Lol I admit I'm a collector: 31 RF 11 EF 7 FD 5 V system 2 L mount 1 Nikkor And then of course the built-in lenses on my two mf folders and a '60s era P&S. So, 60. And I've actually used all of them!
Four F-mount lenses for my D5100 (kit 18-55 f/3.5-5.6; 28-80 f/3.3-5.6, 55-300 f/4.5-5.6, and a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 Contemporary), and soon to be one Z-mount lens as I got/received a Z6III for my birthday (a 24-120 f/4 on backorder)!
I recently moved to the Z8 and also have the 14-24, and 24-120mm. The image quality from these is simply stunning. I also have the 85mm f1.8 for portrait work. Love Nikon
I see you are really excited about your camera and lenses. Agree totally with you that lenses are more important than the camera - they make or break a system. Regarding the 14-24, it's absolutely amazing, and I've been going through half a dozen (or more) wide angle zooms and primes - from different brands - in the past 5 years. There is only one thing you should be aware of when using the 14-24: when shooting wide open to blur the background, turn off the stabilizer. I got very annoying bokeh when shooting a subject with a busy background. I can't say for sure that it's the VR, but it looks like a stabilizer issue.
Those look like excellent lenses for your use case(s)! I had the Nikon NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G when I was using the D700, and it was indeed spectacular, though I didn't use it much. I found that I was mostly shooting in the 50-100mm range except for wildlife in the 200+ range. And I was shooting a lot under low-light conditions where flash wasn't feasible or allowed. When I switched to Z9, I opted for the 50mm and 85mm f/1.2 S lenses and the 180-600mm and a TC-1.4x. I also got the 105mm f/2.8 Macro, which I've been thoroughly enjoying. Nikon really have done an excellent job provisioning the Z-mount lens line; there's something for just about everyone (and every budget). 👍
Great video this week. Appreciate the thoughtful analysis. I couldn’t agree more with you on the 24-120. I got it my z8 and haven’t taken it off yet. One question about your z8. What L-Bracket are using and are you happy with it? I know you’re not typically a “gear guy”, but noticed on the camera in this video and thought I would ask.
Great Video, Mark. Thanks. Last month I sold all my Fuji gear and picked up the Z 8, 24-120, 100-400, 180-600 and 20mm 1.8. Oh, and the 105 Macro. Couldn't be happier with the new set up. I don't do a lot of super wide photography so the 20mm f/1.8 works nicely for that and for the rare astro shots...
I've just bought the Oly 7-14 2.8 Pro for my OMD E-Mi MkIII (14-28 equivalent) - and really enjoying getting to know how it works and feels. It was bought mainly for an astrophotography and aurora hunting trip in November in Iceland, which I'm really looking forward to
Mark, great rundown on the lenses. Have you played with the 28-400 Nikon lens yet? This is my new run and gun. I also have the 100-400 and the 14-24. Love that they all work on my Z8 and Z9. Looking forward to shooting more landscape and Astro. Keep up the good work!
I've just got back into photography properly and have a full frame for the first time. I took good advice and got one good lens - the Sony 24mm f1.4 GM prime - and I'm having a great time. I'm looking at 24-70 options but may well go for 24 - 105mm instead.
Currently, my main lens for my R6 Mark II is the a RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM. This lens has been great to refine my landscape and other photography and I have great photos to prove it. Next, I have been learning how to use the RF 14-35mm f4 L lens and I have gotten some fantastic landscapes and cityscapes using it but it is still a work in progress. My long lens is the EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 USM II. It’s the oldest lens I own and still takes great photos of sports, wildlife, and landscapes. When I used 70-300mm on my Canon 80D crop sensor the reach was incredible but, with my full frame camera it still has plenty of reach. My fourth lens is the RF 50mm f1.8 and it is a blast to use in various settings.
Good timing on the video- recently purchased Nikon D850 with the 14-24 2.8 and was considering other lenses to add. I have a 70-300 with my D90 setup that I can use until I can afford the other 2 you mentioned. Thanks!
My basic 3 lens kit is very similar to yours. However at 69 years old and with issues with Heart Disease I am much more concerned with weight than you are, so every option chosen had weight as a consideration. So my complete kit covers what I had with my D750 with about 1.5 less pounds of weight to carry. First the camera is a Z7 II, the Z8 is nice but just too heavy. The wide zoom is an oldy but a goody and the FTZ II is very light. That is the first edition Sigma 12-24mm. The intermediate iss the 24-120mm S lens, 1/2 lbs. lighter than the AF-S 24-120. The third lens is the Tamron 70-300mm, while not S line sharp it's still exceptional at f8 and f11 and very good in the corners wide open. One additional lens that occasionally replaces the 70-300 is the 150-500mm Tamron, another excellent lens at 1/2 the cost of the 100-400 Nikkor S and it just fits in the long zoom slot in my feather light National. Geographic backpack if I remove the divider and 40mm f2 Nikkor in that slot.
The 24-120 is my "always on" lens. Very versatile, and sharp. ON the wide end, I use the 14-30, and long is the 180-600. All great lenses. Nikon has built a good lineup, and I think we'll start see them deepen the selection... For filters, I standardized on the 95mm Kase magnetic filters, and mount different adapters to my different lenses.
Hey Mark! I agree with you Re 24-120mm f/4 lens being an excellent replacement for the 24-70 lens if shooting landscapes or outdoor natural light. I shoot f-mount and the 24-120mm lens rarely comes off of my D850. I also use the 14-24mm f/2.8 lens which is uber sharp. Great video and subject matter.
Similar thinking to me. I've gone around the houses with lenses but now settled back where I started, but with the benefit of experience. I'm on Sony: 12-24mm f/2.8 GM (as I do a fair amount of astro), Sony 24-105mm f/4 G (the most used lens) and Sony's 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM. Paralysis through analysis is a very real thing in landscape photography. Precious time can be wasted and carrying all that weight "just in case".
This is the exact setup I just put together. Excellent lenses all around! My only addition is the 70-200 f2.8 but I only use it for shooting hockey so I need the light. It never goes with me on my landscape outings. The 100-400 is sharp and works good for critters in decent light. Thanks for sharing all your extremelies!
Thank you. I had these lenses when I tried out the Z9 a few years back but unfortunately the weight and size of the Z9 forced me to give up that system.This was before the Z8 was available. In my Sony landscape system, with the A7RV, I can duplicate the 100-400mm but can only get to 105mm with the midrange and for wide angle it's a toss-up. Finally move to their small 16-25mm f/2.8 G but do have the larger and heavier 16-35mm f/2.8 ZGM II or the 12-24mm f/4 G since the 12-24mm f/2.8 GM is very big and heavy and expensive. May go back and try the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 again. Really appreciate sharing this. Take care. On Canon RF I guess it's the RF 15-35/2.8, RF 24-105/4 RF, and the RF 100-500/4.5-7.1. and EOS R5
Terrific video Mark. I use the Canon system, but found your thought process for deciding which lenses work best for the subjects that interest you most really useful. Like you, I picked wide and long, but thought your mid range choice insightful
Just over 2 years ago I came across your channel while doing a research for the lens setup (as an enthusiast, not pro) for my Sony a7riii. I've decided to ignore your advice and got myself: 1) Sigma 14-24 f2.8 2) Sony 24-105 F4 3) Sigma 100-400mm Well, well, well, how the turntables 😂😂😂
I love the 24-120 and 100-1400 also. But I use the f/4 14-30 instead of the 14-24, as I rarely need an aperture wider than f/4 for wide angle. The only exception is astro, a role well-filled by the f/1.8 20mm S lens. Two more bonuses: the 14-30 takes 82mm filters, so I can use its filters on the other three (all 77mm) with a step-up ring. And the 14-30 + 20mm two-lens combo is $50 cheaper than the 14-24 by itself. I always know if I'm going to be doing astro, so my normal kit is still just three lenses. Got some great aurora pictures with the 20mm too! Really like the thought you put into this!
It is good to see a landscape photographer using telephotos vs primes ( reviewers say to get because of this or that). For me yes I have two bags one for night and the other for day but also one for the everyday going to market or Dr. appointment etc.. For my any time anywhere lenses, I am a Sony, the FE PZ 16-35 f/4 and the FE 24-240mm but in APS-C 36-360 I also have an old favorite from years back that is real small the APS-C E 10-18mm (15-27mm) f/4 OSS But 12-18mm in Full Frame (18 if you remove the light shield) and all lenses have the rear filter holders. I also have my old A7SM1 and A7SM2 and A7RM2 for I have the on camera apps that were available back in the beginning mainly for the "Digital Filter" app that lets you capture in camera sky and foreground separately for jpeg and or RAW on to SD card and able to adjust center position before sending to SD card, also the built in Panorama section on the dial meaning not having to carry filters or panorama gear. I keep for planning wildlife in the spring the 70-200 and the 200-600 with the 2X teleconverter at the ready no need for the 1.4X due to going APS-C is 1.5x. Most telephotos get a bad review like the 24-240 but from ground to eclipses is great to have. The biggest thing to remember is todays SW corrects any bad in a review, when I started PS and Lr both cost $800+ and for each full update and had to use the makers SW so from 2010 to now we are in heaven thanks to the programmers and lower costs.
Got the same lens choice - except i have the F4 14-30mm (would love to upgrade to the 2.8) - Same reasons as you, but they also have an amazingly short/close up min-focus distance. Recently got the 105mm Macro too - bloody brilliant!
I'm with you on the wide end. Love the 14-30 and still considering the 14-24. I'll keep both cuz the smaller weight and size of the f/4 is amazing for hiking. I went for the 20mm 1.8 for astro before replacing my 105mm macro from the DSLR days. The macro lens is next on my list unless I go for one of the super fast exotics. Lens purchases now on hold waiting for new announcements in the fall. My hopes? A 500mm pf lens native to the Z system.
That’s a great combination of lenses for a lightweight camera kit! I’m wondering if you gave any thought to the new Nikon 24-400. I don’t know if it would save weight but it would reduce amount of lenses to carry. But it wouldn’t replace your Astro lens.
Hi Mark. I have been following your videos for quite sometime now. Do like them a lot. The way you explain things is so easy to understand. I have a question for you, though. I will be visiting Yellowstone and Teton in a month from now. I am looking forward to getting some beautiful landscape shots. Though I am an amateur in photography, primarily birds, I would like to have your views on...Will you recommend a polarising filter for landscape ?
Thanks Mark, I truly agree with you, and I can see I may be able to sell off some lenses, as like you, I rarely take images in the middle focal length, as I'm more of a Landscape/Nature photographer. I watched your recent video on the Z8 as well, and I'm contemplating it, or the Z6iii, as I'm more of an enthusiast/hobby photographer, and believe I could get similarly sharp images with it. Appreciate you showing us your images, very beautiful indeed!
I have almost the same setup as you, the 24-120 and the 100-400, but I have the 14-30 f4. I also have a x2 tele converter for the 100-400 to get me from 14 to 800. You might consider getting it, it is fantastic!
I also shoot with the Nikon Z8 (and Z9). Along with the Z8, I use those same three lenses which are in my “go” bag, the bag I use whenever I go out shooting landscapes, cityscapes, and night skies. I still use (and love) the Z9 primarily for event photography because of the incredible battery life and vertical grip. I can shoot all night and never think about whether or not I need to change the battery. For event photography, I will use a different lens lineup. Another piece of gear you might want to add to your bag is the Z-mount 1.4x teleconverter to add a little more reach to your 100-400mm lens, if needed.
Oh, yeah, for sure. My 1.4x teleconverter on my 100-400 has been a read treat. I never had a teleconverter in 30 years of shooting until now. Well, to be fair, I never shot wildlife until getting my Z8 a few month ago and never had a lens longer that 200mm.
I agree with all your points. For my Canon RF setup I went all-f/4, including my wide-angle, and rent the f/2.8 when I anticipate serious astro shooting.
Hi Mark - thank you for sharing your favorite Z8 lenses with us. Much appreciated! I purchased a Z8 with a 24-120 f/4 lens about a month ago and I was wondering what L-bracket you purchased for your Z8? Also, what filters or filter system are you using for your lenses. Thanks again for your videos and for your enthusiasm. Best - Richard
Hi again Mark - I read more of the comments and found the answer to my L-bracket question. (RRS) Thanks! Wondering about your filter setup? BTW, great channel!
I must be on the right track. After buying my Z5 I bought the 24-120mm f4 and sold all of my DSLR glass except my 80-400mm f4.5-5.6. Yes I have to use an adapter but I love this lens and it is super sharp on my Z5 even with the TC-14E iii teleconverter. I've been trying to decide if, as a hobbyist, I should spend the $2K+ on the 14-24mm or get the 20mm f1.8.
Nice kit 🙂 My usual landscape/ nature kit is the Z9 and or Z8 24-120, 100-400 and Tamron 15-30. May switch to a 14-24 Z at some point but the Tamron works fine. 🙂 plus I still have a D850 . When that goes out the F mount 24-120, 15-30 and either Tamron 70-200 or 150-600. For the 100-400 I have the 2x extender along. Has very good image quality. Depending, the 150-600 might go out with the Z’s rather than 100-400. The 100-400 is a great lens.
I recently brought six lenses to Portugal on vacation. Of the three you mention, the only one I did not sue was my 100-400mm. My 24-105 was my go-to, especially for shooting the trams!
I have that same setup of cameras and lenses…I use the Kase 112mm magnetic filter set with a 112-77mm step down ring so I can use one set of filters on all three lenses!! The 112mm fits the 14-24mm lens and the step down ring from Kase as well fits everything else. It’s a beautiful set of filters and worth the investment as one set covers all 3 lenses and any other 77mm lens.
Thanks for the explanation you gave for the 14-24 2.8, totally made sense. I use to carry my 24-70 2.8, funny for the same reason as you stated, it’s one of the best in that range, but really don’t use 2.8 enough to justify the cost. After it was destroyed during a shot I end up getting the 24-70 f4 and very happy with it. But I like you idea for the 14-24 2.8 for that few occasions I shoot astro. Also thinking about getting the 180-600mm 5.6 - 6.3 for that occasion when I shoot wildlife 😂
I absolutely love my 24-120, it's on my camera 90-95% of the time...and ironically, the other two lenses you mentioned are definitely on my radar, especially the 100-400.
I love this trio (trinity, if you will) of focal ranges from Nikon. However, I shoot Sony and constantly struggle with the ideal focal ranges. I currently shoot the 20-70 f/4 G and the 70-200 f/4 Macro G II. I usually throw a 1.4 TC in my pocket, just in case I want to use it with the 70-200/Macro. The set of lenses, with the TC, weigh just over 3 lb and can easily be carried with an A7RV or A1 in a 7L shoulder bag, along with batteries, cards, filters, remote, cloths, and a few other odds & ends. They cover 90% of my needs and use the same filter thread. I will occasionally swap the 70-200 for a 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, or throw a 14mm f/1.8 in the bag. Heavier, it is a tight fit, and the extra 1 lb puts me right on the edge of comfort for longer hikes. The gaps in focal range are not much of an issue as I can crop to 37 megapixel and cover a 70-90 mm or 14-18 mm FOV. If I am carrying a backpack I will, typically, pack the 12-24 f/2.8, 24-105 f/4 and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, which puts me at about the same weight as your setup, with a camera body. I do wish Sony made a 24-120, though. I could see it resulting in a lot fewer lens swaps with the 3 lens combination. If I were specifying an ideal lens trio for my setup, it would be a 12-24 f/2.8, 20-120 f/4 (as long as it was under 2 lb), and a 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 (under 2.5 lb). The problem with that is, I would probably get lazy, and just leave the 20-120 on my camera all the time. Finally, for a light weight single lens walk-around solution, the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6 is the ticket. Don’t think it’s available for Nikon yet.
Like the thinking and the line up. Mine is similar but I have the 70-200 F2.8 (plus a 2x converter for the extra reach) because the 100-400 wasn't available at the time. However, I don't see a good argument for changing it now.
Great video. I am currently switching from Fuji to Nikon. I have the z6III. 24-70 2.8 for weddings, 14-30 f4 for real estate photo and video. Going to get the 35 1.4 soon for wedding video.
Thanks for sharing your 3 lens set up. As for filters, the 14-24 Nikon Z comes with HB 97 lens hood which is 112 mm. Now, if you purchase the Kase 112 magnetic filter kit, it works on the 14-24. The Kase kit also comes with a 77-112 adapter ring which you can place on the 24-120 and the 100-400. One set of filters works with all 3 lenses if you bring the proper lens hood for the 14-24. The Kase magnetic filter kit is great but very expensive.
Thank you Mark for the video. I agree with all your lens choices. I shoot Sony and Tamron. I have two mid range f2.8 lenses but my go to lenses are the 50-400 and the 17-28. On my two recent trips, I was able to capture all the images I needed with these two lenses. The 28mm- 50mm gap is not that bad. You are either shooting long or wide and you choose the lens that does the job. I went with Sony about three years ago because of Tamron lens availability. I got into the game without having to spend Sony GM lens prices. I like Nikon's colors better. If I started over today, I would go with Nikon.
I absolutely love my Nikon 24-120 f/4. I had the 24-70 2.8 and it is incredible but didn’t use the wider apertures so returned it for the f/4 and the cash. The extra reach was worth more to me.
Great presentation. Just a few weeks ago I was planning my own kit around your "two lens for landscape" video, so thanks for the additional food for thought. :D
I consider my lens selection complete with the 24-70 f2.8, the 70-200 f2.8, and the 100-500. I'm using them with my R6mII, and all of them are great pieces of glass ❤ Only lense I'm still considering for when I get a good price is the 100mm macro.
Hi Mark, as a Nikon-photograph (Z7) from Germany, i can follow your recommendations. In the long run i want to switch to the 24-120 and 100-400. But i will prefer the 4/14-30 to the 2.8/14-24. It´s not because of the range, but because of the filters. I can use regular filters of 82mm. I addition to the zoom i have the prime lenses Irix 2.5/15 and Nikon 1.8/20mm lens for Astrophotography and photos with a tiny depth of field. You don´t use prime lenses?
Almost your same kit! 14-30, 24-120,100-400 Z mount. Then I have a prime set. Viltrox 16 1.8 for Astro, 35 1.8 for family vacations, 85 1.8 for portraits. Then I just picked up a 600 6.3 PF for wild life but not 100% sold on needing it yet lol. Mark my question to you use why not just use the 14-30 and go with a wide angle bright prime for Astro? They are small and cheap. Like the Viltrox 1.8. Wouldn’t that be better for Astro? Or did I do wrong lol
Oh, I totally agree about everything you said especially the mid-range 24-120mm Nikkor. I have nearly the same set-up as I just switched to mirrorless from the Nikon d810 to the Z8 about 8 months ago. Like you for landscapes, I only shot in wide (16-35) or telephoto (100mm prime), and I'd chuck a 50mm prime in the bag just in case. So, I was really ignoring the mid-range and quite happy to do so. And with my telephoto at only 100mm, I was always pining for more reach. Jumping to mirrorless with the Z8, I went with a similar set up: 14-30mm f4 and 100-400mm. But while in the store, at the last moment I was eyeing the 24-120mm and the salesman said that many were raving about it. So, as an afterthought, really, I threw in the 24-120mm in my purchase thinking it might be a decent walk-around lens. Oh, was I ever wrong. The 24-120 might be my most used lens, and out of my f4 trinity (14-30, 24-120, 100-400), it seems to be not only my most used lens but also my sharpest zoom. It blows my mind. Since I can't help myself, I went out and got a 50mm 1.8 for portraits and then a 20mm 1.8 for astro (all nikkor). I just love a prime, but the damn 24-120 really equals the primes in sharpness to my eyes. Who'd thunk it?
Thanks Mark!! I have 3 lenses: Tokina 11-20 2.8, Sigma 24-70 2.8 and Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I use for Landscapes. I also have a Sigma 40mm Prime 1.4 for Portraits and a Sigma 60-600 4.0-6.3 for Wildlife. I wish they were lighter but I opted for the better glass to go with my Canon 90D Crop Sensor Body. All the lenses are Full-Frame mountable except the Tokina so I won't have to buy new lenses when I finally go Full-Frame.
Great video! I actually just purchased 2 more lenses to complete my setup similar to yours with my Sony. I got a 20mm 1.8 for astro/night, and a 100-400 Sigma to complete the range around my 24-105 but now you got me thinking about a 14-24mm... Curious, but how do you manage keeping the sensor free of dust/dirt when swapping lenses and ensure they're not on your sensor after you swap them? I recall the Z8 has a sensor shield, but I imagine dust can still get stuck inside and would bounce around in your bag. Thank you as always!
Hi Mark. Can you suggest some budget alternatives for covering wide to long focal lengths? I already have a 18-55 kit lens and a 10-20 wide angle lens for Nikon D3400. But would like to switch to a better mid range lens and a cost effective telephoto lens.
I admit to having nine lenses, but agree with your three main landscape lenses. I gravitated to the Panasonic MFT versus a full frame camera system because of the smaller weight and size, … and often cost. The MFT lenses I use most are (MFT sizes): 8-18, 12-60 and 50-200. I also make a lot use of my macro lens (amazing things to see when you get really close) and am making small advances with my 100-400 (200-800 FF equivalent) photographing birds and other wildlife. I have a few other lenses such as a 9mm (18mm FF equiv) f/1.7 for trying astro photography, a 14-140mm (24-280 FF equiv) that often has been THE travel lens, if I am packing small. I am a hobbyist only trying to make images that please me and to capture memories, happily doing both.
I got the 14-30mm f4 version from Nikkor and have been quite happy with it. It's virtually as good as the more expensive one and saves on not only weight but also cash. I love this lens but I've never shot with the 14-24mm. What my option did was cause me to go out and get a 20mm 1.8 for astro. Yes, the 2.8 for astro is good and wider, but personally, I prefer a faster prime for astro, which I find superior. Would I use the 2.8 for astro? You bet. But I'm happier with my prime for that purpose.
Hi! Thanks for the video. Have you had an opportunity to use the Nikon 24-400 lens? I'm considering a move to Nikon and getting this lens. It would simplify my kit.
Zoom lenses have come a long way. I do not feel the need for primes for my landscape work. I don't do weddings actively anymore but was asked to do one a few months ago. A borrowed Sigma 85 f1.4 save the day (the night!). Incredible lens and I shot it mostly at f1.4.
Nikon z6ii, 24-120 on most of the time, 20mm 1.8 for Astro and 100-400 for landscape and birds (1.4x converter soon) Really happy with this set up - amazing glass. Bodies come and go but the investment in good lens pays off.
I'm keen on getting the Viltrox 16mm 1.8 Z. Mainly for city night scenes & a bit of wedding photography & videography. I do have the 24-70mm 2.8 Z & the 70-200mm 2.8 Z. I do notice a lot of folks complaining about the weight of a Z9. I carry it around hand-held for hours with a 180-600mm - no problem. And I'm 70 years old. Cheers.
Those are also my favorite 3 lenses. The 24-70 2.8 is the sharpest lens, but i am prefering the 24-120. You should add an 1.4 tc to the 100-400, small and light, unnoticeable in your bag an give you a longer reach when nedd it.
I would go for the f/4 24-120, but I also do a decent amount of concert and wedding/reception party shots with the f/2.8 24-70. I get the 24-120 for my frequent nature and landscapes, but im not sure it's worth it
Im using the f mount AF-S 24-120mm on my Z7. Do you have any thoughts on that? I like the sharpness as well but understand it wouldnt be as sharp as the Z equivalent.
I’d love to add the 14-24 to my kit - got to save my pennies! I have kept my F70-200 2.8 in the bag because it makes a great indoor lens for photographing my small grandchildren
Just came back from Alaska and used the Tamron 28-200 the most. The Tamron 50-400 for some whale shots and Sony 16-35 for street photography. I wished I had brought my Sony 200-600 for the whales but it’s just too big to lug around. Next year we are going to Iceland and will bring the same lenses with my 2 bodies; Sony A74 and A7R5.
Great video, thanks. Mark, but why Nikon Z8? Why not Z7 II? Yes, I saw where you mentioned that you have large hands and the Z8 is comfortable. But the Z7 II is about 200 grams lighter, which is also important for hiking. The Z8 also has a curtain to protect the sensor from dust. This is also undoubtedly great. The Z8 has a fast processor, which means fast and accurate autofocus, fast continuous shooting. This is important for wildlife. But much less important for landscapes. But the Z7 II still has more attractive characteristics in terms of the sensor itself, a more interesting dynamic range, less noise. To be honest, the choice is not obvious. Six months ago, I myself was tormented by the choice between Canon R5 and Nikon Z8. The lenses I had for the old Canon 40D were not of particular value to me and I was ready to change the system. And at that time I chose Canon R5. I still do not know if it was the right choice. Because I haven't managed to travel and shoot landscapes in these six months (almost), but I've managed to shoot all sorts of birds and other animals in the place where I live. And I realized that my system lacks a full-fledged analogue of Nikon's Z 180-600 6.3. Canon RF 100-500 is still not a full-fledged replacement, and it's also insanely expensive. And the Sigma I have is not fast enough for birding and not precise enough. My Canon RF 100-400 f/8 is not long enough and too dark. At least it's very cheap)) Prime lenses like 600 f/4 - the price tag is completely outrageous. After all, photography is a hobby, not a way to earn money. If I had Nikon, I would most likely choose your version of the kit. And I would supplement it with something like an 85mm f/1.8 for portraits, a 105mm macro, and a 180-600mm for wildlife. And they all don't cost an astronomical amount of money. And it would really be the perfect kit for all occasions and for any type of photography that I prefer. The only thing is, if I had a 180-600, I would probably replace the 100-400 with a 70-200 f/2.8. Because after shooting birds at 600mm you already understand that 400 is not enough))
I use the Sony 12-24mm F/2.8 GM on my Sony A7RV for almost everything now, such a great focal range for my type of shooting and also very suitable for astro, the 2 mm from 14 to 12 is really something ;) For filter use I use the 16-35mm F/2.8 GM II. I own a lot of other lenses also but I hardly ever use them anymore. A 14mm F/1.8 GM for instance, but the 12-24 makes it obsolete and is even actually sharper. The loss in light for astro is to live with.
Over a few years I had accumulated the "Holy Trinity" while I had my D800 and D850. But last year, I finally relented and got a Z8 - absolutely awesome camera. Since then, I got the 24-120 and discovered that I rarely used the 24-70 F/2.8 anymore, so I sold it. I got an adapter for my 14-24 G and 70-200. I am thinking of keeping the wide angle since I don't use it all that often. BUT I'm slipping closer and closer to the edge to sell the 70-200, and then buy the 100-400Z. And here I thought I was over the "gotta have the next best thing" syndrome. I can justify it every time I look at the quality of the images.
Hi Mark, I am a big fan of your channel and really appreciate your journey. I am a canon user, and the R5 (20% lighter than Z8) with 15-35 2.8 (advantage in filter size, disadvantage 25% in weight), 24-105 4.0 (same filter and weight), and 100-500 (same filter, slightly less weight, more reach) is about $700 cheaper than your kit. However, I shoot a lot with a Nikon user, and the Z 24-120 made me get rid of my RF 24-105 for the RF 24-70. Z lens is fantastic, RF 24-70 is fantastic, RF 24-105 is NOT. Nice to have choices
As a landscape astrophotographer, I use something similar to you but all my wide angle lenses are prime. I carry 16mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.4, 28mm f/1.4, 40mm f/1.4 and 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3. All the prime lenses are for shooting the milky way. The 50-400mm is for daytime shooting.
Funny, while I agree that the 24-120 is so useful (and usually my always on), my approach to get the same reach that you get with your 3 lens setup is using only 2 lenses. 14-30+28-400 Sure, not as open as you have it, but also much more affordable, und much less weight, when talking about hiking or travelling by plane. For Astro I'm aiming at the Viltrox 16mm/1.8 as special purpose lens. Not yet something that I'm doing a lot, so still on my wish list. Talking of owned lenses, got a bit of GAS over the years, so beside the 3 mentioned on top have 105/2.8 for macro and a 150-600 for wildlife, both F mount lenses. Plus a few (Z) primes for playing around (28/2.8, 40/2, 50/1.8), mostly for getting better separation of objects. On the APSC side only 3 lenses left for the Z50, absolutely based on weight. 16-50+50-250 Kit lenses + Viltrox 13/1.4.
Since I just got a new R7 I only have the kit 18-150mm and my "old" EF 50 1.8, kind of stumped on what to get since they all cost a pretty penny. I haven't even gotten ND filters yet
50 f1.8 10-18 f4/5.6 25-104 f4L 100-400 f4L But my point and shoot lens that sits on my Canon 800D most of the time is a 'lowly' Tamron 18-270 f3.5/6.3. It's the cheapest used lens I've ever bought at £100 but results from it are very good. Not in the 'L' class but not a million miles away either. And yes, I know the 1.6x crop factor makes almost all of them all longer - that effective 640mm reach on the long Canon is very useful and it's also the sharpest of all the lenses.
I sold my 24-70, 70-200, 35 (1.8), 500 pf… and now have the wide F4 lens , 24-120, 100-400… light and optimal… but added lately the 800 pf… for birds, so great (and somewhat crazy!) also have the 1.4 TC (with my Z9) would like the 600 pf as I liked so much my 500 pf… but can not justify it really!
I am a nikon user and I have 5. They are: 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and a 200-500 5.6. I probably sell the first two because i dont use them that much. I use Nikon D750 which I love, but want to switch to the Z8.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
🔥QUESTION: How many Lenses do you own?
Lol I admit I'm a collector:
31 RF
11 EF
7 FD
5 V system
2 L mount
1 Nikkor
And then of course the built-in lenses on my two mf folders and a '60s era P&S.
So, 60. And I've actually used all of them!
Currently, I have 3 lenses. A 24-70 F2.8, 70-200 F2.8, and a 105mm Macro. All are for Canon full frame.
Four F-mount lenses for my D5100 (kit 18-55 f/3.5-5.6; 28-80 f/3.3-5.6, 55-300 f/4.5-5.6, and a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 Contemporary), and soon to be one Z-mount lens as I got/received a Z6III for my birthday (a 24-120 f/4 on backorder)!
Three and you will guess what camera I own by the lenses..... 20-35, 45-100, and 100-200mm. 🙂
Currently just one, the Fuji F4 16 - 80 but hope to add the 70 - 300 later this year.
I recently moved to the Z8 and also have the 14-24, and 24-120mm. The image quality from these is simply stunning. I also have the 85mm f1.8 for portrait work.
Love Nikon
I see you are really excited about your camera and lenses. Agree totally with you that lenses are more important than the camera - they make or break a system. Regarding the 14-24, it's absolutely amazing, and I've been going through half a dozen (or more) wide angle zooms and primes - from different brands - in the past 5 years. There is only one thing you should be aware of when using the 14-24: when shooting wide open to blur the background, turn off the stabilizer. I got very annoying bokeh when shooting a subject with a busy background. I can't say for sure that it's the VR, but it looks like a stabilizer issue.
Those look like excellent lenses for your use case(s)! I had the Nikon NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G when I was using the D700, and it was indeed spectacular, though I didn't use it much. I found that I was mostly shooting in the 50-100mm range except for wildlife in the 200+ range. And I was shooting a lot under low-light conditions where flash wasn't feasible or allowed. When I switched to Z9, I opted for the 50mm and 85mm f/1.2 S lenses and the 180-600mm and a TC-1.4x. I also got the 105mm f/2.8 Macro, which I've been thoroughly enjoying. Nikon really have done an excellent job provisioning the Z-mount lens line; there's something for just about everyone (and every budget). 👍
Nikon Z6 and nikkor z 14-30, 24-120, 100-400, all f4. Now planning viltrox 16mm f1.8 for night skies
Oh! f4 Trinity like me! Awesome set-up!
Great video this week. Appreciate the thoughtful analysis. I couldn’t agree more with you on the 24-120. I got it my z8 and haven’t taken it off yet. One question about your z8. What L-Bracket are using and are you happy with it? I know you’re not typically a “gear guy”, but noticed on the camera in this video and thought I would ask.
Thanks so much! It's an Lbracket from Really Right Stuff - expensive but good quality.
Great Video, Mark. Thanks. Last month I sold all my Fuji gear and picked up the Z 8, 24-120, 100-400, 180-600 and 20mm 1.8. Oh, and the 105 Macro. Couldn't be happier with the new set up. I don't do a lot of super wide photography so the 20mm f/1.8 works nicely for that and for the rare astro shots...
I've just bought the Oly 7-14 2.8 Pro for my OMD E-Mi MkIII (14-28 equivalent) - and really enjoying getting to know how it works and feels. It was bought mainly for an astrophotography and aurora hunting trip in November in Iceland, which I'm really looking forward to
Mark, great rundown on the lenses. Have you played with the 28-400 Nikon lens yet? This is my new run and gun. I also have the 100-400 and the 14-24. Love that they all work on my Z8 and Z9. Looking forward to shooting more landscape and Astro. Keep up the good work!
I've been using the 24-120 and 100-400 for almost 2 years now. Absolutely love them. I have the 20mm 1.8, which also has a 77mm filter thread.
I've just got back into photography properly and have a full frame for the first time. I took good advice and got one good lens - the Sony 24mm f1.4 GM prime - and I'm having a great time. I'm looking at 24-70 options but may well go for 24 - 105mm instead.
Currently, my main lens for my R6 Mark II is the a RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM. This lens has been great to refine my landscape and other photography and I have great photos to prove it. Next, I have been learning how to use the RF 14-35mm f4 L lens and I have gotten some fantastic landscapes and cityscapes using it but it is still a work in progress. My long lens is the EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 USM II. It’s the oldest lens I own and still takes great photos of sports, wildlife, and landscapes. When I used 70-300mm on my Canon 80D crop sensor the reach was incredible but, with my full frame camera it still has plenty of reach. My fourth lens is the RF 50mm f1.8 and it is a blast to use in various settings.
Good timing on the video- recently purchased Nikon D850 with the 14-24 2.8 and was considering other lenses to add. I have a 70-300 with my D90 setup that I can use until I can afford the other 2 you mentioned. Thanks!
My basic 3 lens kit is very similar to yours. However at 69 years old and with issues with Heart Disease I am much more concerned with weight than you are, so every option chosen had weight as a consideration. So my complete kit covers what I had with my D750 with about 1.5 less pounds of weight to carry. First the camera is a Z7 II, the Z8 is nice but just too heavy. The wide zoom is an oldy but a goody and the FTZ II is very light. That is the first edition Sigma 12-24mm. The intermediate iss the 24-120mm S lens, 1/2 lbs. lighter than the AF-S 24-120. The third lens is the Tamron 70-300mm, while not S line sharp it's still exceptional at f8 and f11 and very good in the corners wide open. One additional lens that occasionally replaces the 70-300 is the 150-500mm Tamron, another excellent lens at 1/2 the cost of the 100-400 Nikkor S and it just fits in the long zoom slot in my feather light National. Geographic backpack if I remove the divider and 40mm f2 Nikkor in that slot.
The 24-120 is my "always on" lens. Very versatile, and sharp. ON the wide end, I use the 14-30, and long is the 180-600. All great lenses. Nikon has built a good lineup, and I think we'll start see them deepen the selection... For filters, I standardized on the 95mm Kase magnetic filters, and mount different adapters to my different lenses.
Hey Mark! I agree with you Re 24-120mm f/4 lens being an excellent replacement for the 24-70 lens if shooting landscapes or outdoor natural light. I shoot f-mount and the 24-120mm lens rarely comes off of my D850. I also use the 14-24mm f/2.8 lens which is uber sharp. Great video and subject matter.
Similar thinking to me. I've gone around the houses with lenses but now settled back where I started, but with the benefit of experience. I'm on Sony: 12-24mm f/2.8 GM (as I do a fair amount of astro), Sony 24-105mm f/4 G (the most used lens) and Sony's 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM. Paralysis through analysis is a very real thing in landscape photography. Precious time can be wasted and carrying all that weight "just in case".
This is the exact setup I just put together. Excellent lenses all around! My only addition is the 70-200 f2.8 but I only use it for shooting hockey so I need the light. It never goes with me on my landscape outings.
The 100-400 is sharp and works good for critters in decent light.
Thanks for sharing all your extremelies!
Thank you. I had these lenses when I tried out the Z9 a few years back but unfortunately the weight and size of the Z9 forced me to give up that system.This was before the Z8 was available. In my Sony landscape system, with the A7RV, I can duplicate the 100-400mm but can only get to 105mm with the midrange and for wide angle it's a toss-up. Finally move to their small 16-25mm f/2.8 G but do have the larger and heavier 16-35mm f/2.8 ZGM II or the 12-24mm f/4 G since the 12-24mm f/2.8 GM is very big and heavy and expensive. May go back and try the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 again. Really appreciate sharing this. Take care. On Canon RF I guess it's the RF 15-35/2.8, RF 24-105/4 RF, and the RF 100-500/4.5-7.1. and EOS R5
Terrific video Mark. I use the Canon system, but found your thought process for deciding which lenses work best for the subjects that interest you most really useful. Like you, I picked wide and long, but thought your mid range choice insightful
Just over 2 years ago I came across your channel while doing a research for the lens setup (as an enthusiast, not pro) for my Sony a7riii. I've decided to ignore your advice and got myself:
1) Sigma 14-24 f2.8
2) Sony 24-105 F4
3) Sigma 100-400mm
Well, well, well, how the turntables 😂😂😂
I love the 24-120 and 100-1400 also. But I use the f/4 14-30 instead of the 14-24, as I rarely need an aperture wider than f/4 for wide angle. The only exception is astro, a role well-filled by the f/1.8 20mm S lens. Two more bonuses: the 14-30 takes 82mm filters, so I can use its filters on the other three (all 77mm) with a step-up ring. And the 14-30 + 20mm two-lens combo is $50 cheaper than the 14-24 by itself.
I always know if I'm going to be doing astro, so my normal kit is still just three lenses. Got some great aurora pictures with the 20mm too!
Really like the thought you put into this!
I also have the 14-30 as it can use standard filter holder, and 24-120. I’ve got the Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 for Astro.
It is good to see a landscape photographer using telephotos vs primes ( reviewers say to get because of this or that). For me yes I have two bags one for night and the other for day but also one for the everyday going to market or Dr. appointment etc.. For my any time anywhere lenses, I am a Sony, the FE PZ 16-35 f/4 and the FE 24-240mm but in APS-C 36-360 I also have an old favorite from years back that is real small the APS-C E 10-18mm (15-27mm) f/4 OSS But 12-18mm in Full Frame (18 if you remove the light shield) and all lenses have the rear filter holders. I also have my old A7SM1 and A7SM2 and A7RM2 for I have the on camera apps that were available back in the beginning mainly for the "Digital Filter" app that lets you capture in camera sky and foreground separately for jpeg and or RAW on to SD card and able to adjust center position before sending to SD card, also the built in Panorama section on the dial meaning not having to carry filters or panorama gear. I keep for planning wildlife in the spring the 70-200 and the 200-600 with the 2X teleconverter at the ready no need for the 1.4X due to going APS-C is 1.5x.
Most telephotos get a bad review like the 24-240 but from ground to eclipses is great to have. The biggest thing to remember is todays SW corrects any bad in a review, when I started PS and Lr both cost $800+ and for each full update and had to use the makers SW so from 2010 to now we are in heaven thanks to the programmers and lower costs.
Dude, What the H ? That Puffen or Puphen photo with a mouth full of fish, is award winning. Holy fesses 😮
Puffin
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puffin
@@pm-ec1fc you must be so much fun at parties
My first time using my 24-120 was also at the Grand Tetons and I instantly fell in love with this lens.
Got the same lens choice - except i have the F4 14-30mm (would love to upgrade to the 2.8) - Same reasons as you, but they also have an amazingly short/close up min-focus distance.
Recently got the 105mm Macro too - bloody brilliant!
I'm with you on the wide end. Love the 14-30 and still considering the 14-24. I'll keep both cuz the smaller weight and size of the f/4 is amazing for hiking. I went for the 20mm 1.8 for astro before replacing my 105mm macro from the DSLR days. The macro lens is next on my list unless I go for one of the super fast exotics. Lens purchases now on hold waiting for new announcements in the fall. My hopes? A 500mm pf lens native to the Z system.
That’s a great combination of lenses for a lightweight camera kit! I’m wondering if you gave any thought to the new Nikon 24-400. I don’t know if it would save weight but it would reduce amount of lenses to carry. But it wouldn’t replace your Astro lens.
Interesting video, which got me thinking about the lenses I use and my preferences, so thanks. I like the new studio set up by the way!
Great video. I own the 100-400 and 14-24. Great lenses. My mid-range, and most utilized, is the 24-200 f 4-6.3.
almost the same kit here, except I have the 180-600 instead of your 100-400. Both great lenses. we are truly fortunate to have such gear.
Hi Mark. I have been following your videos for quite sometime now. Do like them a lot. The way you explain things is so easy to understand. I have a question for you, though. I will be visiting Yellowstone and Teton in a month from now. I am looking forward to getting some beautiful landscape shots. Though I am an amateur in photography, primarily birds, I would like to have your views on...Will you recommend a polarising filter for landscape ?
Thanks Mark, I truly agree with you, and I can see I may be able to sell off some lenses, as like you, I rarely take images in the middle focal length, as I'm more of a Landscape/Nature photographer. I watched your recent video on the Z8 as well, and I'm contemplating it, or the Z6iii, as I'm more of an enthusiast/hobby photographer, and believe I could get similarly sharp images with it. Appreciate you showing us your images, very beautiful indeed!
I have almost the same setup as you, the 24-120 and the 100-400, but I have the 14-30 f4. I also have a x2 tele converter for the 100-400 to get me from 14 to 800. You might consider getting it, it is fantastic!
I also shoot with the Nikon Z8 (and Z9). Along with the Z8, I use those same three lenses which are in my “go” bag, the bag I use whenever I go out shooting landscapes, cityscapes, and night skies. I still use (and love) the Z9 primarily for event photography because of the incredible battery life and vertical grip. I can shoot all night and never think about whether or not I need to change the battery. For event photography, I will use a different lens lineup.
Another piece of gear you might want to add to your bag is the Z-mount 1.4x teleconverter to add a little more reach to your 100-400mm lens, if needed.
Oh, yeah, for sure. My 1.4x teleconverter on my 100-400 has been a read treat. I never had a teleconverter in 30 years of shooting until now. Well, to be fair, I never shot wildlife until getting my Z8 a few month ago and never had a lens longer that 200mm.
I agree with all your points. For my Canon RF setup I went all-f/4, including my wide-angle, and rent the f/2.8 when I anticipate serious astro shooting.
Hi Mark - thank you for sharing your favorite Z8 lenses with us. Much appreciated! I purchased a Z8 with a 24-120 f/4 lens about a month ago and I was wondering what L-bracket you purchased for your Z8? Also, what filters or filter system are you using for your lenses. Thanks again for your videos and for your enthusiasm.
Best - Richard
Hi again Mark - I read more of the comments and found the answer to my L-bracket question. (RRS) Thanks! Wondering about your filter setup? BTW, great channel!
I must be on the right track. After buying my Z5 I bought the 24-120mm f4 and sold all of my DSLR glass except my 80-400mm f4.5-5.6. Yes I have to use an adapter but I love this lens and it is super sharp on my Z5 even with the TC-14E iii teleconverter. I've been trying to decide if, as a hobbyist, I should spend the $2K+ on the 14-24mm or get the 20mm f1.8.
Nice kit 🙂 My usual landscape/ nature kit is the Z9 and or Z8 24-120, 100-400 and Tamron 15-30. May switch to a 14-24 Z at some point but the Tamron works fine. 🙂 plus I still have a D850 . When that goes out the F mount 24-120, 15-30 and either Tamron 70-200 or 150-600. For the 100-400 I have the 2x extender along. Has very good image quality.
Depending, the 150-600 might go out with the Z’s rather than 100-400. The 100-400 is a great lens.
I recently brought six lenses to Portugal on vacation. Of the three you mention, the only one I did not sue was my 100-400mm. My 24-105 was my go-to, especially for shooting the trams!
I have that same setup of cameras and lenses…I use the Kase 112mm magnetic filter set with a 112-77mm step down ring so I can use one set of filters on all three lenses!! The 112mm fits the 14-24mm lens and the step down ring from Kase as well fits everything else. It’s a beautiful set of filters and worth the investment as one set covers all 3 lenses and any other 77mm lens.
Thanks for the explanation you gave for the 14-24 2.8, totally made sense. I use to carry my 24-70 2.8, funny for the same reason as you stated, it’s one of the best in that range, but really don’t use 2.8 enough to justify the cost. After it was destroyed during a shot I end up getting the 24-70 f4 and very happy with it. But I like you idea for the 14-24 2.8 for that few occasions I shoot astro. Also thinking about getting the 180-600mm 5.6 - 6.3 for that occasion when I shoot wildlife 😂
I absolutely love my 24-120, it's on my camera 90-95% of the time...and ironically, the other two lenses you mentioned are definitely on my radar, especially the 100-400.
I love this trio (trinity, if you will) of focal ranges from Nikon. However, I shoot Sony and constantly struggle with the ideal focal ranges. I currently shoot the 20-70 f/4 G and the 70-200 f/4 Macro G II. I usually throw a 1.4 TC in my pocket, just in case I want to use it with the 70-200/Macro. The set of lenses, with the TC, weigh just over 3 lb and can easily be carried with an A7RV or A1 in a 7L shoulder bag, along with batteries, cards, filters, remote, cloths, and a few other odds & ends. They cover 90% of my needs and use the same filter thread. I will occasionally swap the 70-200 for a 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, or throw a 14mm f/1.8 in the bag. Heavier, it is a tight fit, and the extra 1 lb puts me right on the edge of comfort for longer hikes. The gaps in focal range are not much of an issue as I can crop to 37 megapixel and cover a 70-90 mm or 14-18 mm FOV. If I am carrying a backpack I will, typically, pack the 12-24 f/2.8, 24-105 f/4 and the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, which puts me at about the same weight as your setup, with a camera body. I do wish Sony made a 24-120, though. I could see it resulting in a lot fewer lens swaps with the 3 lens combination. If I were specifying an ideal lens trio for my setup, it would be a 12-24 f/2.8, 20-120 f/4 (as long as it was under 2 lb), and a 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 (under 2.5 lb). The problem with that is, I would probably get lazy, and just leave the 20-120 on my camera all the time. Finally, for a light weight single lens walk-around solution, the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6 is the ticket. Don’t think it’s available for Nikon yet.
Like the thinking and the line up. Mine is similar but I have the 70-200 F2.8 (plus a 2x converter for the extra reach) because the 100-400 wasn't available at the time. However, I don't see a good argument for changing it now.
Great video. I am currently switching from Fuji to Nikon. I have the z6III. 24-70 2.8 for weddings, 14-30 f4 for real estate photo and video. Going to get the 35 1.4 soon for wedding video.
I would love to see a video on how you setup your Z8 for Landscape Photography. I have a Z8 with a 14-30 and 24-120 Z Lenses. Thanks Ron
Thanks for sharing your 3 lens set up. As for filters, the 14-24 Nikon Z comes with HB 97 lens hood which is 112 mm. Now, if you purchase the Kase 112 magnetic filter kit, it works on the 14-24. The Kase kit also comes with a 77-112 adapter ring which you can place on the 24-120 and the 100-400. One set of filters works with all 3 lenses if you bring the proper lens hood for the 14-24. The Kase magnetic filter kit is great but very expensive.
Thank you Mark for the video. I agree with all your lens choices. I shoot Sony and Tamron. I have two mid range f2.8 lenses but my go to lenses are the 50-400 and the 17-28. On my two recent trips, I was able to capture all the images I needed with these two lenses. The 28mm- 50mm gap is not that bad. You are either shooting long or wide and you choose the lens that does the job.
I went with Sony about three years ago because of Tamron lens availability. I got into the game without having to spend Sony GM lens prices. I like Nikon's colors better. If I started over today, I would go with Nikon.
I absolutely love my Nikon 24-120 f/4. I had the 24-70 2.8 and it is incredible but didn’t use the wider apertures so returned it for the f/4 and the cash. The extra reach was worth more to me.
Great presentation. Just a few weeks ago I was planning my own kit around your "two lens for landscape" video, so thanks for the additional food for thought. :D
Glad to hear you enjoyed it!
I consider my lens selection complete with the 24-70 f2.8, the 70-200 f2.8, and the 100-500. I'm using them with my R6mII, and all of them are great pieces of glass ❤
Only lense I'm still considering for when I get a good price is the 100mm macro.
Hi Mark, as a Nikon-photograph (Z7) from Germany, i can follow your recommendations. In the long run i want to switch to the 24-120 and 100-400. But i will prefer the 4/14-30 to the 2.8/14-24. It´s not because of the range, but because of the filters. I can use regular filters of 82mm. I addition to the zoom i have the prime lenses Irix 2.5/15 and Nikon 1.8/20mm lens for Astrophotography and photos with a tiny depth of field. You don´t use prime lenses?
Mark, I am also interested in the tripod head brand you are currently using, and is it a geared head?
Almost your same kit! 14-30, 24-120,100-400 Z mount. Then I have a prime set. Viltrox 16 1.8 for Astro, 35 1.8 for family vacations, 85 1.8 for portraits. Then I just picked up a 600 6.3 PF for wild life but not 100% sold on needing it yet lol.
Mark my question to you use why not just use the 14-30 and go with a wide angle bright prime for Astro? They are small and cheap. Like the Viltrox 1.8. Wouldn’t that be better for Astro? Or did I do wrong lol
Oh, I totally agree about everything you said especially the mid-range 24-120mm Nikkor. I have nearly the same set-up as I just switched to mirrorless from the Nikon d810 to the Z8 about 8 months ago. Like you for landscapes, I only shot in wide (16-35) or telephoto (100mm prime), and I'd chuck a 50mm prime in the bag just in case. So, I was really ignoring the mid-range and quite happy to do so. And with my telephoto at only 100mm, I was always pining for more reach. Jumping to mirrorless with the Z8, I went with a similar set up: 14-30mm f4 and 100-400mm. But while in the store, at the last moment I was eyeing the 24-120mm and the salesman said that many were raving about it. So, as an afterthought, really, I threw in the 24-120mm in my purchase thinking it might be a decent walk-around lens. Oh, was I ever wrong. The 24-120 might be my most used lens, and out of my f4 trinity (14-30, 24-120, 100-400), it seems to be not only my most used lens but also my sharpest zoom. It blows my mind. Since I can't help myself, I went out and got a 50mm 1.8 for portraits and then a 20mm 1.8 for astro (all nikkor). I just love a prime, but the damn 24-120 really equals the primes in sharpness to my eyes. Who'd thunk it?
Thanks Mark!! I have 3 lenses: Tokina 11-20 2.8, Sigma 24-70 2.8 and Sigma 70-200 2.8 that I use for Landscapes. I also have a Sigma 40mm Prime 1.4 for Portraits and a Sigma 60-600 4.0-6.3 for Wildlife. I wish they were lighter but I opted for the better glass to go with my Canon 90D Crop Sensor Body. All the lenses are Full-Frame mountable except the Tokina so I won't have to buy new lenses when I finally go Full-Frame.
Great video! I actually just purchased 2 more lenses to complete my setup similar to yours with my Sony. I got a 20mm 1.8 for astro/night, and a 100-400 Sigma to complete the range around my 24-105 but now you got me thinking about a 14-24mm...
Curious, but how do you manage keeping the sensor free of dust/dirt when swapping lenses and ensure they're not on your sensor after you swap them? I recall the Z8 has a sensor shield, but I imagine dust can still get stuck inside and would bounce around in your bag.
Thank you as always!
For my Nikon z7II I use Z 24-120mm f4,, Z 20mm f1.8 and Z 100-400mm f4.5-5.6. They all use 77mm filters. Fills all my needs.
Do you have recommendations for canon brand ? That every landscape photographer should own?
Question on the 14-24, what filters are you using?
Hi, in compare with 16bit/102 mp gfx, now are you happy with 14bit/45 mp on Z8?!
Hi Mark. Can you suggest some budget alternatives for covering wide to long focal lengths? I already have a 18-55 kit lens and a 10-20 wide angle lens for Nikon D3400. But would like to switch to a better mid range lens and a cost effective telephoto lens.
Mark I own these exact lenses. How have you adapted your 14-24 to use magnetic filters? It’s a bit of a pain…
I admit to having nine lenses, but agree with your three main landscape lenses. I gravitated to the Panasonic MFT versus a full frame camera system because of the smaller weight and size, … and often cost. The MFT lenses I use most are (MFT sizes): 8-18, 12-60 and 50-200. I also make a lot use of my macro lens (amazing things to see when you get really close) and am making small advances with my 100-400 (200-800 FF equivalent) photographing birds and other wildlife. I have a few other lenses such as a 9mm (18mm FF equiv) f/1.7 for trying astro photography, a 14-140mm (24-280 FF equiv) that often has been THE travel lens, if I am packing small. I am a hobbyist only trying to make images that please me and to capture memories, happily doing both.
Love this content, been watching since the beginning!
Thanks so much!!
I would like to know if you have shot at max 400mm, on your telephoto. Are the pictures soft at that length ?
I’m only missing a wide angle lens! It’s on the list! So inspiring!
I got the 14-30mm f4 version from Nikkor and have been quite happy with it. It's virtually as good as the more expensive one and saves on not only weight but also cash. I love this lens but I've never shot with the 14-24mm. What my option did was cause me to go out and get a 20mm 1.8 for astro. Yes, the 2.8 for astro is good and wider, but personally, I prefer a faster prime for astro, which I find superior. Would I use the 2.8 for astro? You bet. But I'm happier with my prime for that purpose.
Hi! Thanks for the video. Have you had an opportunity to use the Nikon 24-400 lens? I'm considering a move to Nikon and getting this lens. It would simplify my kit.
Zoom lenses have come a long way. I do not feel the need for primes for my landscape work. I don't do weddings actively anymore but was asked to do one a few months ago. A borrowed Sigma 85 f1.4 save the day (the night!). Incredible lens and I shot it mostly at f1.4.
Nikon z6ii, 24-120 on most of the time, 20mm 1.8 for Astro and 100-400 for landscape and birds (1.4x converter soon) Really happy with this set up - amazing glass. Bodies come and go but the investment in good lens pays off.
I'm keen on getting the Viltrox 16mm 1.8 Z. Mainly for city night scenes & a bit of wedding photography & videography. I do have the 24-70mm 2.8 Z & the 70-200mm 2.8 Z. I do notice a lot of folks complaining about the weight of a Z9. I carry it around hand-held for hours with a 180-600mm - no problem. And I'm 70 years old. Cheers.
Rf 15-35 F2.8, RF 50 F1.2, RF 24-105 F4, RF 70-200 F4, RF 100 F2.8 macro, RF 100-500 F4-F7 (bought over several years)
Those are also my favorite 3 lenses. The 24-70 2.8 is the sharpest lens, but i am prefering the 24-120. You should add an 1.4 tc to the 100-400, small and light, unnoticeable in your bag an give you a longer reach when nedd it.
It's time for you to move to RF and get that 10-20mm! A killer lens I can't wait to own, but I've used it a bit and it's fantastic.
I would go for the f/4 24-120, but I also do a decent amount of concert and wedding/reception party shots with the f/2.8 24-70. I get the 24-120 for my frequent nature and landscapes, but im not sure it's worth it
Im using the f mount AF-S 24-120mm on my Z7. Do you have any thoughts on that? I like the sharpness as well but understand it wouldnt be as sharp as the Z equivalent.
The 24-120 has become very popular. It will be in my next kit for sure. Carry on. 👍🥂
Such a versatile lens!
What are your settings at 14mm to not have to focus stack?
Usually somewhere between f8 and f11
I’d love to add the 14-24 to my kit - got to save my pennies! I have kept my F70-200 2.8 in the bag because it makes a great indoor lens for photographing my small grandchildren
Just came back from Alaska and used the Tamron 28-200 the most. The Tamron 50-400 for some whale shots and Sony 16-35 for street photography. I wished I had brought my Sony 200-600 for the whales but it’s just too big to lug around. Next year we are going to Iceland and will bring the same lenses with my 2 bodies; Sony A74 and A7R5.
Mark, when deciding to go for the 14-24mm, did you consider that the 14-30mm lens is easier to use with filters than the 14-24mm?
I needed it to be f/2.8 since that's the lens I'd use for astro.
Great video, thanks. Mark, but why Nikon Z8? Why not Z7 II? Yes, I saw where you mentioned that you have large hands and the Z8 is comfortable. But the Z7 II is about 200 grams lighter, which is also important for hiking. The Z8 also has a curtain to protect the sensor from dust. This is also undoubtedly great. The Z8 has a fast processor, which means fast and accurate autofocus, fast continuous shooting. This is important for wildlife. But much less important for landscapes. But the Z7 II still has more attractive characteristics in terms of the sensor itself, a more interesting dynamic range, less noise. To be honest, the choice is not obvious. Six months ago, I myself was tormented by the choice between Canon R5 and Nikon Z8. The lenses I had for the old Canon 40D were not of particular value to me and I was ready to change the system. And at that time I chose Canon R5. I still do not know if it was the right choice. Because I haven't managed to travel and shoot landscapes in these six months (almost), but I've managed to shoot all sorts of birds and other animals in the place where I live. And I realized that my system lacks a full-fledged analogue of Nikon's Z 180-600 6.3. Canon RF 100-500 is still not a full-fledged replacement, and it's also insanely expensive. And the Sigma I have is not fast enough for birding and not precise enough. My Canon RF 100-400 f/8 is not long enough and too dark. At least it's very cheap)) Prime lenses like 600 f/4 - the price tag is completely outrageous. After all, photography is a hobby, not a way to earn money. If I had Nikon, I would most likely choose your version of the kit. And I would supplement it with something like an 85mm f/1.8 for portraits, a 105mm macro, and a 180-600mm for wildlife. And they all don't cost an astronomical amount of money. And it would really be the perfect kit for all occasions and for any type of photography that I prefer. The only thing is, if I had a 180-600, I would probably replace the 100-400 with a 70-200 f/2.8. Because after shooting birds at 600mm you already understand that 400 is not enough))
I use the Sony 12-24mm F/2.8 GM on my Sony A7RV for almost everything now, such a great focal range for my type of shooting and also very suitable for astro, the 2 mm from 14 to 12 is really something ;) For filter use I use the 16-35mm F/2.8 GM II. I own a lot of other lenses also but I hardly ever use them anymore. A 14mm F/1.8 GM for instance, but the 12-24 makes it obsolete and is even actually sharper. The loss in light for astro is to live with.
Over a few years I had accumulated the "Holy Trinity" while I had my D800 and D850. But last year, I finally relented and got a Z8 - absolutely awesome camera. Since then, I got the 24-120 and discovered that I rarely used the 24-70 F/2.8 anymore, so I sold it. I got an adapter for my 14-24 G and 70-200. I am thinking of keeping the wide angle since I don't use it all that often. BUT I'm slipping closer and closer to the edge to sell the 70-200, and then buy the 100-400Z. And here I thought I was over the "gotta have the next best thing" syndrome. I can justify it every time I look at the quality of the images.
Hi Mark, I am a big fan of your channel and really appreciate your journey. I am a canon user, and the R5 (20% lighter than Z8) with 15-35 2.8 (advantage in filter size, disadvantage 25% in weight), 24-105 4.0 (same filter and weight), and 100-500 (same filter, slightly less weight, more reach) is about $700 cheaper than your kit. However, I shoot a lot with a Nikon user, and the Z 24-120 made me get rid of my RF 24-105 for the RF 24-70. Z lens is fantastic, RF 24-70 is fantastic, RF 24-105 is NOT. Nice to have choices
Shared - nice to see you shoot (and love) wildlife! Excellent puffins!
So much fun!
As a landscape astrophotographer, I use something similar to you but all my wide angle lenses are prime. I carry 16mm f/1.8, 20mm f/1.4, 28mm f/1.4, 40mm f/1.4 and 50-400mm f/4.5-6.3. All the prime lenses are for shooting the milky way. The 50-400mm is for daytime shooting.
Real guy in real world 👍
Hi Mark, what is your go to tripod?
Funny, while I agree that the 24-120 is so useful (and usually my always on), my approach to get the same reach that you get with your 3 lens setup is using only 2 lenses. 14-30+28-400
Sure, not as open as you have it, but also much more affordable, und much less weight, when talking about hiking or travelling by plane. For Astro I'm aiming at the Viltrox 16mm/1.8 as special purpose lens. Not yet something that I'm doing a lot, so still on my wish list.
Talking of owned lenses, got a bit of GAS over the years, so beside the 3 mentioned on top have 105/2.8 for macro and a 150-600 for wildlife, both F mount lenses. Plus a few (Z) primes for playing around (28/2.8, 40/2, 50/1.8), mostly for getting better separation of objects.
On the APSC side only 3 lenses left for the Z50, absolutely based on weight. 16-50+50-250 Kit lenses + Viltrox 13/1.4.
I noticed you have a RRS L bracket. Why did you choose this one ?
Since I just got a new R7 I only have the kit 18-150mm and my "old" EF 50 1.8, kind of stumped on what to get since they all cost a pretty penny. I haven't even gotten ND filters yet
Excellent review!
50 f1.8
10-18 f4/5.6
25-104 f4L
100-400 f4L
But my point and shoot lens that sits on my Canon 800D most of the time is a 'lowly' Tamron 18-270 f3.5/6.3. It's the cheapest used lens I've ever bought at £100 but results from it are very good. Not in the 'L' class but not a million miles away either. And yes, I know the 1.6x crop factor makes almost all of them all longer - that effective 640mm reach on the long Canon is very useful and it's also the sharpest of all the lenses.
The 100-400 mm lens is amazing.
I sold my 24-70, 70-200, 35 (1.8), 500 pf… and now have the wide F4 lens , 24-120, 100-400… light and optimal… but added lately the 800 pf… for birds, so great (and somewhat crazy!) also have the 1.4 TC (with my Z9) would like the 600 pf as I liked so much my 500 pf… but can not justify it really!
Isn’t 14-30 f4 a better wide angle lens as it’s much smaller and lighter
I am wondering how wide should people get for astrophotography
I am a nikon user and I have 5. They are: 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and a 200-500 5.6. I probably sell the first two because i dont use them that much. I use Nikon D750 which I love, but want to switch to the Z8.
What is the height at which you take most of your photos out in the field?
I have z14-30 z24-120 z100-400 😃 good to hear a professional photographer
share the similar lens as mine 😅
Nice!!
I'm with you! Same setup here. Love, love it.
14-24 is an amazing lens. It’s sharp corner to corner and hardly any vignetting.
Yep - I'm super happy with it.