I have the small 28 mm f2.8 for quite some time now. I love that lens very much. It is small and lightweight and produces great images. Due to the quality of the 28 I'm now temped to get the 40mm f2. And yes, cheap lenses are getting very good. There is a difference between the expensive lenses and the cheap lenses when pixel peeping. But the differences are very small when viewing the images at normal size. The most important, and most noticeable, thing in photography is good composition. That will be noticed much more than expensive glass. The small and cheap Viltrox 20 mm is also on my list.
I have the 28 and 40 lenses. I also have the 70-180 and the 24-200 non S lenses. I also have the 50 1.8 and the 24-120. I love those two S lenses for their sharpness and rendition, but I find myself frequently going to the non s lenses, especially the 28, 40 and 24-200. I find their light weight, size desirable, and their sharpness often good enough, even on a Z8. I love that Nikon is producing great low-cost lenses
I have bought this 28Z and the 40Z specifically for travel and they are good for that. I’ve even shot some children portraits with the 40z and was pleasantly surprised. It is good enough and light to handle the camera one handed, be close enough to direct the child so it was great. Having said that, I have also recently bought the TTArtisan 75mm f/2. This is what Nikon should be producing for their retro cameras. It is all metal, autofocus, and has aperture control on the lens like the classic lenses have. Such a joy to use! Sony have similar lenses by Sigma, a 35mm, 50mm and 90mm if I’m not mistaken… hope we get those soon.
@@RussandLoz oh, and did I say that it’s under £200? If they get a 35 f/2.8 out with the same formula I’ll buy it with my eyes closed. Such a joy to use. Feels Leica quality.
thank you for this good discussion/review. I am really impressed by this lens (the 28 2.8). Coming from Fuji and being frustrated over years by their AF (-C, main subjects: playing kids, occasionally too little light...) and even more revcently.. (weekend shooting: kids playing around indoors, before and after dinner time.... X-T3 and prime 1.4 lense: no successful image. X-T5 with prime 1.4: few results, too many fails. Z f with this 28: great; even the noise at 6400 (my usual limit with 1/200) indoors and kids) does not hurt my eyes). I got the Z f few months back with the 28 (and the 24-120 S). First trip was vacation, there I loved the zoom. Now, in "real life" the 28 is on and the camera is always near by. And I am so impressed with the results. Every evening when I download and post-process the results make my face smile. I can zoom in, zoom in, zoom in - IQ is always great until I see just pixels. For day-to-day usage its sharpness is truly good enough. vignetting is what I often do anyway etc. I do not want to know how good a sharp Z prime would be. This is a problem ;-) I was prepare to invest in more primes (1.4 or 1.8) - but what would I get more?? Ha ha... Now, dear Nikon, why not more of this ;-) A real 24 2.0 "pancake" or so. Or a decent 20 -35. thanks again gents.
I have this lens ... and use it on a Zf. For me it is a nice little lens that you can use when you do not want a lot of real estate carrying around. The image quality is of course not the same as with lenses two or four times the price, but they are still very useful images with a bit of a character in my opinion.
We always give our clients the best, that’s why they chose us in the first place! I love walking around with my ZF and my 28 and 40 mm lenses. I use them more than my Z8 with my 14 to 24 2.8 or any of my 1.8 primes because they’re less heavy and more fun. I was definitely surprised to see the Z24-70 vs 28 2.8 😲
So were we, thats centre sharpness, I forgot to test edge, but we all know the S lenses will be better overall, and can deal with varying situations better.
I got the 28mm you’re reviewing and the 40mm. I got rid of them both. The quality was not there. The 28mm was soft. Adapted the 28mm f1.8g. Much better. I blew an opportunity to buy the 28mm f1.4 you have. I look for to Nikon making a proper 28mm S line lens. I found a deal on the 35mm S so I got rid of the 40. I think the S line lenses are worth it. If there are out of reach adapted G is the way to go for me.
@@RussandLoz Edge to edge sharpness and t-stop value was meh on the 28. I shoot a lot of existing light and off center compositions. It just wasn’t cutting it consistently. The 40mm was brilliant in these areas but the 35mm S was just a better performer in consistent sharpness, focus and detail capture on my Z6ii ‘s and Z8.
Thanks a lot for the cool 28/2.8 on the Zf review!!! I always switch the Nikon's wheels, Aperture on the back wheel is best for me. And I hate aperture-rings on lenses, which cannot be locked (clicking is not enough). I even reprogram the Z-lenses with an aperture-ring to do nothing, because I always mistakenly hit it with my clumsy hands. Got me a 50/1.5 but no experience with it yet (it came out 3 days too late for my last shooting-trip). I will be very interested in your opinion! Especially when comparing it with the beloved 58/1.4 on its rendering-characteristics. Yes, 58 to 50 is almost like 105 to 85 and not the same dept-compression, even if you change distances to get the same framing. And I will only be able to form my own opinion in late November, when I'm again doing a lot of shooting.
@@RussandLoz again thanks for the video, much appreciated. As for a future review-idea, I meant the new Nikkor Z 50/1.4. How your opinion is in comparing the rendering of this new 1.4 to the AF-S NIKKOR 58mmf/1.4G, which we both seem to love and miss, and not to the 50/1.8S (which everybody does and what is an easy distinction).
@@andikunar7183 The new 1.4 range is a dilemma for me, I would love a Pro line 1.4 but don't want edgy out of focus areas and lined bokeh. Thats why i have the 1.2, but that is often overkill
In terms of lightweight, compact lenses, I prefer the combo of the Nikon Z 26mm and the Viltrox 40mm over the Nikon Z 28mm and 40mm. The image quality of Nikon’s two “cupcake” falls a little short. But when weight and size aren’t a factor, adapting Sigma’s F mount 28mm and 40mm f/1.4 Art lenses are the bee’s knees. I’m still baffled as to why Nikon hasn’t released a 28mm 1.8 S.
My travel kit with the ZF is 28mm 2.8, 40mm F/2 and the Voigtlander 50mm F/1.0. it will be interesting to see what Nikon does with this new 1.4 line and if they do a 28mm Z mount I would eagerly pick one up.
Sorry to be off-task but (Russ/Loz - not sure who is who), may I ask about the Zf? I'm updating one of my Z6ii's. I shoot paid gigs events etc. Lots of action fast moving subjects. Want a new main camera with up to date AFC. I only shoot stills - zero vid. Loath the thought of the flip around screen, but may have to live with it. Do you think the ZF could function for this type of photography, compared with the Z6iii. I shoot all paid gigs with my gorgeous Z24-70 2.8s, but for all my personal stuff/street, small primes like the 40 F2. Zf is a thousand dollars cheaper than the Z6iii here in Australia - I'm leaning toward that but never tried one. I've never tried the flip around screen, do you get used to it for lots of shooting from the hip, or is it still better with the kind of screen on the older Z6ii (Z8/9 far too big and expensive here in Australia). Sorry to be off topic but your input would be appreciated. Cheers
Hey, the zf has the same tech inside and the z6iii, all but a few things so is very capable. I like using the ZF for fun, street, travel, as it makes you want to use it rather than being a cold tool. But, I much prefer the ergonomics of a bigger body. As a second camera the ZF is fully capable, but does get uncomfortable with bigger lenses. We have a full review on our videos
I bought this lens based on glowing RUclips reviews but found it rather mediocre and traded up to the 35mm f1.8 S. Lot more buckaroos but worth it.Cheers
That was me!!!! I don't know why you would say Americans just go on and on talking not giving anyone a chance to answer I realize that your not using film now that I'm back in the States and have had time to look up what type of camera and lens you were using and of course it had to be a mirrorless crop body because real photographers would only use full frame bodies and with such a wide field of view that the 28mm you will most likely lose all the details that are to be found everywhere in Venice not to mention you must not be to physically strong with your choice of equipment because you really should be using a full frame and bring along the holy trinity of lenses because that's really the only way to capture every aspect of a city like that I mean really who doesn't bring at least some sort of zoom like a 70mm - 200mm or one of the many different mid-range zooms instead of relying on only a small prime and a 2.8 prime why not just bring a 35 mm 1.8 because I'm sure you now that a 1.8 would give you much better out of focus background (bokeh) then a 2.8 would be capable of for that matter there are even ones that go beyond that like 1.4 or 1.2 but I understand if you have not had time to research these other lenses while your at it I could tell you were not a professional because you were using a Nikon everyone knows that Canon and Sony are way better I'm sure in time you will get better take care. j/k it was't me 🤣
Very nice job, all of it. I got a Zf and this lens few months ago, but I haven't touched it, as it is with my son abroad, where it was purchased. After watching it, I am glad I did. I paid 100 euros, and 1.5 for the Zf. I am aware it was a find.
Well, there is no bad Z lens. Not really. Have a look @8:41. In the image on the left, you see that the '22' and 'm' is double. Not to be seen in the image on the right (older lens). This phenomenan is present using many different lenses. The out of focus 'doublet' ghost images is not very nice. Once you have seen it, you do not like it.
Yes true, it will have some image rendition issues but not as many or as often as I thought there would be. I should have shown edge sharpness but it wasn't that bad really.
But this is at the close focus distances... a lot of lenses have such issues at close distances wide open, but then quickly sharpen up when the focus is at a typical shooting range to infinity.
I have the small 28 mm f2.8 for quite some time now. I love that lens very much. It is small and lightweight and produces great images. Due to the quality of the 28 I'm now temped to get the 40mm f2. And yes, cheap lenses are getting very good. There is a difference between the expensive lenses and the cheap lenses when pixel peeping. But the differences are very small when viewing the images at normal size. The most important, and most noticeable, thing in photography is good composition. That will be noticed much more than expensive glass. The small and cheap Viltrox 20 mm is also on my list.
Had this lens a few years only just got into it, my 24-200 dominates, but for night shots, the 28mm is great.
I have the 28 and 40 lenses. I also have the 70-180 and the 24-200 non S lenses. I also have the 50 1.8 and the 24-120. I love those two S lenses for their sharpness and rendition, but I find myself frequently going to the non s lenses, especially the 28, 40 and 24-200. I find their light weight, size desirable, and their sharpness often good enough, even on a Z8. I love that Nikon is producing great low-cost lenses
@@ericlarson6180 do you food much difference in image rendition?
Great vid! Being every so slightly pedantic, the cheapest Z lens of any brand is probably the viltrox 20mm f/2.8
Thanks, Fair enough, but certainly Nikon's.
@@RussandLoz talking of that lens (the viltrox 20mm) - it's great for the money. I might suggest a review of that?
@@christopherjs4945 Yes, most the time we review lenses we buy or get sent, unfortunately we can't request yet
I have bought this 28Z and the 40Z specifically for travel and they are good for that. I’ve even shot some children portraits with the 40z and was pleasantly surprised. It is good enough and light to handle the camera one handed, be close enough to direct the child so it was great. Having said that, I have also recently bought the TTArtisan 75mm f/2. This is what Nikon should be producing for their retro cameras. It is all metal, autofocus, and has aperture control on the lens like the classic lenses have. Such a joy to use! Sony have similar lenses by Sigma, a 35mm, 50mm and 90mm if I’m not mistaken… hope we get those soon.
isn't the 75mm a dx lens? Any shortcomings from that? But sure, we need an update on these lenses
@@RussandLoz nope! It’s full frame and it’s lovely.
@@RussandLoz oh, and did I say that it’s under £200? If they get a 35 f/2.8 out with the same formula I’ll buy it with my eyes closed. Such a joy to use. Feels Leica quality.
You can use a sony E / Nikon Z adapter ( like the Megadap ETZ21 Pro / TechArt TZE / Meike TZE ) to put those great f/2 Sigma on the ZF
@@Kliffot Does it work with autofocus?
Nikon is making fantastic lenses these days. They pretty much always have.
thank you for this good discussion/review. I am really impressed by this lens (the 28 2.8). Coming from Fuji and being frustrated over years by their AF (-C, main subjects: playing kids, occasionally too little light...) and even more revcently.. (weekend shooting: kids playing around indoors, before and after dinner time.... X-T3 and prime 1.4 lense: no successful image. X-T5 with prime 1.4: few results, too many fails. Z f with this 28: great; even the noise at 6400 (my usual limit with 1/200) indoors and kids) does not hurt my eyes).
I got the Z f few months back with the 28 (and the 24-120 S). First trip was vacation, there I loved the zoom. Now, in "real life" the 28 is on and the camera is always near by. And I am so impressed with the results. Every evening when I download and post-process the results make my face smile. I can zoom in, zoom in, zoom in - IQ is always great until I see just pixels. For day-to-day usage its sharpness is truly good enough. vignetting is what I often do anyway etc. I do not want to know how good a sharp Z prime would be. This is a problem ;-) I was prepare to invest in more primes (1.4 or 1.8) - but what would I get more?? Ha ha... Now, dear Nikon, why not more of this ;-) A real 24 2.0 "pancake" or so. Or a decent 20 -35.
thanks again gents.
Thanks, yes, it would be good to have more compact, better made lenses, made they'll allow a third party to make them
I have this lens ... and use it on a Zf. For me it is a nice little lens that you can use when you do not want a lot of real estate carrying around. The image quality is of course not the same as with lenses two or four times the price, but they are still very useful images with a bit of a character in my opinion.
Brilliant to see you went to Venice with my suggestion 😀 Great video.
Thanks, yes, it worked well don't you think?
Absolutely! Great set of stills and videos.
We always give our clients the best, that’s why they chose us in the first place! I love walking around with my ZF and my 28 and 40 mm lenses. I use them more than my Z8 with my 14 to 24 2.8 or any of my 1.8 primes because they’re less heavy and more fun. I was definitely surprised to see the Z24-70 vs 28 2.8 😲
So were we, thats centre sharpness, I forgot to test edge, but we all know the S lenses will be better overall, and can deal with varying situations better.
I got the 28mm you’re reviewing and the 40mm. I got rid of them both. The quality was not there. The 28mm was soft. Adapted the 28mm f1.8g. Much better. I blew an opportunity to buy the 28mm f1.4 you have. I look for to Nikon making a proper 28mm S line lens. I found a deal on the 35mm S so I got rid of the 40. I think the S line lenses are worth it. If there are out of reach adapted G is the way to go for me.
Yes I've heard this before, what was it about the quality you didn't like? But sure the S line are better quality
@@RussandLoz Edge to edge sharpness and t-stop value was meh on the 28. I shoot a lot of existing light and off center compositions. It just wasn’t cutting it consistently. The 40mm was brilliant in these areas but the 35mm S was just a better performer in consistent sharpness, focus and detail capture on my Z6ii ‘s and Z8.
@@jamesspicewilliams8835 Yes I agree, 35mm S lens is good from f2.8
Thanks a lot for the cool 28/2.8 on the Zf review!!!
I always switch the Nikon's wheels, Aperture on the back wheel is best for me. And I hate aperture-rings on lenses, which cannot be locked (clicking is not enough). I even reprogram the Z-lenses with an aperture-ring to do nothing, because I always mistakenly hit it with my clumsy hands.
Got me a 50/1.5 but no experience with it yet (it came out 3 days too late for my last shooting-trip). I will be very interested in your opinion! Especially when comparing it with the beloved 58/1.4 on its rendering-characteristics. Yes, 58 to 50 is almost like 105 to 85 and not the same dept-compression, even if you change distances to get the same framing. And I will only be able to form my own opinion in late November, when I'm again doing a lot of shooting.
This video took a long time to put together with many technical issues so thanks. Did you mean 50mm 1.5?
@@RussandLoz again thanks for the video, much appreciated. As for a future review-idea, I meant the new Nikkor Z 50/1.4. How your opinion is in comparing the rendering of this new 1.4 to the AF-S NIKKOR 58mmf/1.4G, which we both seem to love and miss, and not to the 50/1.8S (which everybody does and what is an easy distinction).
@@andikunar7183 The new 1.4 range is a dilemma for me, I would love a Pro line 1.4 but don't want edgy out of focus areas and lined bokeh. Thats why i have the 1.2, but that is often overkill
In terms of lightweight, compact lenses, I prefer the combo of the Nikon Z 26mm and the Viltrox 40mm over the Nikon Z 28mm and 40mm. The image quality of Nikon’s two “cupcake” falls a little short. But when weight and size aren’t a factor, adapting Sigma’s F mount 28mm and 40mm f/1.4 Art lenses are the bee’s knees. I’m still baffled as to why Nikon hasn’t released a 28mm 1.8 S.
Yes, they are lacking in the 28 to 40mm range, thats why i'm surprised by the 35 1.4 release. Maybe they are trying to compete with 3rd party lenses
My travel kit with the ZF is 28mm 2.8, 40mm F/2 and the Voigtlander 50mm F/1.0. it will be interesting to see what Nikon does with this new 1.4 line and if they do a 28mm Z mount I would eagerly pick one up.
@@MB-dq2gz yes I would love a 28 z mount though not a non S. I don’t want to deal with those artefacts and fuzzy bokeh
@@RussandLoz I would take either but would prefer a lightweight vintage like lens for travel. ^^
Sorry to be off-task but (Russ/Loz - not sure who is who), may I ask about the Zf? I'm updating one of my Z6ii's. I shoot paid gigs events etc. Lots of action fast moving subjects. Want a new main camera with up to date AFC. I only shoot stills - zero vid. Loath the thought of the flip around screen, but may have to live with it. Do you think the ZF could function for this type of photography, compared with the Z6iii. I shoot all paid gigs with my gorgeous Z24-70 2.8s, but for all my personal stuff/street, small primes like the 40 F2. Zf is a thousand dollars cheaper than the Z6iii here in Australia - I'm leaning toward that but never tried one. I've never tried the flip around screen, do you get used to it for lots of shooting from the hip, or is it still better with the kind of screen on the older Z6ii (Z8/9 far too big and expensive here in Australia). Sorry to be off topic but your input would be appreciated. Cheers
Hey, the zf has the same tech inside and the z6iii, all but a few things so is very capable. I like using the ZF for fun, street, travel, as it makes you want to use it rather than being a cold tool. But, I much prefer the ergonomics of a bigger body. As a second camera the ZF is fully capable, but does get uncomfortable with bigger lenses. We have a full review on our videos
Loz is the better looking one 🤷♂️😄
I bought this lens based on glowing RUclips reviews but found it rather mediocre and traded up to the 35mm f1.8 S. Lot more buckaroos but worth it.Cheers
Sure any S lens will outperform this, though our wondering is whether that makes a difference for street and travel?
Not a fan of 28mm as a focul length, it's not wide enough. I think my Viltrox 20mm would have been better in Venice. I do like the 40 though.
For indoor use yeah something wider would have been better
That was me!!!! I don't know why you would say Americans just go on and on talking not giving anyone a chance to answer I realize that your not using film now that I'm back in the States and have had time to look up what type of camera and lens you were using and of course it had to be a mirrorless crop body because real photographers would only use full frame bodies and with such a wide field of view that the 28mm you will most likely lose all the details that are to be found everywhere in Venice not to mention you must not be to physically strong with your choice of equipment because you really should be using a full frame and bring along the holy trinity of lenses because that's really the only way to capture every aspect of a city like that I mean really who doesn't bring at least some sort of zoom like a 70mm - 200mm or one of the many different mid-range zooms instead of relying on only a small prime and a 2.8 prime why not just bring a 35 mm 1.8 because I'm sure you now that a 1.8 would give you much better out of focus background (bokeh) then a 2.8 would be capable of for that matter there are even ones that go beyond that like 1.4 or 1.2 but I understand if you have not had time to research these other lenses while your at it I could tell you were not a professional because you were using a Nikon everyone knows that Canon and Sony are way better I'm sure in time you will get better take care.
j/k it was't me 🤣
😂😂
Blimey, the longest sentence I've ever read, not even a coma, thanks for your monologue, I'll make sure to tell you the truth next time 😀
Very nice job, all of it. I got a Zf and this lens few months ago, but I haven't touched it, as it is with my son abroad, where it was purchased. After watching it, I am glad I did. I paid 100 euros, and 1.5 for the Zf. I am aware it was a find.
These pancake lenses are very good, but sure, if they ever upgrade them it'll be worth it.
Well, there is no bad Z lens. Not really. Have a look @8:41. In the image on the left, you see that the '22' and 'm' is double. Not to be seen in the image on the right (older lens). This phenomenan is present using many different lenses. The out of focus 'doublet' ghost images is not very nice. Once you have seen it, you do not like it.
Yes true, it will have some image rendition issues but not as many or as often as I thought there would be. I should have shown edge sharpness but it wasn't that bad really.
But this is at the close focus distances... a lot of lenses have such issues at close distances wide open, but then quickly sharpen up when the focus is at a typical shooting range to infinity.
@@quikee9195 I can see it also at not so close distances with different expensive S lenses.
You really have to do pixel peeping to find that the 40 f2 is not a good lens
@@tonylevoyageur The 28 quality seems better?