND filters are in body/in lens and all other filters are computational. I hope I live to see that day.

[Jan Anne]

The Canon RF 16/2.8 also looks very interesting as a super lightweight ultra wideangle companion to the Zee 28/2.8 and 40/2 at only 165 gram, would even usable on DX.

[Hugh_3170]

Yes, this would be very handy indeed.  Would love, for example, to have adjustable in-camera graduates.  Especially when dealing with with our contrasty Australian light.

I think I will live to see the day that ND filters are in body/in lens and all other filters are computational. I hope I live to see that day.

[Hugh_3170]

Sadly David, I think that you are correct about a Z version of the 105mm f/2.5.  (But I cannot help dreaming....)

...........................

Now it's assured that there will never be an AF-S 105mm f/1.8 G or E Nikkor and I doubt that there will ever be 105mm f/1.8 Nikkor in Z mount. Again the 70-200/2.8 in AF-S, G and E and 70-200/2.8 Z Nikkors are no replacement for the light and nimble 105/2.5 AIS and 105/2.8 AIS Micro. It's a sad situation to me.

..........................

Dave

[MILLIREHM]

It might be the case that there won't be any new F-mount lens released.

[Jan Anne]

Think that is a good thing, better focus on the new Zee platform and make it a success than spread limited resources thin across the old and new world and fail as a company.

With age there comes the need for reading glasses for many of us, being able to view images on a corrected viewfinder without looking for my glasses is becoming a very convenient feature with mirrorless over a DSLR. When the AF catches up its goodbye to the D500 and 200-500VR and a big welcome to a Z60 DX with a 100-400mm, the sooner the better.

[MILLIREHM]

The Canon RF 16/2.8 also looks very interesting as a super lightweight ultra wideangle companion to the Zee 28/2.8 and 40/2 at only 165 gram, would even usable on DX.

Gives the impression of a Nikon 1 lens- designwise

[MILLIREHM]

Think that is a good thing, better focus on the new Zee platform and make it a success than spread limited resources thin across the old and new world and fail as a company.

With age there comes the need for reading glasses for many of us, being able to view images on a corrected viewfinder without looking for my glasses is becoming a very convenient feature with mirrorless over a DSLR. When the AF catches up its goodbye to the D500 and 200-500VR and a big welcome to a Z60 DX with a 100-400mm, the sooner the better.

I am ambiguous about that. Would prefer Nikon to support both worlds but disrupting circumstances and a shrinking market is forcing something different.

Still enjoy my D500 (and 200-500 or 80-400). This special package is still unreached.

[Jan Anne]

Gives the impression of a Nikon 1 lens- designwise

Checked twice if it really was a full frame lens haha as it looked so similar to my Sony 16m crop lens.

But the trick is that it relies heavily on in camera software corrections or post processing, without it its pretty much unusable:
https://www.cameralabs.com/canon-rf-16mm-f2-8-stm-review/

Thats a bonus with my third party CV15/4.5 which has very little distortion by itself so works perfectly on any camera without any necessary post processing to make it look good

[Roland Vink]

But the trick is that it relies heavily on in camera software corrections or post processing, without it its pretty much unusable:

It could be used as a mild fisheye