NIKON Z 24-200mm Lens
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 ноя 2024
- In this video I review the NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR by Nikon. This lens is for Nikon Z series mirrorless cameras. I let you know what I love about this lens and what could be better. Let me know in the comments what you think about this lens.
See or buy this lens --
Adorama:
adorama.evyy.n...
Amazon:
amzn.to/3xHmHOD
🔔 SUBSCRIBE for more tutorials and free stuff :www.youtube.co...
🗞 NEWSLETTER - Find out first when we post new videos and freebies:eepurl.com/gYsR1f
🤖 ORDER LUMINAR AI:
skylum.evyy.ne...
🛒 BUY LUMINAR 4 (Save $10 by using code SHUTTERSPEAK at checkout!):
macphun.evyy.n...
🪐 PLANET PACK FOR LUMINAR:
shutterspeak.n...
🎨 HOLLYWOOD INSPIRED MOVIE LOOK PACK - 10 Major Hollywood Movies: shutterspeak.n...
🆓 FREE Photoshop Color Matching Action:
shutterspeak.n...
🆓 FREE PHOTOSHOP TWIRL ACTION:
shutterspeak.n...
ME:
💻 WEB: shutterspeak.net
FACEBOOK: / shutterspeak
INSTAGRAM: / shutterspeak
#Nikon #NikonZ #ShutterSpeak
I have been using it for six months and find it is extremely versatile and easy to carry with some superb images and bokeh too.
All your pictures were great. Yes, At the long end slow. But it's sharpness makes up for it. I own it and love it. It is a tool that works well. If you get the picture why cry about a F 6.3. It is skill of the man using it. Nice review.
Not sure why people are so obsessed with f2.8 or faster lenses unless you shoot a lot of low light or night shots. I looked at the Z series of cameras and lenses for a good while before committing to buying into the system.
I went with a used Z5 with the Z24-200mm reviewed here and I'm delighted with this combination for general every day use including weddings portraits to name just two subjects I have now added Z14-30mm f4 and the Z50mm f1.8 and a set of extension tubes and FtZ adaptor.
I have no desire to buy the f2.8 or even there f1:1.2 lenses as I have a vast arsenal of F mount lenses that adapt easily, and with focus peaking I have access to all my A Ai Ais AF and AFS.
A competent experienced photographer will have no problem getting professional results with this lens.
A good review even if somewhat obsessed with f2.8 lenses
Weight wise there is just no contest
Nikkor Z 24-200mm is amazing and good for my travel needs. Using it since September 2020 on my Z6 and i have made some nice prints out of it. It's my go to daytime lens.
Thanks for watching!
In daylight, this lens is good even at f6.3. Yes, it is a good travel lens
Thanks for the video. I just (Today) received a Nikon Z7II. I have been still using DSLR bodies and lenses. I did get an FTZ adaptor and it is working well after a long session session of how to update the firmware (getting old like my F100 and F5 - Haa).
I have this Nikon Z 24-200mm lens you reviewed here coming in three days. I am in a rural area of Kansas so I greatly appreciate your open review of it's quality as well as the shortcoming of the larger f/stops to deal with. I think it will do quite well with my hobbyist plans - as well as budget.
I'll still be using the FX and even DX lenses with the adaptor both from older bodies with the FTZ. I have a FX Nikon 24-120 f/4 VR I and it looks like it will work well with the new Adaptor on the Z7 It's heavy and it balances pretty well with the Z7 for me.
Love the feel and bright viewfinder of the New Z7II! Can't wait for the new 24-200.
Thanks again for your helpful information!
This is a perfect travel lens combined with a fast 1.8 prime!
Which fast prime? 20, 24, 35, 50 , or 85mm? Or just get em all
@@michael-4k4000 35mm or 50mm prime
35mm && 100mm macro
I want 24-200mm for my Z 5. And good idea to take it to the zoo!
Thanks! I couldn't see the net even after you showed me! I'm looking forward to working with this lens!
You'll love it. Thanks for watching!
Hi Joseph, I quite fancied this lens as a nice lightweight alternative to my 70-200, and with it being so sharp for the money
I might just have to go for it. Thanks for a real-world test of it.
Thank you for watching - yes, this lens surprised me with how good it is.
If i use lens 24-200 with nikon z6 for real estate photography is it okay or not ?
Big THANKS Joseph! Your review is of great value to me.
I will bye the 24-200.
Glad it helped you out :-)
The 24-200 is super sharp. Slow as hell but a good day time lens.
I consider this lens as my hiking lens. Then I just have to take my Z6 and the 24-200 with me and also get the tele shots.
Would be interesting to know if this lens is better (sharper) than the Tamron 28-200. VR is a big advantage for sure ... The Tamron has lots of purple cromatic aberrations in the corners at lower f-stops.
My (German) photo magazine rated the Nikon as the best "super zoom" lens. By far. But they haven't tested the Tamron yet.
Mate all z lenses are sharper then tamron, don't let the weight put you off, just get fitter and carry the extra weight. I take my 70-200mm with me always and it's easy. Take care....high from Australia....Brodie
Excellent video, I was considering this lens to purchase. Very helpful in making my decision. Tk you
Glad it was helpful!
Wonderful lens, use it a lot of the time.
Thanks for the review. Can’t have big aperture size and small lens at the same time, but I am glad Nikon make small size as their choice. If one needs bigger apertures, there is that 24-120 F4 which is bigger and heavier, with less reach.
Is it good for landscapes ?
If you really have to work an f1.4 50mm lens is essential. I have a Leitz 50mm that's to die for.
Great video. Think this lens will be a part of my new setup. Thanks.
Thank you so much for your review! This helped my confirm my decision to purchase.
Hello, I have the Nikon Z6 and a Nikkor Z 24-200mm f4-f6.3 VR lens. Can you tell me what the sweet spot of this telephoto lens for sharper photos? Thank you.
Hi Joe, Love your videos. I have the Nikon AF-S 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6G ED DX VR lens which I have been using for the last 8 years on my Nikon D series camera. I recently switched to the Nikon Z5 camera and have bought the FTZ adapter and can use this lens on my Z5 though I am aware its a cropped DX lens and so doesn't use the full frame capabilities. Apart from this issue, is there any other reason why I shouldn't continue to use this lens and should invest in the new Nikon 24-200 Z mount lens. Any advise would be appreciated. Thanks.
Z5 with 24-200 how for wedding cinematic on gimble and how photography explain detail and how all type photography ..?
I have the 14-30 and 24-70 F4 Z mounts. I’m keen to complete the set with a telephoto. Is it worth getting the 24-200 or, get the 70-200mm F2.8 at megabucks or wait for the 70-200 F4?
If you want to save some $ for now (and assuming you have the FTZ), get the 70-300 4.5-5.6 AF-P. AF is super fast even when adapted, and it's a sharp lens.
If you don't have the FTZ already, you're better off picking up the 24-200 at its current price.
Hi Edward - it really depends on your shooting style. Do you mind carrying around your bag and lenses? For me I like to travel light when I am not doing client work. So for me this lens is a win win due to its size, weight and really incredible image quality.
Also I am not aware of a 70-200 f/4 on the Nikon lens roadmap - so I don't think we will see a lens like that in the next year or two. There is a 24-105 S line lens coming but hard to say how far out that lens is.
Thx all
@@csc-photo I have the 70-300 on my z6 and its everything but fast when it comes to af performance. Thinking to get this 24-200...
I just used this lens on a trip to Ireland, shooting mostly scenery, and I was really pleased with the results. I use Capture One in post and it did an excellent job with color corrections when needed. Just wondering, since Nikon just introduced the 24-120mm f4, do you think it is worth purchasing? The constant f4 would be nice, however you lose some length.
Robert, can you not make your own decisions based on your own type of photography, finances, weight of lenses you’re prepared to carry?? 🫤
One thing I noticed w/ all Nikon cameras they all have glitches and bugs.I set primary and secondary cards use for my Z6ii.They automatically change back on their own.It doesn't maintain the setting you chose.
I plan to buy this lens, so your video certainly helped me ,it is only about . the price, here in Holland it costs 999 € and I still doubt whether that is worth the investment?
Thanks for watching and commenting. Depends on your needs and your budget but I loved shooting with it.
@@ShutterSpeak your explanation and answer helped me over the line, I am going to buy this lens.THANKS
I have been on the fence about this lens in spite of all the reviews. Yours has gotten me closer to buying it. I am not a pro, I shoot for myself an currently have no Z lenses to go with my Z5. I have been adapting my 35mm, 50mm summicrons as well as an extremely nice Nikon 50mm 1.4 AIS lens (which wont mount to my D850) with a protruding aperture ring.
Lenses I have considered are the 24mm-200mm, 35mm 1.8 and I heard there is a 40mm f2 coming soon? The idea of one lens and never changing it does appeal though, a prime would (I think) make you think like the lens instead of just clicking the shutter, you know what I mean?
Thank you Joseph for the review. Colour reproduction and sharpness look fantastic for such a zoom range. I'd say it's an excellent travel lens. Obviously it doesn't work for animals at all (see 4:41), but that's expected.
I have this lens and really like it with the Z5. I want an affordable macro option and a longer zoom lens. What would you recommend? I tried my Rokinon 14mm this weekend with the FTZ Adapter but it wasn't having it. ;( I'm thinking of getting the Viltrox 22- what do you think of that for astro? Thanks!
For Macro you can look at extension tubes (ruclips.net/video/FrGlS40lcws/видео.html) or the Laowa 100mm f/2.8 (ruclips.net/video/uT-UX_IrbQM/видео.html). Both are a lot of fun to use. For astro the 14-30 f/4 by Nikon (ruclips.net/video/Ypos3C5FnOw/видео.html) gives fantastic result and although it is one stop higher than f/2.8, the camera more than makes up for it. I have never tried the Viltrox so I don't have any first hand experience with it to share but the Viltrox 20mm f/1.8 looks interesting.
@@ShutterSpeak Ah yes that is the Viltrox I am considering. I do have extension tubes and am using them with the z5 with my 50 mm. I will check out the other lenses you mention! Thanks for your videos, your time, and your responses!
Love this ❤😊
I knew I should have put a bandaid over my webcam like someone else I know! LOL
So many people ask how I see their smiling face I had to clear it all up :-)
Thanks for a great review. I am in Australia, where did you get that special price from? Its A$1600 in most retails today. Thanks
Hi - thanks for watching. This is the U.S. price with current rebate of $100 US. I guess I should mention that in the future for those watching in other areas. Thanks for reminding me.
Its should have been F4-5.6… 😀
What mode were you shooting in?
Hello All! May be it will be helpful for Nikon 7zii owners. I had problem "Lens initialization failed" during the first attachment of 24-200 Nikkor Z Lens to camera. It was solved when I turn camera on with the lens adjusted to the maximum focal length - 200 мм. It was my second lens of this type. The first has defect of small plastic ring with Nikkor name at the front of the lens - the ring was not fixed correctly - it jumps out - I exchanged it. The first lens also has initialization error - but it was gone by turn camera off and on as suggested.
So what camera were you using with the 24-200 ??????? thanks John
Hello John - thanks for watching. Images were taken with a z 6II.
@@ShutterSpeak ThankYou for the interesting day of shooting... I was very pleased to see the sharp crisp pix !!!! :) (I thought that You had purchased a Z5 ,,, im getting older and my memory is losing it)
Love this lens!
Another excellent video review
I appreciate that!
Hi I've the Z5 with the 24-70mm f4 lens. However, I find that I like to do more street photography and sometimes I want the reach when I'm far away from some interesting events. I was wondering if it is a good idea to sell my 24-70mm for the 24-200mm?
Well if I'm spending your money ;-) I would say to keep both. It is always good to have a second lens in case one fails. Also having the constant f/4 on the 24-70 is nice. That being said, if you need the extra reach it is a great lens and you wont be disappointed. Thanks for watching!
@@ShutterSpeak initially I intend to keep it but I happened to salvage a very old Nikkor lens from film days. Although can only manual focus on Z but it's ok due to focus peaking. I enjoyed it even more than my original lens as it's a 28-105 f3.5 to 4.5. Also it has macro. So I've to choose between the 2 lenses.
@@chubbyface74 I would go for the 24-200 in that case - the extra reach makes it a lens you could use everyday.
Would you purchase this lens, if you already have 24-70 F4?
Yes - 100% and I have since the price is so great. It also extends your zoom range to 200 mm over the 70 which is super helpful on trips, events.
Yes. The best thing about this lens is it sharp end to end which was unexpected. Z glass is magic
200mm
Well, you guys convinced me, purchased this lens today!
@@smkunder1 Funny. I did as well. Haha no joke. Just got back from Best Buy now
Great & helpful review, thanks Joe. Tempted to pick up this lens at this price. I think it's also a great fit for the Z50, since it has VR.
Yes it is - and on the Z50 with the cropped sensor it would be the equivalent of a 300mm lens.
@@ShutterSpeak Yes more like using a 55-300mm lens. Will be great
@@sheeyam You mean 36-300mm. I use it on the Z50. Very crisp
@@rackhamro yes correct. I was just comparing this situation with the F-Mount DX 55-300mm lens which I used to use with my D3200. Long back
Id get it, the F2.8 version Bigger and mucho $$$
Excellent. Good lenses. No need for bokeh when shooting these wildlife shots; we also need the background to give the photo life.
This is what I think too. Lot of ppl just want to shoot everything wide open at 2.8 or larger til the background is not even recognizable. Whats the point of that?
@@ShutterSpeak I've bought this lens last week and I have to admit it has pretty good bokeh even if it's just 6.3 above 70 mm. Took roughly 100 shots of various subjects plus some landscapes and I'm absolutely satisfied with the quality. Never was a fan of superzooms but this changed my mind completely.
@@pauka13 Glad you like it as much as I do. Great choice. Thanks for watching and commenting.
Why can't you use it for paid client work? With strobes there's no limit to what you can get out of it professionally.. The lens is also good for landscape photography
Hey you can use anything but if a client is paying me to shoot their wedding, I'm using only f/2.8 lenses. But that is just me. You may feel differently.
@@ShutterSpeakoh, for wedding, you're absolutely right..this lens is not going to be so apt considering its aperture range.
Would you use a 2.0 teleconverter with the 24-200mm lens?
Nope - it won't fit that lens.
By now, the Z teleconverters work with the Z 70-200 f2.8 lens only. They are not compatible with the FTZ adapter.
Why does everyone say it’s a great lens, the quality of the images are almost identical to the better Z lenses, but only good for your kids at school or vacations. Wtf ? 🤷♂️
Great question. Here is the reason - if someone is paying me to photograph their wedding or a concert I am not shooting at f/6.3. I need f/2.8 for a job like that. I need cleaner images shot at lower iso's. I also need the shallow depth of field that I can get at f/2.8. So this is a great travel and everyday lens. It just isn't great for paid work. Quite honestly, the build quality probably wouldn't hold up either. It isn't designed for that type of work.
@@ShutterSpeak Well, then people reviewing this lens should say this isn't THAT good of a lens. Good for pictures you don't care that much about, but not good for anything vaguely professional or even semi professional. ( although you are talking quite specifically about weddings and potential low light setting where one would not take this lens )
In almost every review of this lens everybody is on about how much they like ( love ?) it and how great it is and how well it compares to the other Z zooms. Yet now you say ' actually, not really that good' and generally not good enough for you to take it seriously. I find that odd. I wonder if the other reviewers would say the same ....maybe ???
@@jeffreyhohener6724 I don't think it is odd- I think I am being honest. I own this lens and I take it with me often, just never to paid work. If you have ever shot a concert you would understand the beating the equipment takes. Literally bodies flying over the fence into the photo pit as concert goers make attempts to stage dive on or off the stage. This lens is not made for that. Plus it can't do the low light a concert would demand. It doesn't mean that the image quality isn't excellent, it is. If I was shooting a wedding the bride would want shallow depth of field, the 2.8 can do that better. Again, this has nothing to do with image quality.
@@ShutterSpeak All right. Fair enough. Thank you for your reply :)
For sure it's not a lens for any low light situations...unfortunately.
But again, if you feel it's so poorly made that it can't take a little banging around - then you should say that clearly in your review.
I agree - it doesn't feel as solid as the 24 - 70 for sure. But if it's so junky that one is afraid to use it if things get rough, then I would want to know that !
Anyway, thanks again for your response.
@@jeffreyhohener6724 I am not saying the lens is junky or poorly made. It isn't made to the level of the f/2.8 lenses because it isn't designed for that type of work. It is also a fraction of the price. Those more expensive lenses are made to take a beating. I don't think the average person is putting their lenses through the type of abuse a concert photographer does.
The Z lenses have a cheap "plasticy" look to them.