5 Day Sale ENDS TOMORROW: geni.us/fivedaydeal It's a great WIN/WIN deal and we hope to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for charity. You get over $2200 of photography courses and tools for only $98! Don't miss out!
I already have both of yours, but I am looking at the bundle. A suggestion for the next year is to have a short preview. It's difficult to see a video course without a visual introduction. I am aware that some photographers will have some kind of preview on the respective websites but it will be nice to embed or at least place a direct link. In Hannon Squires case there is no preview I can find and the description on her website is vague, I feel as if I am going to sign up for a scam (I know it's not the case, but it's what I feel). As you know, I buy education and love to support creatives that inspire me and others, but I also work as crazy and the idea of throwing money into "maybe it's worth" is difficult. I will decide before the end of the evening, but it's more difficult than it should be. Best regards.
Hi Matt, Even though I already own your "Find the Shot" course the bundle still had a lot to offer, and hopefully because I used your link to access the site I will get the body paint Kill Bill shoot you did with Steph. Great you were a part of this initiative 👍
Thanks Matt for the review. While I love the IQ of the Z 24-70 f/2.8, as a walk about, I find the Z 24-120 f/4 to be my go to most frequently. It would have been nice to have included it in your review.
I can't stay up to watch this right now, but just wanted to pop in, give it a like, and say YES! I've been hoping somebody whose analyses I trust would do a video on this for months! I finally have a friend with whom I love to go on nature adventures, and carrying around the primes I tend to work with isn't convenient for that at all, so I'm seriously looking into zooms, but they're so much harder to research. Thanks for making this, Matt!
The Z 24-120mm f4 S is the best 24-120mm lens on the market from any brand. Excellent sharpness throughout the frame and zoom range. There is almost no weakness and it renders beautifully.
I agree with you, and I am frequently using 24-120s on my Z6II for quite some time now. Only thing that lacks is AF speed and reliability when in dark situations (and there is no af grid support from flashes on Z system which is a bummer, and that af assist light on the camera is no good...). I often borrow old 24-70G when working in darker venues or events and adapt it. I am thinking about getting 28-75 for that kind of work.
I have been using the 14-30 f4 (on a Z7) as one of my landscape lenses with no regrets. I now own 6 z lenses and the one that has become a pleasant surprise is the 24-200 f4-6.3. I'm calling it my travel lens. Shooting outdoors during the day, it more than holds its own for what I'm doing. Not bad for less than a grand.
I am using the same kit (except only on a Z5, which satisfies what I need for now), plus I have the 105 2.8S for my single element, still life and "botanic" shots 👍
I took that same lens combo on my last trip to Hawaii, mostly shooting landscapes on the Z7ii and ZFC. It covers almost every scenario, and both have excellent optical quality. That 24-200 is my favorite. I've given serious consideration to only carrying that and just deciding that if a subject can't be adequately captured with the 24-200, it's not photogenic.
Thanks for the video … great as usual. The 24-70 f2.8 is my favorite lenses but the 24-120 f4 is the lenses I reach for the most due to the extra range. I shoot mostly landscape with a Z8..
When I eventually go mirrorless I will be getting the 24-120 and one longer lens, maybe about 500. I’m tired of dealing with so many lenses. Too old to be doing that now.
Among the standard zooms, the 24-120 f/4 is missing in the comparison. I am often in the mountains with only one lens and I need the extra 50mm. It's a fantastic lens that actually has only minor weaknesses in direct backlight (but is much better than the old F-lens). With the 14-24, I know no compromise: f/2.8 is a must...😉
I love the 14-24 S2.8 and especially like the extra on the wide end and 2.8 for astrophotography. Makes a big difference in the length the shutter can stay open and maintain sharp stars, especially if you don’t use a star tracker.
I believe you see the difference between f2.8 and f4? I didn't see such a significant difference that it would blow my mind away. If I want a better result, I usually use a minimum of 35 mm 1.8. For the photos that I make, I especially don't like any major body deformations, so even though 35mm isn't like 50mm, 80mm and even further so perfect option, it is satisfying. however, aperture f4 is still the one that I use most often in night situations.
I use a Z6ii and have both 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses that I use most of the time. My poor 24-70 f4 kit lens doesn't get a look in. I also recently got the 24-200 f4-f6.3 as a travel lens and have been really happy with that too when weight and lens swapping are issues.
the tamron 15-30 2.8 SLR lens, both g1 and g2, are optically excellent, has OIS, and great range and aperture. G1 is only $300 now in 2022. You need a smart adaptor though. The real negatives are the weight and bulk front element. Surely worth checking out for budget user
I do use the Z f4 14-30 S for real estate and architectural shoots, and I and my clients all love the images I create with it on my Z6. I would have thought that the Z f4 24-70 S lens would perform better than a non-S Z lens, even if it is a f2.8. I got the Z f4 24-70 S lens when I purchased the Z6 three years ago now, and it has produced some really nice images that I believe are better than what I could have done via an f-mount lens of similar specs. Nice video, Matt! Thank you!
Been meaning to tell you that your gear reviews are the best. The one about the Fuji GX50sii nailed it for me because you mentioned that the sensor is the same old one as in my 50r. I'll defer "upgrading" until Fuji uses a new 50MP sensor. This video was instructive as I was considering a Z7ii and the 24-70 f4 as a full frame alternative to the GFX system.
Sadly 1300 usd is the max price I want to see on 2.8 S lenses. Not on "budget" offerings. But I think camera companies are out of touch, for example new plastic mount canon 18-150 (f6.3 already on 70mm) costs 500$ (pure insanity). As much as I'd love to try Nikon, I can't justify spending premium cost for non premium products.
I think it's important to mention that the 24-70 F4 S was shipped as a "kit lens", which made it widely available for a substantially cheaper price on the used market (with people barely using them and flipping them to get the 2.8), I got mine for only 400€ which is an absolute steal. Also, compared to the 28-75 the optical performance is far superior, being an S line lens it is much sharper, especially on the edges (i understand that it is an unfair comparison considering the aperture difference, but even at F4 the 28-75 is softer). If losing one stop of aperture is a dealbreaker, then the 28-75 is certainly a solid option for the price, but personally I value sharpness over everything, and for less than half the price (used) the 24-70 F4 S is sharper, which is damn impressive.
Thanks for tackling the three tiers. For my nature photography, my 14-30 and 24-120 are a great combo. If I were to start doing events, I might add the 28-75 for that extra stop but a fast 35 would probably be a good option if it were available.
Can't help but notice that you take advantage of the mirror-less cameras looking at the rear screen to compose your shots instead of having to contortion yourself into looking through the evf. Have you noticed a significant improvement in ease of use of your cameras ever since switching to mirrorless compared to dslr? (I know I have).
Is 14-30 f4 sufficient enough for wide angle wedding shots along with 1 godox ad300pro & 1 godox v860III?.. outdoor/indoor..hoping for inputs.. My options are nikon 14-24f2.8G F mount or Nikon 14-30f4 Z mount (almost same price in my country)..14-24 f2.8S is out of the budget.. What should i choose? and why? Thanks!
Hey Matt! There is a difference between distortion and perspective. Most of this new wide angle lenses don't have distortion, that is just perspective.
I have the 24-70 f/4 that came with the Z6 body, there were not much to choose between in those days. I have never been very enthusiastic about it. When I got the 70-200 f/4 I was blown away. Now I also have 24-200 f/4-6.3 for traveling, but I want to sell the two 24-70 and 24-200-lenses for the 24-120 f/4 whenever my budget allows it! One drawback for the 24-120-lens is that it lacks VR, but maybe it works out anyway without it.
I have the 24-120 F4 S and the entire Tamron G2 F-mount trinity (which I'll be holding onto). You won't regret getting the 24-120, it's a premium lens in every way. As a matter of fact this lens made me finally jump to the Z system. Personally when Nikon completes the "Tamron" rebadged trinity I will get the 70-180 2.8 and fill the gap all the way to 180. I just watched every review of the original Sony lens and will be awesome for the price, quality and footprint.
Great comparison. I get from friends the F 2.8 is better. I have the Nikon Z 7ll and use the 14-30 f 4 lens. They are all so close. Budget is an important factor. I use the Nikon z 50 F 1.8 for just about everything. It's low light handleing is out of sight. I think for the purse rather big or small Nikon is a win win situation. I am considering the 28-75 f2.8.
When I will finally jump into the Z system I think I’ll have to choose. For wide angle it’s going to be the 14-30, no question. I don’t really need the f/2.8 there and I know I will love the 14mm. But for the midrange zoom, it’s a little trickier. I would prefer a lens that starts at 24mm, but if that’s covered by the WA, the new 28-75 might be something to look at. I know I won’t get the 24-70/2.8. But the 24-70/4 and especially the 24-120/4 are also strong contenders. Especially since I do most photography while traveling. The 24-70 is also appealing for traveling because it’s tiny. It will also depend on what telezoom I would get. And here I haven’t found something I like yet. The 70-200 is not for me. Too expensive and heavy. Same for the 100-400. The new Tamron 70-300 looks interesting but I’m not sure about it. Maybe a smaller, lighter 100-400 would suit me best, and then I’d get the 24-120 with that. But Nikon is unlikely to release such a lens. Also, what I call “secondary characteristics” matter to me as well. Like how flat is the focus field, or how good is the close focus ability. As I said, it’s for travel, so a lens that offers flexibility has an edge.
My experience with the Canon DSLR (without IBIS) was that I shoot with f/2.8 (non IS) since 2000 and the 24-105 f/4 IS is still in the box. At those focal lengths with a steady hand and heavy camera body, one can get away without IS and/or IBIS. However, a lot of Canon pros use 24-105 f/4 IS successfully. Why? Flash, price, size & weight, different expectation with bokeh, sharpness, etc. As an enthusiast, I still haven't upgraded my AF-S holy trinity to the Z mount yet, since I got bored with f/2.8 and hoping one or more f/2.0 will be around the corner.
The Nikon Z5 and hopefully the Nikon Z5 Mark 2 (which hopefully will have a flip out screen like on the Nikon Zfc and Nikon D5600) and hopefully the Nikon Z5 Mark 2 will have unlimited recording time limit like on the Sony A74 and Panasonic S5
Can’t believe the shutter shield feature on the Z9 is not active as default. As to the lenses, 24-70 f4 I’m unlikely to use much now I have the amazing 24-120, in an ideal world I would partner with 24-70 f2.8. wide angle wise, love 14-30 and for my use case would always choose that over the 14-24.
I went through the RAWs of the midrange zooms on my laptop and I can see what you mean with the 24-70 shot. However, this is a bit confusing to me. I've heard that all of the Z-mount glass is head and shoulders above the F-mount glass. And that it doesn't improve that much on stopping down. Of course a 45MP sensor is demanding (though nothing extreme in today's market), but still, from what I read, I expected less of a difference. I also half expected the 28-75 to be worse than the 24-70/4. Which it isn't. So I can also see what you mean by it being a real contender for those that can't justify the 24-70/2.8. Though of course this is just portraits so perhaps corner sharpness could still be worse on the TamKon? ;)
5 Day Sale ENDS TOMORROW: geni.us/fivedaydeal
It's a great WIN/WIN deal and we hope to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for charity. You get over $2200 of photography courses and tools for only $98! Don't miss out!
I already have both of yours, but I am looking at the bundle. A suggestion for the next year is to have a short preview. It's difficult to see a video course without a visual introduction. I am aware that some photographers will have some kind of preview on the respective websites but it will be nice to embed or at least place a direct link. In Hannon Squires case there is no preview I can find and the description on her website is vague, I feel as if I am going to sign up for a scam (I know it's not the case, but it's what I feel). As you know, I buy education and love to support creatives that inspire me and others, but I also work as crazy and the idea of throwing money into "maybe it's worth" is difficult. I will decide before the end of the evening, but it's more difficult than it should be. Best regards.
Hi Matt, Even though I already own your "Find the Shot" course the bundle still had a lot to offer, and hopefully because I used your link to access the site I will get the body paint Kill Bill shoot you did with Steph. Great you were a part of this initiative 👍
Thanks Matt for the review. While I love the IQ of the Z 24-70 f/2.8, as a walk about, I find the Z 24-120 f/4 to be my go to most frequently. It would have been nice to have included it in your review.
I can't stay up to watch this right now, but just wanted to pop in, give it a like, and say YES! I've been hoping somebody whose analyses I trust would do a video on this for months!
I finally have a friend with whom I love to go on nature adventures, and carrying around the primes I tend to work with isn't convenient for that at all, so I'm seriously looking into zooms, but they're so much harder to research. Thanks for making this, Matt!
Hope you enjoy!
The Z 24-120mm f4 S is the best 24-120mm lens on the market from any brand. Excellent sharpness throughout the frame and zoom range. There is almost no weakness and it renders beautifully.
I agree with you, and I am frequently using 24-120s on my Z6II for quite some time now. Only thing that lacks is AF speed and reliability when in dark situations (and there is no af grid support from flashes on Z system which is a bummer, and that af assist light on the camera is no good...). I often borrow old 24-70G when working in darker venues or events and adapt it. I am thinking about getting 28-75 for that kind of work.
I have been using the 14-30 f4 (on a Z7) as one of my landscape lenses with no regrets. I now own 6 z lenses and the one that has become a pleasant surprise is the 24-200 f4-6.3. I'm calling it my travel lens. Shooting outdoors during the day, it more than holds its own for what I'm doing. Not bad for less than a grand.
I am using the same kit (except only on a Z5, which satisfies what I need for now), plus I have the 105 2.8S for my single element, still life and "botanic" shots 👍
I took that same lens combo on my last trip to Hawaii, mostly shooting landscapes on the Z7ii and ZFC. It covers almost every scenario, and both have excellent optical quality. That 24-200 is my favorite. I've given serious consideration to only carrying that and just deciding that if a subject can't be adequately captured with the 24-200, it's not photogenic.
Thanks for the video … great as usual. The 24-70 f2.8 is my favorite lenses but the 24-120 f4 is the lenses I reach for the most due to the extra range. I shoot mostly landscape with a Z8..
When I eventually go mirrorless I will be getting the 24-120 and one longer lens, maybe about 500. I’m tired of dealing with so many lenses. Too old to be doing that now.
But the 24-120 is 1100 euros even used 850 euros...the 24-70 is a bargain used for 360 euros
Among the standard zooms, the 24-120 f/4 is missing in the comparison. I am often in the mountains with only one lens and I need the extra 50mm. It's a fantastic lens that actually has only minor weaknesses in direct backlight (but is much better than the old F-lens).
With the 14-24, I know no compromise: f/2.8 is a must...😉
24-120 f/4 is my bread and butter for event coverage. Very versatile lens! With DX crop mode you easily reach 180mm
I love the 14-24 S2.8 and especially like the extra on the wide end and 2.8 for astrophotography. Makes a big difference in the length the shutter can stay open and maintain sharp stars, especially if you don’t use a star tracker.
I believe you see the difference between f2.8 and f4? I didn't see such a significant difference that it would blow my mind away. If I want a better result, I usually use a minimum of 35 mm 1.8. For the photos that I make, I especially don't like any major body deformations, so even though 35mm isn't like 50mm, 80mm and even further so perfect option, it is satisfying. however, aperture f4 is still the one that I use most often in night situations.
I use a Z6ii and have both 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses that I use most of the time. My poor 24-70 f4 kit lens doesn't get a look in.
I also recently got the 24-200 f4-f6.3 as a travel lens and have been really happy with that too when weight and lens swapping are issues.
I find my 24-70 f/4 finds its way onto my zfc (35-105 makes a good walk around) more than my z6II.
the tamron 15-30 2.8 SLR lens, both g1 and g2, are optically excellent, has OIS, and great range and aperture. G1 is only $300 now in 2022. You need a smart adaptor though. The real negatives are the weight and bulk front element. Surely worth checking out for budget user
I do use the Z f4 14-30 S for real estate and architectural shoots, and I and my clients all love the images I create with it on my Z6. I would have thought that the Z f4 24-70 S lens would perform better than a non-S Z lens, even if it is a f2.8. I got the Z f4 24-70 S lens when I purchased the Z6 three years ago now, and it has produced some really nice images that I believe are better than what I could have done via an f-mount lens of similar specs.
Nice video, Matt!
Thank you!
Been meaning to tell you that your gear reviews are the best. The one about the Fuji GX50sii nailed it for me because you mentioned that the sensor is the same old one as in my 50r. I'll defer "upgrading" until Fuji uses a new 50MP sensor. This video was instructive as I was considering a Z7ii and the 24-70 f4 as a full frame alternative to the GFX system.
Sadly 1300 usd is the max price I want to see on 2.8 S lenses. Not on "budget" offerings. But I think camera companies are out of touch, for example new plastic mount canon 18-150 (f6.3 already on 70mm) costs 500$ (pure insanity). As much as I'd love to try Nikon, I can't justify spending premium cost for non premium products.
I think it's important to mention that the 24-70 F4 S was shipped as a "kit lens", which made it widely available for a substantially cheaper price on the used market (with people barely using them and flipping them to get the 2.8), I got mine for only 400€ which is an absolute steal. Also, compared to the 28-75 the optical performance is far superior, being an S line lens it is much sharper, especially on the edges (i understand that it is an unfair comparison considering the aperture difference, but even at F4 the 28-75 is softer). If losing one stop of aperture is a dealbreaker, then the 28-75 is certainly a solid option for the price, but personally I value sharpness over everything, and for less than half the price (used) the 24-70 F4 S is sharper, which is damn impressive.
Thanks for tackling the three tiers. For my nature photography, my 14-30 and 24-120 are a great combo. If I were to start doing events, I might add the 28-75 for that extra stop but a fast 35 would probably be a good option if it were available.
The Nikon Z 35mm 1.8 is an option.
I'd probably go with the f/4 on the wide end and that 28-75. My current normal zoom is a 24-120/4 and I do miss f/2.8 some days.
For f/4, the 24-120 f/4 S is excellent. Definitely over the 24-70 f/4 S.
Can't help but notice that you take advantage of the mirror-less cameras looking at the rear screen to compose your shots instead of having to contortion yourself into looking through the evf.
Have you noticed a significant improvement in ease of use of your cameras ever since switching to mirrorless compared to dslr?
(I know I have).
Thanks for the video.
Is 14-30 f4 sufficient enough for wide angle wedding shots along with 1 godox ad300pro & 1 godox v860III?.. outdoor/indoor..hoping for inputs..
My options are nikon 14-24f2.8G F mount or Nikon 14-30f4 Z mount (almost same price in my country)..14-24 f2.8S is out of the budget..
What should i choose? and why? Thanks!
Hey Matt! There is a difference between distortion and perspective. Most of this new wide angle lenses don't have distortion, that is just perspective.
Yes there is a difference, and yes pretty much all ultra wide lenses do have distortion (to varying degrees)
I have the 24-70 f/4 that came with the Z6 body, there were not much to choose between in those days. I have never been very enthusiastic about it.
When I got the 70-200 f/4 I was blown away. Now I also have 24-200 f/4-6.3 for traveling, but I want to sell the two 24-70 and 24-200-lenses for the 24-120 f/4 whenever my budget allows it!
One drawback for the 24-120-lens is that it lacks VR, but maybe it works out anyway without it.
Z6 has ibis to compensate
I have the 24-120 F4 S and the entire Tamron G2 F-mount trinity (which I'll be holding onto). You won't regret getting the 24-120, it's a premium lens in every way. As a matter of fact this lens made me finally jump to the Z system.
Personally when Nikon completes the "Tamron" rebadged trinity I will get the 70-180 2.8 and fill the gap all the way to 180. I just watched every review of the original Sony lens and will be awesome for the price, quality and footprint.
Lovely video, still crossing my fingers you’ll talk about the 24-120 one day soon 🥲
You're using the 24-120? How do you like it?
Great comparison. I get from friends the F 2.8 is better. I have the Nikon Z 7ll and use the 14-30 f 4 lens. They are all so close. Budget is an important factor. I use the Nikon z 50 F 1.8 for just about everything. It's low light handleing is out of sight. I think for the purse rather big or small Nikon is a win win situation. I am considering the 28-75 f2.8.
When I will finally jump into the Z system I think I’ll have to choose. For wide angle it’s going to be the 14-30, no question. I don’t really need the f/2.8 there and I know I will love the 14mm. But for the midrange zoom, it’s a little trickier. I would prefer a lens that starts at 24mm, but if that’s covered by the WA, the new 28-75 might be something to look at. I know I won’t get the 24-70/2.8. But the 24-70/4 and especially the 24-120/4 are also strong contenders. Especially since I do most photography while traveling. The 24-70 is also appealing for traveling because it’s tiny.
It will also depend on what telezoom I would get. And here I haven’t found something I like yet. The 70-200 is not for me. Too expensive and heavy. Same for the 100-400. The new Tamron 70-300 looks interesting but I’m not sure about it. Maybe a smaller, lighter 100-400 would suit me best, and then I’d get the 24-120 with that. But Nikon is unlikely to release such a lens.
Also, what I call “secondary characteristics” matter to me as well. Like how flat is the focus field, or how good is the close focus ability. As I said, it’s for travel, so a lens that offers flexibility has an edge.
The 24-70 f2.8 is spectacular from my own experience. But the 24-70 F4 is good enough for me.
A fun question for everyone. Which would you rather have? f/4 IS or f/2.8 non IS? In general.
My experience with the Canon DSLR (without IBIS) was that I shoot with f/2.8 (non IS) since 2000 and the 24-105 f/4 IS is still in the box. At those focal lengths with a steady hand and heavy camera body, one can get away without IS and/or IBIS. However, a lot of Canon pros use 24-105 f/4 IS successfully. Why? Flash, price, size & weight, different expectation with bokeh, sharpness, etc.
As an enthusiast, I still haven't upgraded my AF-S holy trinity to the Z mount yet, since I got bored with f/2.8 and hoping one or more f/2.0 will be around the corner.
I prefer DXLR to Z. I don't make movies, I make photos. f/4 lens or 2.8 doesn't make much difference as far as price. I'm fine with f/4.
👌🏼
The Nikon Z5 and hopefully the Nikon Z5 Mark 2 (which hopefully will have a flip out screen like on the Nikon Zfc and Nikon D5600) and hopefully the Nikon Z5 Mark 2 will have unlimited recording time limit like on the Sony A74 and Panasonic S5
W is raws?
I miss the 24-120/f4 in this comparrison
Can’t believe the shutter shield feature on the Z9 is not active as default. As to the lenses, 24-70 f4 I’m unlikely to use much now I have the amazing 24-120, in an ideal world I would partner with 24-70 f2.8. wide angle wise, love 14-30 and for my use case would always choose that over the 14-24.
Similar to Tamron... Similar is like 'Close', only counts with Horseshoes, Grenades, and Nuclear Weapons
Any one have suggestion for whale watching? Will F4 be good enough when I zoom in to around 200mm
$1200 for the "cheaper" wide zoom. 🙁. I guess it's all relative.
Nothing pops as a portrait lens except the 24-70 f2.8 . Quite disappointing actually.. time for a decent fast portrait lens on Z mount.
thaaanks
I went through the RAWs of the midrange zooms on my laptop and I can see what you mean with the 24-70 shot. However, this is a bit confusing to me. I've heard that all of the Z-mount glass is head and shoulders above the F-mount glass. And that it doesn't improve that much on stopping down. Of course a 45MP sensor is demanding (though nothing extreme in today's market), but still, from what I read, I expected less of a difference.
I also half expected the 28-75 to be worse than the 24-70/4. Which it isn't. So I can also see what you mean by it being a real contender for those that can't justify the 24-70/2.8. Though of course this is just portraits so perhaps corner sharpness could still be worse on the TamKon? ;)
well done
I love my 28-75, very comparable to my Tamron 70-200
I'd guess because inside it is actual Tamron :) same for the 17-28/2.8 :)
Matt, someone is commenting as if they are you on a few comments, but it not your youtube account. I don't think it's you.
thanks - I block them as fast as I can... they keep coming!
70-200 f4 S lens with constant f4 max aperture is one I would buy but it doesn’t exist 😂
✨🔥👍
A less misleading title would have Nikon on it.
Unless only Nikon shooters are the audience expected, given the thatnikonguy history.
Ahhh fair point. I thought the big retro Nikon logo in the thumbnail would be the clue. Maybe too subtle.
3rd
Sadly😢
?!?
Next time 🤞🏼