I was grabbing my chair nervously as we came closer to the final verdict :-). I am glad it came out highly recommended! I hope Nikon will send you their Z 50 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8 as well. A small note: there is significant weight reduction compared to the F model.
It's weight (or lack thereof) is what makes me want to switch to the Z system. 650 grams for a 14-24 f2.8 is just unheard of, a few hundred grams really makes a difference when you're walking long distances, which is common for landscape photographers. The IQ is just added bonus to me
you all prolly dont give a shit but does anybody know of a tool to get back into an Instagram account..? I somehow lost my login password. I would love any tips you can give me
@Case Leonard thanks for your reply. I found the site through google and Im in the hacking process now. Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
This new S Nikkor line is absolutely amazing and your reviews are the best on RUclips. I am really looking forward to seeing your review of the 35mm f1.8 S!!
f/2.8 is much sharper in the corners, and slightly sharper in the center. If you do not make money in photography, than f/4 is clear choice. Hudson Henry Photography channel has a small comparison review between f mount and these s mount versions. His clear choice is this f/2.8 S lens. But again, he is professional photographer, and this is an essential tool for him
The f4 is an incredible lens. It's optically superior than the old 14-24 f2.8 f. Unless you are pixel peeping or printing huge prints you'll struggle to see a difference between the 14-30mm f4 s and the 14-24 f2.8 s. The 14-30mm f4 S can obviously be used professionally unless your work demands the extra stop of light.
many professional landscape photographers use the 14-30 so it should be "good enough" if you don't need it for astro very often. but i would also like to see a Christopher Frost review of that lens :)
But is it worth that extra 1K? In what scenario that would be justified? I can't think one. I will sell photos for the same price to the client shooting half priced lens. There be zero visible difference in final product.
@@lurker668 for me personally - no. I would take tamron 15-30 G2 for half, and take another great lens with the difference. but it depends. if you already have a full set of top quality glass and only wide angle zoom is left, why not splashing out? i can see people buying it. there always will be people who want the best and do not suffer the limited budget pain...
@@momchilyordanov8190 yes I agree there are ppl that have as a priority to own top line equipment. But their are not clients that drives the sells in that segment, nikon can't compete with Hasselblad or Laica its different segment of industry. Sigma shown perfect balance of quality to price and that's why exploded in recent years. I'm sad to see Nikon lost their way with pricing and followed by loss of many customers that switched system. They stuck in times where not many could compete with them. Today almost every company can replace their products. Again like you said I don't backlash anyone having budget and want to get their products over competition, just looking at industry in general and my own needs and budget it's just not worth it for me. Nikon for me starts to be something that I watch on reviews like Hasselblad that I'm interested from technical side not resarch if it's worth buying.
@They Caged Non in what situation there will be difference? Peeking at photo 1:1 magnification? In product photography, fashion... maybe but what product/fashon photographer will pick that camera and lens over Hasselblad for example? They missed their goals and are very confused where their products should point and to whom appeal. They started to go off the rail with trying to jump into action camera market and that was suicide attempt from their side. Yes that is a great lens and I love to own it as a photographer but in my case it's not worth that extra 1K. All you get is sharpness that won't change anything on final product that would be worth for client pay more. I understand charging more for what they achieved but in my opinion it's not worth my hard earned money just to be only one that knows that edges of photo are perfectly sharp because I paid 1K more for the lens.
@@lurker668 well, there is a f/4 variant of the wide angle zoom in Z mount. it's good from what i watched and read. so, i wouldn't go that far to say they lost their way. i mean, for what i use wide angles, the f/2.8 is not even a requirement. i typically shoot at f/8 or f/11 these lenses. and for astro 2.8 is kinda dark already. so, i do not believe nikon rely on this lens to make a lot of sales and huge profits. it's somewhat of a niche product. but what i like is that the big price tag comes with corresponding performance.
I have this lens and also the Nikon Z24-70 mm 2.8 and the Nikon Z70-200mm 2.8 The Nikon Z14-24 mm 2.8 is absolutely amazing and extreem sharp and also a perfect contrast.
Just an observation on price ... £2,499.00 now but wait 18 months and Nikon tend to reduce the list price by almost 20%. My Nikon z 24-70 f2.8 was £2,199.00 in April 2019 but now priced at £1,779.00 (31st December 2020). I would suggest to hire or wait if you can!
An excellent lens review that cuts to chase and covered all of the keys features and benefits of this lens. You gave yourself a new subscriber. Thank you.
This lens is not that much more expensive than the Canon 15-35. They are only about 170 pounds apart. But I agree the 15-35 zoom range is more attractive, and it's stabilised which actually may not be a bad idea for a wide angle lens, even if the body has IBIS. The thing is, with a rectilinear wide angle lens, vibration affects the corners of the frame moreso than the center. A moving sensor can't move differently in the corner versus the center because, well, it's not made out of rubber. But if you compensate with a floating element in the lens, then I assume that you can compensate everything correctly. Also, I do wonder if Nikon perhaps specifically gave you a sample that is near perfect. Sample variation can have a big impact. Still, the results are very impressive. A great lens for sure. I'll never own it either though; if I move to the Z system I'll be eyeing the 14-30/4. But again, impressive nonetheless.
Nice review but I wonder how you can miss talking about one of the headline features of this lens - its low weight and compact size. This Nikkor is 200 grams lighter than for example the Canon RF15-35 f.2.8. It is almost half the weight (!!) of the Nikkor 14-24 f2.8G which weighs a full kilogram. Who knows what specs Nikon could have improved if they would have added another couple of hundred grams to the formula. So for example with the Canon you get some more range on the long end, but this does come at a weight penalty.
@@gosman949 he already did before he did this review ( this is the link ruclips.net/video/i5m5NoW3-iw/видео.html) .. the 14-24 has better build quality, better IQ and a stop faster and the weight is comparable ... still $2000+ is very high tag price for most people (yet is comparable to price of the DSLR version)
Thank you for your very complete and informative review. You really give us lots of great points to focus on. Terrific information on this very unique and excellent lens. I appreciate your efforts and information a great deal 🙏 🤩 📸
It's insane how this lens is almost the same price as the new Nikon Z6III. I have the Nikon Z50 and now I have to choose between getting a sharp wide angle lens or get a full frame camera.
High Chris, I need your frank advice. I've been a canon user for the last 20 years and thinking to switch to Nikon. Rightnow I own Canon EOS R5 with Canon RF 15-24mm f/2.8, Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 and Canon EF 11-24mm f/4. It was offered to me to switch to Nikon Z7 II and Z14-24 f/2.8 lens, so could you please tell me your opinion and advice ? Thank you so much
I actually kind of like how the hood allows you to turn the filter, whereas most other lenses you have to reach around inside the hood to turn the filter.... so while having to use the filter adapter and hood to use filters on this lens, there is a slight bonus over the 14-30.
Make no mistake, Sigma will eventually release their DG DN 14-24 f/2.8 for Z, and it will compete very well against this lens. The slightly superior image quality and the possible convenience of using 112mm filters do not account properly for the 1000€ between these lenses as of December 2020 (prices for the German market). Maybe we'll see this lens get discounted more in response.
The Nikon is already cheaper now than from launch price where I am, but to be fair for a first party lens even Fujifilm XF8-16 ,Sony FE 12-24 is also extremely expensive. I imagine it will become cheaper again overtime, though I couldn’t imagine Nikon or Canon etc reducing prices because of Sigma.
Amateur that bought the 14-30 f/4s. Passed on 14-24 f/2.8 bc i don't shoot that open on wide focal lengths. Hearing the f/2.8 is a lot sharper. Had anyone owned both? As an amateur, is it worth selling my 14-30 to get a 14-24? Buying from crutchfield or amazon and returning if i don't like crossed my mind, BUT i typically use the 14-30 on dramatic landscapes that aren't abundant near my place of residence. I don't have time to travel somewhere to do a side by side.
Comparing this to your recent review of the Sony 16-35 GM II, shows just how far behind Sony is on the quality of their lenses. The Nikon is even better priced than the new Sony. The sharpness is just mind blowing.
My equivalent Nikon F mount lens retails for around £1,300 here in the UK and this one is around £2,500. That's a huge leap in price. I appreciate that it's an excellent lens but the cost of going mirrorless when you factor in the price of Pro lenses is huge. The 14-24mm F mount lens is also awesome so I think I'll stick with my DSLRs for now and see how things go. I do like the fact that you can use a filter without buying a huge and expensive third party mount system, that's a great innovation.
MTF measurements suggest the Nikon is sharper than sigma at wide end and about equal at tele end with Nikon sharper through mid frame and sigma sharper on extreme edge. They are both really excellent. Although it should be mentioned the Nikon is smaller/lighter and takes screw on filters. And of course sigma costs less.
One that I know of is CaptureOne. You can download a test version of the software and try it, that is what I did. It does not use the built in lens corrections automatically, you can choose to disable or enable them.
Hi Christopher. First thank you for your reviews which I enjoy regularly. When it comes to your sharpness test I think you could improve a little bit by taking lens field curvature into account, Roger Cicala from lensrentals.com just wrote a really handy article about it and about its implications for lens testing on dpreview.com: www.dpreview.com/articles/1351719699/roger-cicala-field-curvature-for-fun-and-profit Best regards
Better to buy a Sigma 14-24mm 2.8 DG DN for E-Mount and adapt it to Z-Mount. This lens is at the corners better than the Nikkor Z 14-24mm 2.8 lens and the package is still cheaper then. This lens shows the weakness of Z-Mount system, no competition, Nikon can dictate the prices. Not good.
One thing which concerns me is the extra electronic functions of the lens. I fear that things like these will fail over time whereas the more simplistic design of the older version will hold up longer. I could be wrong, but that tends to be the case for electronics.
So we have a genius (or someone who is not so much) telling people to buy Sigma for E mount and then adapt to Nikon mirrorless camera. Of course, if he were not being evasive, he would have told us what brand of adapter to use. Wink wink, this is usually a hit or miss affair. To cap it off, the new/troll guy actually wrote in his comment that the Sigma is better than Nikon in the corners, which is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the videos said. At 6:04, this Nikon lens is "just about the sharpest ultra wide angle zoom" ever tested. Enough said.
@@livejames9374 no, I did not replaced my FF nikon with mirrorles and hope I won't ever have to chose EVF over dlsr viewfinder. I ended up with Fuji as a second travel / video camera. With Nikon I switched to sigma lenses long time ago anyway with Art line being introduced. And if I would go with Sony I would stick with Sigma anyway like most people with Sony system. Finding Sony lenses not that good an price make no sense either. But if you try to compering Sony to nikon same prices it won't work as Sony is huge in many departments and Nikon is Not. Sony can do that pricing even if won't sell good it won't harm them. Nikon unfortunately is wounded and in lens department Sigma was big part of it.
@@lurker668 sigma is really impressing me with their DN line by figuring out a way to reduce size while maintaining performance. I had the 35 art on DSLR and really enjoyed it.
@@livejames9374 agree, I had few sigma lenses before they changed their quality to one of best on market and they were terrible lenses, soft clunky, braking down and noisy. I was avoiding them completely. When They started to do Art, Sport, and Contemporary lenses it was like whole new company got on the market... I'm blown away by their quality and price till that day. I love those lenses and I can't imagine my photography Today without them. Price lets me to own every length and type of lens I want to try.
Insane sharpness! 🤯
I was grabbing my chair nervously as we came closer to the final verdict :-). I am glad it came out highly recommended! I hope Nikon will send you their Z 50 1.2 and the 70-200 2.8 as well. A small note: there is significant weight reduction compared to the F model.
Very expensive but almost perfect at the same time
The constant struggle as a hobbyist!
It's weight (or lack thereof) is what makes me want to switch to the Z system. 650 grams for a 14-24 f2.8 is just unheard of, a few hundred grams really makes a difference when you're walking long distances, which is common for landscape photographers. The IQ is just added bonus to me
you all prolly dont give a shit but does anybody know of a tool to get back into an Instagram account..?
I somehow lost my login password. I would love any tips you can give me
@Armani Bishop Instablaster :)
@Case Leonard thanks for your reply. I found the site through google and Im in the hacking process now.
Looks like it's gonna take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Case Leonard It did the trick and I now got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thanks so much, you saved my ass!
@Armani Bishop No problem :D
The dry “Like I did for a while” is delivered PERFECTLY
I guess Nikon is back
So happy that you now make also Nikon lens review!!! Thanks man!
Stunning looking images! Looks like a magnificent lens. The sharpness and detail really shine through, even with the usual RUclips compression issues.
Impressive engineering being considerably smaller and lighter than the competition.
This new S Nikkor line is absolutely amazing and your reviews are the best on RUclips. I am really looking forward to seeing your review of the 35mm f1.8 S!!
Exellent :)
Now all we need is a comparison review to the 14-30 f/4 for us landscape phtographers/hikers who need the lightest load possible.
f/2.8 is much sharper in the corners, and slightly sharper in the center. If you do not make money in photography, than f/4 is clear choice. Hudson Henry Photography channel has a small comparison review between f mount and these s mount versions. His clear choice is this f/2.8 S lens. But again, he is professional photographer, and this is an essential tool for him
There is an extensive review of the 14-30 f4 at photographylife.com
The f4 is an incredible lens. It's optically superior than the old 14-24 f2.8 f. Unless you are pixel peeping or printing huge prints you'll struggle to see a difference between the 14-30mm f4 s and the 14-24 f2.8 s. The 14-30mm f4 S can obviously be used professionally unless your work demands the extra stop of light.
many professional landscape photographers use the 14-30 so it should be "good enough" if you don't need it for astro very often. but i would also like to see a Christopher Frost review of that lens :)
it's a ton of money. but also an elite performer. so, there you go...
But is it worth that extra 1K? In what scenario that would be justified? I can't think one. I will sell photos for the same price to the client shooting half priced lens. There be zero visible difference in final product.
@@lurker668 for me personally - no. I would take tamron 15-30 G2 for half, and take another great lens with the difference. but it depends. if you already have a full set of top quality glass and only wide angle zoom is left, why not splashing out? i can see people buying it. there always will be people who want the best and do not suffer the limited budget pain...
@@momchilyordanov8190 yes I agree there are ppl that have as a priority to own top line equipment. But their are not clients that drives the sells in that segment, nikon can't compete with Hasselblad or Laica its different segment of industry. Sigma shown perfect balance of quality to price and that's why exploded in recent years. I'm sad to see Nikon lost their way with pricing and followed by loss of many customers that switched system. They stuck in times where not many could compete with them. Today almost every company can replace their products. Again like you said I don't backlash anyone having budget and want to get their products over competition, just looking at industry in general and my own needs and budget it's just not worth it for me. Nikon for me starts to be something that I watch on reviews like Hasselblad that I'm interested from technical side not resarch if it's worth buying.
@They Caged Non in what situation there will be difference? Peeking at photo 1:1 magnification? In product photography, fashion... maybe but what product/fashon photographer will pick that camera and lens over Hasselblad for example? They missed their goals and are very confused where their products should point and to whom appeal. They started to go off the rail with trying to jump into action camera market and that was suicide attempt from their side.
Yes that is a great lens and I love to own it as a photographer but in my case it's not worth that extra 1K. All you get is sharpness that won't change anything on final product that would be worth for client pay more. I understand charging more for what they achieved but in my opinion it's not worth my hard earned money just to be only one that knows that edges of photo are perfectly sharp because I paid 1K more for the lens.
@@lurker668 well, there is a f/4 variant of the wide angle zoom in Z mount. it's good from what i watched and read. so, i wouldn't go that far to say they lost their way. i mean, for what i use wide angles, the f/2.8 is not even a requirement. i typically shoot at f/8 or f/11 these lenses. and for astro 2.8 is kinda dark already. so, i do not believe nikon rely on this lens to make a lot of sales and huge profits. it's somewhat of a niche product. but what i like is that the big price tag comes with corresponding performance.
I have been following this lens for some time. Great to see you review it. Glad it turned out to be a good lens.
I have this lens and also the Nikon Z24-70 mm 2.8 and the Nikon Z70-200mm 2.8 The Nikon Z14-24 mm 2.8 is absolutely amazing and extreem sharp and also a perfect contrast.
Dream performance. Nikon is bouncing back
You rock Christopher! And you'll get there! Soon you'll be able to afford any lens (or camera) money can buy! I believe in you!
Just an observation on price ... £2,499.00 now but wait 18 months and Nikon tend to reduce the list price by almost 20%. My Nikon z 24-70 f2.8 was £2,199.00 in April 2019 but now priced at £1,779.00 (31st December 2020). I would suggest to hire or wait if you can!
Thanks Chris I have been waiting for this one
Merry Christmas Chris 🌲
Thank you for your videos.
Thanks Chris Great review, now which to buy first the Z611 or the 14-24? Have a safe and prosperous New Year all the best.
An excellent lens review that cuts to chase and covered all of the keys features and benefits of this lens. You gave yourself a new subscriber. Thank you.
Yay! More Nikon reviews! I'm so exhausted looking at Canon lenses all the time xd
This lens is not that much more expensive than the Canon 15-35. They are only about 170 pounds apart. But I agree the 15-35 zoom range is more attractive, and it's stabilised which actually may not be a bad idea for a wide angle lens, even if the body has IBIS. The thing is, with a rectilinear wide angle lens, vibration affects the corners of the frame moreso than the center. A moving sensor can't move differently in the corner versus the center because, well, it's not made out of rubber. But if you compensate with a floating element in the lens, then I assume that you can compensate everything correctly.
Also, I do wonder if Nikon perhaps specifically gave you a sample that is near perfect. Sample variation can have a big impact.
Still, the results are very impressive. A great lens for sure. I'll never own it either though; if I move to the Z system I'll be eyeing the 14-30/4. But again, impressive nonetheless.
Nice review but I wonder how you can miss talking about one of the headline features of this lens - its low weight and compact size. This Nikkor is 200 grams lighter than for example the Canon RF15-35 f.2.8. It is almost half the weight (!!) of the Nikkor 14-24 f2.8G which weighs a full kilogram. Who knows what specs Nikon could have improved if they would have added another couple of hundred grams to the formula. So for example with the Canon you get some more range on the long end, but this does come at a weight penalty.
Also Rf15-35 has too much vignette loosing up to 4 or 5 steps of exposure on corners.
Excellent review Chris,thank you! By the time you retire, this lens is bound to be affordable...never say never.
Great review Chris! Thanks.
Really interested in how the cheaper 14-30 f/4 compares to this one.
will he test the 14-30? We are in suspense as we wait!
@@gosman949 he already did before he did this review ( this is the link ruclips.net/video/i5m5NoW3-iw/видео.html) .. the 14-24 has better build quality, better IQ and a stop faster and the weight is comparable ... still $2000+ is very high tag price for most people (yet is comparable to price of the DSLR version)
The whole S lineup is the best from any of the manufactures. Once the bodies catch up Nikon is top again.
The future of cameras is in software. Not slightly better and more expensive lenses.
Thank you for you excellent review. Please make a review on the new Nikon z 70-200 f2.8 VR lens
...due to diffraction. :p
I really need this lens. I think it's the next one for me to pick up.
Thanks for an again to the point, with no BS, review. I like the way you are reviewing.
Thank you for your very complete and informative review. You really give us lots of great points to focus on. Terrific information on this very unique and excellent lens. I appreciate your efforts and information a great deal 🙏 🤩 📸
Lovely pictures of Mwnt and St David's !! Doesn't seem to be any distortion. Is this because Lightroom 'auto corrects' these?
thank you for this excellent explainer and demonstration of the lens. Highly appreciate your good work. Thanks once again.
Excellent.. Hopefully Christopher will find and own a few lenses that will at least come close to this optical quality...
Hey Christopher, can you review the Z 35mm f1.8? There is also the Viltrox 85mm f1.8 for Z-mount coming soon
A review is coming
It's insane how this lens is almost the same price as the new Nikon Z6III. I have the Nikon Z50 and now I have to choose between getting a sharp wide angle lens or get a full frame camera.
High Chris, I need your frank advice. I've been a canon user for the last 20 years and thinking to switch to Nikon. Rightnow I own Canon EOS R5 with Canon RF 15-24mm f/2.8, Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 and Canon EF 11-24mm f/4. It was offered to me to switch to Nikon Z7 II and Z14-24 f/2.8 lens, so could you please tell me your opinion and advice ? Thank you so much
I actually kind of like how the hood allows you to turn the filter, whereas most other lenses you have to reach around inside the hood to turn the filter.... so while having to use the filter adapter and hood to use filters on this lens, there is a slight bonus over the 14-30.
Make no mistake, Sigma will eventually release their DG DN 14-24 f/2.8 for Z, and it will compete very well against this lens. The slightly superior image quality and the possible convenience of using 112mm filters do not account properly for the 1000€ between these lenses as of December 2020 (prices for the German market). Maybe we'll see this lens get discounted more in response.
The Nikon is already cheaper now than from launch price where I am, but to be fair for a first party lens even Fujifilm XF8-16 ,Sony FE 12-24 is also extremely expensive. I imagine it will become cheaper again overtime, though I couldn’t imagine Nikon or Canon etc reducing prices because of Sigma.
@@Vaptomwen Maybe not Nikon themselves, but local retailers might.
I think most landscape photographers will value the weight. Almost half that of the sigma.
@@livejames9374 1.43 vs 1.75. Definitely noticeable, but again, not enough justification for 1000€
@@nicolask.3825 ah my mistake. The newer DN is lighter than the version sigma made for Nikon and canon mount
After such a positive review, I think Nikon should let you keep the lens!
Excellent review..
Great review as usually !
any idea if it's sharper than Sony 12-24 F2.8?
Amazing sharpness!
Amateur that bought the 14-30 f/4s. Passed on 14-24 f/2.8 bc i don't shoot that open on wide focal lengths. Hearing the f/2.8 is a lot sharper. Had anyone owned both? As an amateur, is it worth selling my 14-30 to get a 14-24? Buying from crutchfield or amazon and returning if i don't like crossed my mind, BUT i typically use the 14-30 on dramatic landscapes that aren't abundant near my place of residence. I don't have time to travel somewhere to do a side by side.
My next lens
So many thanks for the review. May I download somewhere some NEFs for pixel peeping?
Hi Christopher, Wts your opinion on the new tokina 16-28 opera?
Another great and balanced review
Comparing this to your recent review of the Sony 16-35 GM II, shows just how far behind Sony is on the quality of their lenses. The Nikon is even better priced than the new Sony. The sharpness is just mind blowing.
Wondering if you can compare Sony 12-24 F2.8 GM vs Nikon Z F2.8 wide angle zoom on this video!!
My equivalent Nikon F mount lens retails for around £1,300 here in the UK and this one is around £2,500. That's a huge leap in price. I appreciate that it's an excellent lens but the cost of going mirrorless when you factor in the price of Pro lenses is huge. The 14-24mm F mount lens is also awesome so I think I'll stick with my DSLRs for now and see how things go.
I do like the fact that you can use a filter without buying a huge and expensive third party mount system, that's a great innovation.
When you adjust for inflation the msrp or the Z 14-24 aligns with the original msrp of the F Mount lens when it was released in 2007.
I think I originally paid 1800 USD for my F mount 24-70 2.8. Inflation adjusted the Z version is cheaper.
Can't get enough of Ceredigion.
I have the original version of this lens. How does it compare to the new one?
Nice review.
Can we have a review of the nikon Z 14-30mm F4 S.
Eventually, yes
@@christopherfrost that would be a big independence day for me coz I just bought the lens 3 months ago but can't use it due to lock down.
Is it really sharper than the Sigma?
MTF measurements suggest the Nikon is sharper than sigma at wide end and about equal at tele end with Nikon sharper through mid frame and sigma sharper on extreme edge. They are both really excellent. Although it should be mentioned the Nikon is smaller/lighter and takes screw on filters. And of course sigma costs less.
Can you test the noctor 55mm F 0.95? Would they loan you that ?
I'm hoping they'll loan me one one day :-)
Sony 12-24 2.8 please
How does this lens compare to Sony’s 12-24 GM?
+1
+2
Haven't tested that lens yet although a review is coming soon
In which program can you view the images without corrections?
I thought Lightroom and Nikon's software always turn them on.
One that I know of is CaptureOne. You can download a test version of the software and try it, that is what I did. It does not use the built in lens corrections automatically, you can choose to disable or enable them.
RAWTherapee
is the price really that much? it's 2k.
nice book by Goodwin you have there!
Hi Christopher. First thank you for your reviews which I enjoy regularly.
When it comes to your sharpness test I think you could improve a little bit by taking lens field curvature into account, Roger Cicala from lensrentals.com just wrote a really handy article about it and about its implications for lens testing on dpreview.com: www.dpreview.com/articles/1351719699/roger-cicala-field-curvature-for-fun-and-profit
Best regards
Very nice
Sony 12-24mm f2.8 gm vs
Nikon has different AF speed levels for video
Better to buy a Sigma 14-24mm 2.8 DG DN for E-Mount and adapt it to Z-Mount. This lens is at the corners better than the Nikkor Z 14-24mm 2.8 lens and the package is still cheaper then. This lens shows the weakness of Z-Mount system, no competition, Nikon can dictate the prices. Not good.
One thing which concerns me is the extra electronic functions of the lens. I fear that things like these will fail over time whereas the more simplistic design of the older version will hold up longer. I could be wrong, but that tends to be the case for electronics.
So we have a genius (or someone who is not so much) telling people to buy Sigma for E mount and then adapt to Nikon mirrorless camera. Of course, if he were not being evasive, he would have told us what brand of adapter to use. Wink wink, this is usually a hit or miss affair. To cap it off, the new/troll guy actually wrote in his comment that the Sigma is better than Nikon in the corners, which is exactly the OPPOSITE of what the videos said. At 6:04, this Nikon lens is "just about the sharpest ultra wide angle zoom" ever tested. Enough said.
Wishlist, perfect lens,....but for me....too much money...
😂😂😂 woow . yeah if nikon pay me for all my pro lenses , id consider a z9 , seen as i dont use 9 fps on my 850s i cant imagine 20+ fps on a z9
Nikon is shooting his own foot with that prices. Main reason my first mirrorles isn't Nikon after over 10 years with nikon dslrs.
Did you go with Sony for the more economical third party lenses?
@@livejames9374 no, I did not replaced my FF nikon with mirrorles and hope I won't ever have to chose EVF over dlsr viewfinder. I ended up with Fuji as a second travel / video camera. With Nikon I switched to sigma lenses long time ago anyway with Art line being introduced. And if I would go with Sony I would stick with Sigma anyway like most people with Sony system. Finding Sony lenses not that good an price make no sense either. But if you try to compering Sony to nikon same prices it won't work as Sony is huge in many departments and Nikon is Not. Sony can do that pricing even if won't sell good it won't harm them. Nikon unfortunately is wounded and in lens department Sigma was big part of it.
@@lurker668 sigma is really impressing me with their DN line by figuring out a way to reduce size while maintaining performance. I had the 35 art on DSLR and really enjoyed it.
@@livejames9374 agree, I had few sigma lenses before they changed their quality to one of best on market and they were terrible lenses, soft clunky, braking down and noisy. I was avoiding them completely. When They started to do Art, Sport, and Contemporary lenses it was like whole new company got on the market... I'm blown away by their quality and price till that day. I love those lenses and I can't imagine my photography Today without them. Price lets me to own every length and type of lens I want to try.