To my humble opinion, this channel offers the best and most informative lens reviews in astonishing compact 6 minutes. No blah blah, directly going in media res. Thanks man! Wish you 2 million subscribers!
Nikon Technical engineer claimed, that the Z mount bokeh at F4 has the look of F2.8 bokeh in FX lenses. This is not depth of field, but the bokeh rendering. How the bokeh is pleasing to the eyes...All I know is the bokeh seems so nicely rendered.
Christopher, whenever you're making remarks about vignetting or distortion, keep in mind that Z mount lenses (or any other mirrorless lesses for that matter) are designed to be used on digital bodies only. That allows to optimize the optics for all the other properties at the expense of vignetting and distortion, which are easy to correct in-camera automatically (even for the viewfinder image in theory), yielding the best possible result in the end. Even with recent F-mount lenses, they couldn't really go that far because F-mount lenses can still be used on film cameras such as the F6 or F100, which still have a non-negligible user base. I'm pretty sure that consideration went into all the mirrorless lens designs, especially with Nikon Z as they came last to the mirrorless game and were able to employ a lot of lessons learned from the other brands that started earlier. The Z mount being both the largest and the one with the shortest flange distance is probably also a result of that, which provides even more degrees of freedom in lens design, and wide-angle designs in particular can benefit from that.
Will you do a review of the nikkor z 24-200 f4-6.3?, i am considering it with the z5, but i am worried that the performance might be as bad as the rf 24-240
At the risk of sounding like a grumpy bastard I'd say you're better off with a constant aperture 24-70. Personal opinion, but I find superzooms to be a bit of an anachronism. Why use a lens with so many compromises on a camera for which the main feature is the ability to switch lens to suit the situation? The exception is of course travel photography. So if that's what you need then go for it. Otherwise I'd go for the 24-70/4 with the 105mm macro or something like an adapted AI 105/2.5 for portraits and stuff. Or if you don't mind a bit of bulk then get an FTZ and a second gen F-mount 70-200. You could get one used for reasonable money.
I'm not happy with the smearing and distortion on the viltrox 24mm 1.8. but having seen your review of the nikon 24mm 1.8 to consider updating and now seeing this, I really go me thinking if I should just get the 20mm and crop in. I'm shooting in a small studio room where 24mm is the sweet spot for the work I do. 28mm is missing a bit. 20mm is overkill. but I feel like I'd get better results from shooting at 20mm and cropping in to the 24mm, having 45mp at hand. I'm torn....
Sony doesnt come Close as the Sony cameras DONT have the luxury and efficiency of the Z Mount The good G Lenses therefore start out on the wrong foot as a result. Having said that I love my Sony TV
@@Mr09260 That’s a good joke 😂😂 How do you know that the 20mm Sony doesn’t come close to this Nikon , have you tested it? Just to remind you, Sony with their small mount have released a 50 1.2 which is smaller and lighter than the Nikon and canon versions and equal or better in terms of image quality. Talking about the zmount as a luxury and being very efficient does make you a bit of a Nikon fanboy…
The Z 20mm is unfortunately not as good as 20 G Sony. There are Jim and a few others tested both at infinity and 10m. Sony pulled this one off perfectly, smaller in diameter and lighter, crucially shorter in length, while beat Nikon in a few areas of image quality. Nikon lost 50mm F1.2 war too. I really wanted to see Nikon at least top the rank in optical quality but gone are those glorious days.
Rumors had Nikon only designed a few of current Z lineup, the rest were Tamron. I can tell holy trinity, 58mm, 105mmVR are definitely work of their old designers, the rest especially 14-30 doesn't look like, the colour and rendition are different to other lenses.
Using a 14-30mm for mountain photography, I often bump up the ISO for freehand shots. I'm leaning towards the 20mm f1.8 for its sharpness and color quality, which helps in post-crop scenarios. However, it's a tough call between that and the Laowa 15mm f2.0, especially since I need a lens that bridges well to my 35mm. Reviewing my Lightroom gallery, I noticed a third of my shots are at 14mm. With the 20mm, I might miss out on some wider angles. Any thoughts or experiences with these lenses in similar situations?
Thanks for this. I used to have the Laowa that you mention but didn’t like it. It just wasn’t that sharp in my experience so I sold it. My aim with the Nikkor 20mm f/1.8 would be to use it indoors in low light conditions
I used to have that lens, and it served me well, but when I switched to Z I tried out this 20mm Z version and I was blown away. This Z version is on another level.
@@djchips Only when wide open, when stopped down to f8 there is no difference between this and the F mount version this is the same for pretty much all of the Z lenses.
@@haydennettleton3272 when I compared the two there was a very noticable difference between them, the Z Lens coming out on top. It is the superior lens.
@@djchips I tried both the Z Mount and F mount on my Z5, from f5.6 and faster the Z version was vastly superior but at f8 I couldn't tell them apart, maybe the higher resolution of the Z7 would show the differences more?
I'm a Sony APSC shooter. I'm looking to go FF and considering Nikon. I must confess, I don't get Nikons design philosophy. These primes are relatively huge not to mention ugly (I know, subjective) I did a comparison of the Nikon 20mm, 24mm, and 85mm F1.8 and all are consistantly much larger than their Sony counter parts. Even the 24mm F1.8 is larger and heavier than the Sony 24mm F1.4 GM!!
@They Caged Non I think you are miss representing my comments I never said a thing about the quality of these lenses and I said, esthetics is subjective. Obviously, several have commented that they like the look. My point was that as someone who has an z6II, Z24-200, Z24-70, a d a Z14-30 sitting I'm my cart at B&H the design of the Nikon primes has kept me from pulling the trigger. For me, if Samyang and/or Sigma available in Z mount it would be a no brainer.
I dont buy a lens for its looks I buy it for the Image quality and how it renders my images >. Nikon has delivered for me for 45 years with its ugly , heavy , big lenses. I Like my Sony TV Its a good looker too LOL
I hear you so well, I just dnt get your logic why you chose Nikon ff instead of Sony when you were using their apsc camera already? Maybe a ff DSLR user? Then I can relate and I do prefer the look of those golden Nikon DSLR lenses much more than these too simple and pipe like z lenses. Sony prime are great indeed, specially the recent ones are optically perfect. Sony 20mm 1.8 is not worse than this lens if not better. 85 1.8 is also great and the 24 1.4 is a gem indeed. All 3 are reasonably priced compared to Nikon and Canon mirrorless lenses. Nikon has the best wide zooms in any system currently(imo). But Sony has a vast diversity of choices which most of them are smaller compared to other systems.
@@networm64 No doubt you are absolutely right. For a couple reasons, and probably none make sense to anybody but me. 1st is ergonomics. I love the feel of the Nikon Z bodies in hand. I'm a big guy and the Sony bodies all feel cramped to me. I think that's an important part of the formula. 2nd, As a casual retired/travel/grand kids /landscape shooter, I prefer the focal range of the Nikon 24-200 to the Tamron 28-200, not to mention, Sony really can't match the 24-70/4 or 14-30/4. 3rd, plain old G.A.S. I've been shooting Sony since it was Minolta, and I'd like to try something new. I know, pretty shallow huh? But hey, it's my money. LOL
Hey Chris, why isn't there a lens similar to the Sigma 18-35 1.8 for Sony apsc emount? I mean, that lens already exists, it's not impossible to do. Even with 18-24mm I would settle.
Sigma should announce its first Z lenses in the coming months, so their 18-35 1.8 (which is the one you think about i guess) will probably be upgraded as a Z mount APSC lens, personnaly i look forward to see a sigma 85mm 1.4 Z.
Its because of the exposure in wide openings. Center point of sensors get more light exposure and hence get brighter when the lens is open wide. Stop down the aperture with those aperture blades that control the opening and you get more even exposure because you only keep the light coming in the center of the glass, more evenly dispersed towards the sensor. It'll obviously be darker on same camera settings such as iso speed and shutter speed, But to get right exposure you need to adjust both of the latter. I guess you're pretty new to photography
Another wonderful video Brother, thank you! I cannot seem to locate your Nikkor 24-200 video which I used extensively in my recent camera decision matrix... did you pull it down? Thanks!
@@christopherfrost Now that’s funny lol… it must have been one of your other Nikkor reviews I was thinking about. I enjoy your balanced reviews Brother! “Further up, further in!”.
I was waiting for these lens to come with your review and only thing that I wanted to see is how it performs in crop mode because I own Nikon Z50 😞 I also have Nikon D7200 and I am thinking between 20mm and 24mm (Z or F mount) I haven’t tried either lens but I am leaning more for wider focal length. I can get used in good condition 20mm F1.8g for 500€ in that case I would have to get FTZ adapter so I can use also on my Z50. Newer lenses are for sure better in every way but they are pricey. Anyway I just wanted to see performance of new lens. I will always watch your reviews because you are the best in testing lenses. Love your videos you are No.1 for me 👍👌💪 Cheers
Unless you're planning on getting a full frame Z body I'd recommend an adapted F-mount lens. By using the DX format you wont have any use for the better edge performance of the new Z lenses. If you're on the fence about what focal length you like I'd say an adapted DX wide zoom like the 10-24 is a good place to start.
@@Joelsfilmer 95% of photos I take are indoors so F2.8 is minimum for me, 20mm is wide enough for me. I’m using my 35mm f1.8g dx and a lot of times I wished a had wider lens. That’s why I’m looking in this direction. Nikkor 17-55mm F2.8g is also interesting lens for me and it’s similar price to 20mm F1.8g, used ofcourse
@@garra7472 Are you planning on getting the Z5 or Z6? If you do low light shooting the better ISO performance and 5-stop IBIS would be a big benefit. If you're seeing yourself staying on DX then, honestly, you're backing yourself into a corner full of compromises. Getting a big and pricey FX 20mm for a 30mm equivalent, which is barely wide angle, on DX then you are kinda throwing money into the lake, to use a local expression.
@They Caged Non it was a rough estimate. Lol. Im thinking about the 1.8g lenses were not as good but a lot less expensive and smaller but i suppose that comes with the bigger lens mount. Im just glad theyve announced the 40mm f2 which would be good.
I have this 20mm F1.8 S Lens for Milky Way on the Z7 ..Mind Boggling IQ and light gathering and Pin sharp stars. I also have the 14-30 F4 for Wide Angle general photography , Then I have the 2 best lenses ever made all brands included , The S 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 S lenses paired with the 1.4 S Convertor you get no image loss and no loss in focusing speed
Side note: For £1000 they really couldn't afford to make it in Japan instead of outsourcing them (or hell, Taiwan or anywhere else)? These Japanese companies are going to be in for a rude awakening once these Chinese companies go from making great manual focus lenses to being able to copy and then advance the domestic production of high quality AF lenses from the knowhow they gain from manufacturing these for foreign companies (as they competently have for many other products). Viltrox already makes half decent ones that compete with Canon and SIGMA in the mirrorless space on price if not quality. Oh well, cheaper lenses in the future for the rest of us.
@@Mr09260 for now. But that’s the thing. Many in the HiFi space thought the same thing yet Chinese companies are now pushing out equipment better than anything the Japanese have ever pushed out. They cant make anything as good as Nikon until one day very soon, they can, no small part in thanks to penny pinching and outsourcing to China on Nikons part.
@@helloworldsteinI don't think that day will ever come. Chinese mentality is let others make it then we steal and copy their technology. As long as Nikon ensures their technology is not stolen, they are pretty safe. When you say hifi, what do you mean? If you are referring to Chinese smartphones or routers, you have to realize that none of the components are made by Chinese companies. Even their smartphones are made by Foxconn, not even local company. As long as China continues to copy and steal technologies, they will never become the tech leader.
Every one of your reviews mentions the "effects of diffraction", which seems kind of pointless or simplistic. Why? Because having the ability to stop down to f22 (or more) is actually a feature, not (solely) a flaw. You get more DoF by trading off some fine detail. Furthermore, diffraction is always present and stopping down may continue to improve off axis performance at some cost to centre performance. Photography is often managing tradeoffs rather than seeking a holy grail.
Yes, I know all of that. I mention diffraction for the benefit of people who might be a bit newer to photography and don't know these things (which was all of us, once)
@@christopherfrost "people who might be a bit newer to photography ". Then all the more reason to further elaborate on why the smaller apertures are still worth using. Let's hope the people who are considering the high-end len$e$ are not so "new" to photography.
@@sandb1867 It is in the "sharpness" part of his reviews, the point of this part is to test sharpness. What would you want him to do ? Neglect entirely apertures above F/11 ? Say that it becomes softer, but without mentionning diffraction ? Or make an optic lesson on "why apertures above F/11 are softer but still have an interest" every time he tests a lens ? Sure, sometimes you need a bit more DOF at the expense of sharpness, which is why lenses can stop down way past the limit of difraction, but is it worth mentionning in every video ? Sticking to "due to the effects of diffraction" is probably the way to go.
@@pierrevilley6675 "Neglect entirely apertures above F/11 ?" If it's all about the sharpness then a serious test should be performed at all apertures, determining resolution at the center, mid-frame and extreme corners. As pixel pitch or sensor resolution increases, diffraction will be become more evident at pixel peeping observation. Diffraction usually impacts the center before it becomes evident in the corners as you stop down because off-axis aberrations can continue to be improved that way before diffraction overtakes it. In any case, since diffraction is ALWAYS present in a lens, what's the point of even mentioning it at all?
Is it bad to use clean lenses? I think there's a time and place for everything. A lens with lots of imperfections aka character will be fine in the 30~85mm range. 20mm is rather specialized for real estate, astro, and these things need the highest level of cleanliness & clarity. You can always pick up vintage lenses if imperfections are important. Vintage effects can always be added in post anyway, but you can't make a vintage lens look modern.
@@jukeboxjohnnie Have you looked at any Z lens reviews lately? Nikon Z 24-70mm f2.8 is currently ranked best 24-70mm at dxomark. The 85mm is ranked 3rd best lens ever, beating out Carl Zeiss, GM, Canons that are 2-3 times their price. I am assuming once DXOMark reviews the 105, it will be up there as well.
@@mlai2546 I know the 24-70mm is good but look at the designs, they are big, ugly and horrible. I dont know if youre old enough to remember pre AI and AIS nikon lenses, they were the best designed and attractive lenses available on the market, beautifully made, todays offerings are frankly embarrassing. GFX lenses are the nicest available today if youre looking for an example of design and performance
What a horrible looking lens, just looks cheap, bland and its too long. I dont even like the sony brand but its G 20mm looks so much like more of a lens you would actually want to pick up...
@@muttishelfer9122 Plastic is a good thing on lenses. If you drop a lens made out of metal it will hit the ground at a higher speed, and due to the hardness of the casing it's more likely to shatter the glass even at the same velocity. Better yet, plastic will crack rather than deform, so you're less likely to get mounting problems or a seized up focus ring or ruined filter thread. And no, I'm not a Nikon user, I use Fuji and all their lenses are sadly metal.
@@muttishelfer9122 I don't consider XC lenses Fuji lenses, they're made in a different factory in the Phillippines/ Vietnam and get bundled with the cheapest cameras. The 70-300 is just old. I don't know what 18-55 you have but mine is metal.
To my humble opinion, this channel offers the best and most informative lens reviews in astonishing compact 6 minutes. No blah blah, directly going in media res. Thanks man! Wish you 2 million subscribers!
Nikon Technical engineer claimed, that the Z mount bokeh at F4 has the look of F2.8 bokeh in FX lenses. This is not depth of field, but the bokeh rendering. How the bokeh is pleasing to the eyes...All I know is the bokeh seems so nicely rendered.
This lens renders so clean and contrasty, it's such a great modern look. Thanks for the review!
Long live the Z line!
Nikon's Z mount lenses are sharp enough to give you a papercut! This one looks to be no exception.
Christopher, whenever you're making remarks about vignetting or distortion, keep in mind that Z mount lenses (or any other mirrorless lesses for that matter) are designed to be used on digital bodies only. That allows to optimize the optics for all the other properties at the expense of vignetting and distortion, which are easy to correct in-camera automatically (even for the viewfinder image in theory), yielding the best possible result in the end. Even with recent F-mount lenses, they couldn't really go that far because F-mount lenses can still be used on film cameras such as the F6 or F100, which still have a non-negligible user base.
I'm pretty sure that consideration went into all the mirrorless lens designs, especially with Nikon Z as they came last to the mirrorless game and were able to employ a lot of lessons learned from the other brands that started earlier. The Z mount being both the largest and the one with the shortest flange distance is probably also a result of that, which provides even more degrees of freedom in lens design, and wide-angle designs in particular can benefit from that.
Looks perfect for astrophotography
For sure!
The G was easily my favorite lens for F mount. When I finally get a Z this will be my first lens, I think.
Amazing lens! Love mine. Once you get used to the futuristic minimalist design other lenses look dated.
That bokeh at the end for the candle shot sold it.
You forgot the LOCA test (I'm assuming it's bc you couldn't find any color fringing).
Will you do a review of the nikkor z 24-200 f4-6.3?, i am considering it with the z5, but i am worried that the performance might be as bad as the rf 24-240
I would also love to see that lens reviewed, considering it now while it's summer sale
There are many reliable reviews on RUclips, it is great for what it is.
At the risk of sounding like a grumpy bastard I'd say you're better off with a constant aperture 24-70. Personal opinion, but I find superzooms to be a bit of an anachronism. Why use a lens with so many compromises on a camera for which the main feature is the ability to switch lens to suit the situation? The exception is of course travel photography. So if that's what you need then go for it. Otherwise I'd go for the 24-70/4 with the 105mm macro or something like an adapted AI 105/2.5 for portraits and stuff. Or if you don't mind a bit of bulk then get an FTZ and a second gen F-mount 70-200. You could get one used for reasonable money.
I use this lens on my Z7 for Milky way ..Insanely high IQ!!!!!!
Great review as always! Any chance you get your hands on the new 105 mm Z mount Macro lens?
Eventually I will, yes :-)
I'm not happy with the smearing and distortion on the viltrox 24mm 1.8. but having seen your review of the nikon 24mm 1.8 to consider updating and now seeing this, I really go me thinking if I should just get the 20mm and crop in. I'm shooting in a small studio room where 24mm is the sweet spot for the work I do. 28mm is missing a bit. 20mm is overkill. but I feel like I'd get better results from shooting at 20mm and cropping in to the 24mm, having 45mp at hand. I'm torn....
Such nice Bokeh. Don't see that often in a Ultra Wide Angle lens.
Great performance lens. I'm *very* curious to see how it compares to the Sony G 1,8/20mm.
Sony doesnt come Close as the Sony cameras DONT have the luxury and efficiency of the Z Mount The good G Lenses therefore start out on the wrong foot as a result. Having said that I love my Sony TV
@@Mr09260 That’s a good joke 😂😂 How do you know that the 20mm Sony doesn’t come close to this Nikon , have you tested it? Just to remind you, Sony with their small mount have released a 50 1.2 which is smaller and lighter than the Nikon and canon versions and equal or better in terms of image quality. Talking about the zmount as a luxury and being very efficient does make you a bit of a Nikon fanboy…
@@Super01041994 But it's not actually 50mm and I bet you the t-stop is no where near as good.
The Z 20mm is unfortunately not as good as 20 G Sony. There are Jim and a few others tested both at infinity and 10m. Sony pulled this one off perfectly, smaller in diameter and lighter, crucially shorter in length, while beat Nikon in a few areas of image quality. Nikon lost 50mm F1.2 war too. I really wanted to see Nikon at least top the rank in optical quality but gone are those glorious days.
Rumors had Nikon only designed a few of current Z lineup, the rest were Tamron. I can tell holy trinity, 58mm, 105mmVR are definitely work of their old designers, the rest especially 14-30 doesn't look like, the colour and rendition are different to other lenses.
Been following your reviews for years. Between you, Dustin & Nasim I don’t need to go anywhere else. Thanks again for this one Chris. 👏
It seems f2.8 is the sweetspot of this lens for clearer and crisper image.
Hi Christopher...14-30 or 17-28 or 20mm...if you had to buy one, which would you go for (I can't afford 14-24)
Using a 14-30mm for mountain photography, I often bump up the ISO for freehand shots. I'm leaning towards the 20mm f1.8 for its sharpness and color quality, which helps in post-crop scenarios. However, it's a tough call between that and the Laowa 15mm f2.0, especially since I need a lens that bridges well to my 35mm. Reviewing my Lightroom gallery, I noticed a third of my shots are at 14mm. With the 20mm, I might miss out on some wider angles. Any thoughts or experiences with these lenses in similar situations?
Thanks for this. I used to have the Laowa that you mention but didn’t like it. It just wasn’t that sharp in my experience so I sold it. My aim with the Nikkor 20mm f/1.8 would be to use it indoors in low light conditions
Cheesus! I have never seen so much of that room before on the autofocus test! .
Very beautiful Dolmen in your video 👌 I like these old stoneage graves. And I like your reviews of course
What are the white marks all over the focus ring. Are those scratches
Loved the cathedral photos.
Hi chris, Excellent review. please do review on fuji 8-16 f2.8. we are waiting.
Love this review ... thank you ... great lens ...
Thanks man, much appreciated.
I have the F mount version, got it used for about 400-500 dollars worth used, i like it, tho wide open the corners can look not so good.
I used to have that lens, and it served me well, but when I switched to Z I tried out this 20mm Z version and I was blown away. This Z version is on another level.
@@djchips Only when wide open, when stopped down to f8 there is no difference between this and the F mount version this is the same for pretty much all of the Z lenses.
@@haydennettleton3272 when I compared the two there was a very noticable difference between them, the Z Lens coming out on top. It is the superior lens.
@@djchips I tried both the Z Mount and F mount on my Z5, from f5.6 and faster the Z version was vastly superior but at f8 I couldn't tell them apart, maybe the higher resolution of the Z7 would show the differences more?
@@haydennettleton3272 No, only the new toy Syndrome.
you haven't shown the chromatic aberration of this lens here
I'm a Sony APSC shooter. I'm looking to go FF and considering Nikon. I must confess, I don't get Nikons design philosophy. These primes are relatively huge not to mention ugly (I know, subjective) I did a comparison of the Nikon 20mm, 24mm, and 85mm F1.8 and all are consistantly much larger than their Sony counter parts. Even the 24mm F1.8 is larger and heavier than the Sony 24mm F1.4 GM!!
@They Caged Non I think you are miss representing my comments I never said a thing about the quality of these lenses and I said, esthetics is subjective. Obviously, several have commented that they like the look. My point was that as someone who has an z6II, Z24-200, Z24-70, a d a Z14-30 sitting I'm my cart at B&H the design of the Nikon primes has kept me from pulling the trigger. For me, if Samyang and/or Sigma available in Z mount it would be a no brainer.
I dont buy a lens for its looks I buy it for the Image quality and how it renders my images >. Nikon has delivered for me for 45 years with its ugly , heavy , big lenses. I Like my Sony TV Its a good looker too LOL
@They Caged Non Totally agree All the Z lenses box way above their weight and some are best in class all brands considered
I hear you so well, I just dnt get your logic why you chose Nikon ff instead of Sony when you were using their apsc camera already? Maybe a ff DSLR user? Then I can relate and I do prefer the look of those golden Nikon DSLR lenses much more than these too simple and pipe like z lenses. Sony prime are great indeed, specially the recent ones are optically perfect. Sony 20mm 1.8 is not worse than this lens if not better. 85 1.8 is also great and the 24 1.4 is a gem indeed. All 3 are reasonably priced compared to Nikon and Canon mirrorless lenses. Nikon has the best wide zooms in any system currently(imo). But Sony has a vast diversity of choices which most of them are smaller compared to other systems.
@@networm64 No doubt you are absolutely right. For a couple reasons, and probably none make sense to anybody but me. 1st is ergonomics. I love the feel of the Nikon Z bodies in hand. I'm a big guy and the Sony bodies all feel cramped to me. I think that's an important part of the formula. 2nd, As a casual retired/travel/grand kids /landscape shooter, I prefer the focal range of the Nikon 24-200 to the Tamron 28-200, not to mention, Sony really can't match the 24-70/4 or 14-30/4. 3rd, plain old G.A.S. I've been shooting Sony since it was Minolta, and I'd like to try something new. I know, pretty shallow huh? But hey, it's my money. LOL
@5:56 love that image!
Hey Chris, why isn't there a lens similar to the Sigma 18-35 1.8 for Sony apsc emount? I mean, that lens already exists, it's not impossible to do. Even with 18-24mm I would settle.
Not yet
Great review Chris
You know that 1.8 Sigma lens that EVERYBODY puts on the blackmagic? I really wish they would make that for nikon z.
Sigma should announce its first Z lenses in the coming months, so their 18-35 1.8 (which is the one you think about i guess) will probably be upgraded as a Z mount APSC lens, personnaly i look forward to see a sigma 85mm 1.4 Z.
Please, Can you review 7artisan 35mmf1.2 mark ii ?
Pleaaaseee do a Sony 20mm 1.8 review finally🥺🙏🏻👀
how does it do with longitudinal chromatic aberration?
..i think you have one of the best vids on RUclips.. 🙌
thank’s so much.. 👍🙌
Will you kindly do a review for Sony 35 G master? Thanks
Take a look at the closed captions for this video.
Awesome review Sir😍
How is it brighter at 2.8 then 1.8?
You mean in the corner? It's because the vignetting goes away as you stop down.
Its because of the exposure in wide openings. Center point of sensors get more light exposure and hence get brighter when the lens is open wide. Stop down the aperture with those aperture blades that control the opening and you get more even exposure because you only keep the light coming in the center of the glass, more evenly dispersed towards the sensor. It'll obviously be darker on same camera settings such as iso speed and shutter speed, But to get right exposure you need to adjust both of the latter. I guess you're pretty new to photography
Are there any cheap 300+ mm lenses with image stabilization?
On Nikon Z? Not yet unless you adapt an old F-mount one
@@christopherfrost No, I use an e mount apsc camera
Another wonderful video Brother, thank you! I cannot seem to locate your Nikkor 24-200 video which I used extensively in my recent camera decision matrix... did you pull it down? Thanks!
I haven't tested it :-) will do one day.
@@christopherfrost Now that’s funny lol… it must have been one of your other Nikkor reviews I was thinking about. I enjoy your balanced reviews Brother! “Further up, further in!”.
„Heavy Duty Plastic“ (chuckle) 😂
Great lens! Great review!
I was waiting for these lens to come with your review and only thing that I wanted to see is how it performs in crop mode because I own Nikon Z50 😞
I also have Nikon D7200 and I am thinking between 20mm and 24mm (Z or F mount) I haven’t tried either lens but I am leaning more for wider focal length. I can get used in good condition 20mm F1.8g for 500€ in that case I would have to get FTZ adapter so I can use also on my Z50. Newer lenses are for sure better in every way but they are pricey.
Anyway I just wanted to see performance of new lens.
I will always watch your reviews because you are the best in testing lenses. Love your videos you are No.1 for me 👍👌💪
Cheers
Ah sorry haha! Trust me, it'll be absolutely awesome on your Z50.
I’m sure it would be 😁 honestly for most people F mount version is also great choice and performer 😉
Unless you're planning on getting a full frame Z body I'd recommend an adapted F-mount lens. By using the DX format you wont have any use for the better edge performance of the new Z lenses. If you're on the fence about what focal length you like I'd say an adapted DX wide zoom like the 10-24 is a good place to start.
@@Joelsfilmer 95% of photos I take are indoors so F2.8 is minimum for me, 20mm is wide enough for me. I’m using my 35mm f1.8g dx and a lot of times I wished a had wider lens. That’s why I’m looking in this direction. Nikkor 17-55mm F2.8g is also interesting lens for me and it’s similar price to 20mm F1.8g, used ofcourse
@@garra7472 Are you planning on getting the Z5 or Z6? If you do low light shooting the better ISO performance and 5-stop IBIS would be a big benefit. If you're seeing yourself staying on DX then, honestly, you're backing yourself into a corner full of compromises. Getting a big and pricey FX 20mm for a 30mm equivalent, which is barely wide angle, on DX then you are kinda throwing money into the lake, to use a local expression.
The s line lenses are hugely expensive. Id happily take slight less decent quality to get lenses half the price.
@They Caged Non it was a rough estimate. Lol. Im thinking about the 1.8g lenses were not as good but a lot less expensive and smaller but i suppose that comes with the bigger lens mount. Im just glad theyve announced the 40mm f2 which would be good.
You get what you pay for , Life is made of choices
I have this 20mm F1.8 S Lens for Milky Way on the Z7 ..Mind Boggling IQ and light gathering and Pin sharp stars. I also have the 14-30 F4 for Wide Angle general photography , Then I have the 2 best lenses ever made all brands included , The S 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 S lenses paired with the 1.4 S Convertor you get no image loss and no loss in focusing speed
You're absolutely ridiculous :D :D :D
@@DJFAmenHeavy is Sony A7C not way overpriced? Same with Sony A7iii
I have the 20 F mount. Used it hardly at all. It’s just not a focal length that interests me. Much prefer my 24.
5:46 where ? PLz
The Blue Lagoon, Pembrokeshire, Wales
Side note: For £1000 they really couldn't afford to make it in Japan instead of outsourcing them (or hell, Taiwan or anywhere else)? These Japanese companies are going to be in for a rude awakening once these Chinese companies go from making great manual focus lenses to being able to copy and then advance the domestic production of high quality AF lenses from the knowhow they gain from manufacturing these for foreign companies (as they competently have for many other products). Viltrox already makes half decent ones that compete with Canon and SIGMA in the mirrorless space on price if not quality. Oh well, cheaper lenses in the future for the rest of us.
Correct Viltrox makes great Canon and Sony Lenses but will NEVER match/come close to Nikon Z Mount S Lenses in image quality like this beaut
@@Mr09260 for now. But that’s the thing. Many in the HiFi space thought the same thing yet Chinese companies are now pushing out equipment better than anything the Japanese have ever pushed out. They cant make anything as good as Nikon until one day very soon, they can, no small part in thanks to penny pinching and outsourcing to China on Nikons part.
@@helloworldsteinI don't think that day will ever come. Chinese mentality is let others make it then we steal and copy their technology. As long as Nikon ensures their technology is not stolen, they are pretty safe.
When you say hifi, what do you mean? If you are referring to Chinese smartphones or routers, you have to realize that none of the components are made by Chinese companies. Even their smartphones are made by Foxconn, not even local company. As long as China continues to copy and steal technologies, they will never become the tech leader.
Cool review!
I’d love to see you review the Nikon P1000!
😃
Has anyone watched this with the closed captions turned on?
I prefer: 20,50,85 and 105MC.
Between 20-50 i usually add another 28/35 pancake class lens
Every one of your reviews mentions the "effects of diffraction", which seems kind of pointless or simplistic. Why? Because having the ability to stop down to f22 (or more) is actually a feature, not (solely) a flaw. You get more DoF by trading off some fine detail. Furthermore, diffraction is always present and stopping down may continue to improve off axis performance at some cost to centre performance.
Photography is often managing tradeoffs rather than seeking a holy grail.
Yes, I know all of that. I mention diffraction for the benefit of people who might be a bit newer to photography and don't know these things (which was all of us, once)
@@christopherfrost "people who might be a bit newer to photography ".
Then all the more reason to further elaborate on why the smaller apertures are still worth using. Let's hope the people who are considering the high-end len$e$ are not so "new" to photography.
@@sandb1867 It is in the "sharpness" part of his reviews, the point of this part is to test sharpness. What would you want him to do ? Neglect entirely apertures above F/11 ? Say that it becomes softer, but without mentionning diffraction ? Or make an optic lesson on "why apertures above F/11 are softer but still have an interest" every time he tests a lens ?
Sure, sometimes you need a bit more DOF at the expense of sharpness, which is why lenses can stop down way past the limit of difraction, but is it worth mentionning in every video ? Sticking to "due to the effects of diffraction" is probably the way to go.
@@pierrevilley6675 "Neglect entirely apertures above F/11 ?"
If it's all about the sharpness then a serious test should be performed at all apertures, determining resolution at the center, mid-frame and extreme corners. As pixel pitch or sensor resolution increases, diffraction will be become more evident at pixel peeping observation. Diffraction usually impacts the center before it becomes evident in the corners as you stop down because off-axis aberrations can continue to be improved that way before diffraction overtakes it.
In any case, since diffraction is ALWAYS present in a lens, what's the point of even mentioning it at all?
Is it just me? The Picture at 1.00min time looks somehow like an AT-AT from Star Wars.... ;)
Bigger and heavier than the Sony Fe 20mm 1,8 G, but not better! And the Sony has an aperture ring.
You win again! Just as you expected!
If you love 20 mm so much why then did you have to loan this lense?
sony 50 1.2 vs nikon canon
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Your Lens Copy does have some dings & dents, wear & tear onto the Focus Ring, Chris...i'd like to mention.
This weighs 355g not half a kilo
You are wrong. It weighs 506 gr.
Shoot real estate video with it!
cool
If you looking sterile, sharp character lose lens this is way to go.
Is it bad to use clean lenses? I think there's a time and place for everything. A lens with lots of imperfections aka character will be fine in the 30~85mm range. 20mm is rather specialized for real estate, astro, and these things need the highest level of cleanliness & clarity. You can always pick up vintage lenses if imperfections are important. Vintage effects can always be added in post anyway, but you can't make a vintage lens look modern.
Compare to Sony 20mm f1.8 G
Most Z mount lenses look like tin cans spray painted black
Yes but no other barand can get images these Nikon Tin Cans sprayed Black take shot after Shot
@@Mr09260 sony, fujifilm gfx, canon, definately Leica, all of them really :-)
They are perfect. :3
@@jukeboxjohnnie Have you looked at any Z lens reviews lately? Nikon Z 24-70mm f2.8 is currently ranked best 24-70mm at dxomark. The 85mm is ranked 3rd best lens ever, beating out Carl Zeiss, GM, Canons that are 2-3 times their price. I am assuming once DXOMark reviews the 105, it will be up there as well.
@@mlai2546 I know the 24-70mm is good but look at the designs, they are big, ugly and horrible. I dont know if youre old enough to remember pre AI and AIS nikon lenses, they were the best designed and attractive lenses available on the market, beautifully made, todays offerings are frankly embarrassing. GFX lenses are the nicest available today if youre looking for an example of design and performance
It's a ugly beast
Not even made in Thailand.
What a horrible looking lens, just looks cheap, bland and its too long. I dont even like the sony brand but its G 20mm looks so much like more of a lens you would actually want to pick up...
Too long? It's as long as the optics inside it are.
@@Joelsfilmer it is more than 2cm longer than the FE 20mm 1,8 G. And the Sony lens doesn`t looks so plasticy as the Nikon.
@@muttishelfer9122 Plastic is a good thing on lenses. If you drop a lens made out of metal it will hit the ground at a higher speed, and due to the hardness of the casing it's more likely to shatter the glass even at the same velocity. Better yet, plastic will crack rather than deform, so you're less likely to get mounting problems or a seized up focus ring or ruined filter thread. And no, I'm not a Nikon user, I use Fuji and all their lenses are sadly metal.
@@Vinterloft metal is usually a sign of high quality. But not all Fuji Lenses are made of metal ( i use Fuji too) f.e. XC 35mm F2, 18-55, 70-300...
@@muttishelfer9122 I don't consider XC lenses Fuji lenses, they're made in a different factory in the Phillippines/ Vietnam and get bundled with the cheapest cameras. The 70-300 is just old. I don't know what 18-55 you have but mine is metal.