Yup I have this for my Z6 and use it for a portable set up. Been using it for a few months and loving it so far. Great for taking out on the town or to friends and family get togethers for a nice light set up.. Also noticed the colour right out of camera on this lens is REALLY pleasing..
I have the z50 with the two lenses and would like to get something faster. Do you think I would be better off getting this lens or buying the ftz adaptor to attach the 35 mm f2.8 that I already have. Would appreciate your thoughts.
The 35 is more of a 50mm on DX whereas this is closer to what a 35 would be so it kind of depends what focal length you want… Personally I’d go with this over adapting the 35 1.8 DX
I bought this lens and the 50mm f1.8 for my z6ii, and I am thinking about buying the 35mm f1.8. May I ask whether the image quality of the 35mm f1.8 is a lot better than this 28mm f2.8 given that's a "s" lens?
I own both lenses. The 35/1.8S is notably sharper in the corners and has very little to no CA at all. The 28/2.8 is very sharp in the centre and less so in the very edges. Still good. Displays purple fringing in high contrast areas. The S lens is optically better and has nicer quality bokeh. But that comes at the cost of size, weight and a higher price. It’s a pro grade lens. The 28 isn’t. Having said that, the 28 is wonderful for casual and travel photography. But if I could only have one it would be the 35/1.8S.
Just bought a z5 with a 50mm 1.8. As a second lens, would you prefer the 28mm 2.8 or the DX 50-250mm 4.5-6.3 VR lens? I bought this camera to hopefully turn this hobby to a profession. On Nikon’s website, they have a 26mm coming soon so i am hoping it is announced during CES next week.
Hi there, nice review! I wanted to ask you, is there a reason to get this lens if I already have Zfc with both kit zooms, so is 28 2.8 sharper and more versatile (for stills), than 28mm on 16-50 kit lens? Or should I watch something else, like 40 f2 or S lenses? Thank you in advance for your opinion.
This is such a great question, thank you for asking. My answer may be a bit of a cop out but stick with me. It’d be a great addition to your kit… if you like that focal length. The benefit of the 28mm is the aperture of 2.8 so it’s better for low light and allows you to get deeper out of focus areas and subject separation. I’d also argue it’s sharper to a degree as well. If you want to get closer and think the 40mm would be better, I’d get the 50mm 1.8 S instead. It is CRAZY sharp, and used not much more than the 40mm f2. It is bigger and heavier but it’s a step up for sure. On a Zfc it’s be a great portrait lens for instance. Hope that kind of helps. I’d say it’s only worth upgrading from the two kit lenses if you feel limited. Work out what you feel limited by and then buy accordingly. 🙂
Never understood why this has been heavily marketed as a dx lens. 2.8 is pretty slow on crop especially if you want to achieve a narrow depth of field. I was really hoping this would have been f2.
My guess is it’d have changed the size? I’m not sure to be honest. I do like it on DX, not quite sure I agree on DoF being an issue but maybe it’s just how I shoot. The 40mm F2 is excellent so far fyi
The 28mm 2.8 Nikkor is a pretty nice lens, so it survived the updates to auto-focus and now the Z-mount. However, there was a 28mm 2.0 manual lens which is significantly superior, one of the best lenses Nikon ever made. So why didn't it make the change up to auto-focus, then Z? Probably because it was relatively expensive to make and sold at a much higher price than other 28mm Nikkors. In its day, the pricing resulted in relatively few sales, and that probably would have continued. The 2.8 had a good reputation, was fairly cheap to make, and Nikon was facing the same economic pressure as all other manufacturers at the time. Much more profitable to drop the manual 28mm 2.0 and 3.5 going to auto-focus, particularly as popular interest was in zooms, not primes. Need for profit has turned Nikon into just one more of the bunch, rather than the "make the best you can" company of past years. The horizon for cameras like these, and their lenses, isn't that far off, so there is little interest in expensive product development when you can just slip a 40 year old product into a new, plastic skin and sell it marked up double what it cost a few years ago.
Is there a difference in AF between the Z5 and Z6. I did watch a video where a Z5 was used with this lens or the 40mm F2 and really didn't work well. Trouble is I now can't find the video so I don't know which lens it was having a difficulty with.
The IQ is really good, especially compared to the older pro f-mount lenses. Often heavy vignetting bit of a let down. Interesting video, 10 minutes+ with a lot of talking :)
All I know is my Nikon D750 was built in Thailand and it is really badly built. Skin came off twice Eyecup came off within weeks Live view button dropped off Port doors buckled. Shutter replaced. (Nikon design problem) Ive also watched a video were a Nikon Z6 had all the same issues (except eyecup). I just think they are cutting corners now to get in as much cash. My D700 was built really well no comparison to the D750. I'm really not sure about sticking with them. Just waiting for the Z6III / Z8 to see what they will do mid market. But Im probably going to get a A74.
I think it started off as the China vs Japan convo and just escalated from there. People just assume China therefore cheap and not well made (which obv is rubbish these days) but it’s just a convo that persists. @Mark Shirley, sounds like a bad experience but equally I’ve had the same happen on a D1 and D300 all made in Japan at the time… rubber coming off, aputure base plate failing, I’ve had AF-S motors go on relatively new Japan lenses and a VR failure actually… It can happen at any factory - but I don’t think the Thai factory is any more or less prone to it than the Japan one
@@markshirley01 A7IV definitely isn't an upgrade. I almost made the switch from Nikon to it as well, but further research away from paid RUclips reviews is its is very cheaply made, the body actually caves in at the back when pressing the screen, the Eye AF is having issues locking on the opposite eye that is chosen or only puts the eyebrow in focus, the overheating is happening when taking stills as well now and the Z5 and Z6 still beat it in image quality. Nikon really needs to step their game up and get us a camera out that performs to our needs, but certainly don't downgrade to a camera that is already having so many issues.
As some who is just getting into photography over the last 2 years and is primarily using pretty ancient equipment by today's standards, I can never understand why having a body/lens with image stabilization is so important? Like I understand it's nice, but it's always seemed like a luxury, not a necessity
I guess one’s kind of move on? IBIS, VR gives more creative opportunity, shooting at 1/10 handheld and getting useable results makes a lot of things possible. Essentially more keepers across the board 🙂
I think lenses like the 18-55 prove that Nikon can make that tech plenty small. Personally I’d prefer it to have been slightly bigger and include it, especially on lenses that are so readily paired with the DX Z lineup
Call me picky, you have discussed the lens but you haven’t really tested it! At f2.8 is it sharp in the corners? Does it vignette? Does it have distortion? Lens hood issues? How long is the focus throw and is it easy to manually focus?
🤷♂️ whatever you say? I mean I can only give my opinion, I used it for a couple of months and gave my verdict. From my perspective. A lot of people find this style useful, some don’t. If I try to be all things to all people I guarantee people would complain about the length. I‘m not a channel that’s going to do deep analysis of every aperture, and every situation where you might use it. If that’s what you’re looking for there are a lot of channels doing that and I hope they give you the information that you’re looking for 🙂. That being said, I’ll keep it in mind for future, maybe I’ll add some other parts. I generally find sample photos more useful than exact stats, to help people come to their own conclusions before a purchase.
Yup I have this for my Z6 and use it for a portable set up. Been using it for a few months and loving it so far. Great for taking out on the town or to friends and family get togethers for a nice light set up.. Also noticed the colour right out of camera on this lens is REALLY pleasing..
What's the AF like - Ive heard its a bit hit and miss.
Nikon has a very long history of producing stellar 28mm lenses.
Definitely some truth there but this was is surpassingly good despite the relatively small size 🙂
lovely little lens, cheers for a nice review
Thanks buddy! Appreciate it 🙂
I have the z50 with the two lenses and would like to get something faster. Do you think I would be better off getting this lens or buying the ftz adaptor to attach the 35 mm f2.8 that I already have. Would appreciate your thoughts.
The 35 is more of a 50mm on DX whereas this is closer to what a 35 would be so it kind of depends what focal length you want…
Personally I’d go with this over adapting the 35 1.8 DX
26mm or 28mm? Which is the best option?
I bought this lens and the 50mm f1.8 for my z6ii, and I am thinking about buying the 35mm f1.8. May I ask whether the image quality of the 35mm f1.8 is a lot better than this 28mm f2.8 given that's a "s" lens?
I own both lenses. The 35/1.8S is notably sharper in the corners and has very little to no CA at all.
The 28/2.8 is very sharp in the centre and less so in the very edges. Still good. Displays purple fringing in high contrast areas.
The S lens is optically better and has nicer quality bokeh. But that comes at the cost of size, weight and a higher price. It’s a pro grade lens. The 28 isn’t.
Having said that, the 28 is wonderful for casual and travel photography. But if I could only have one it would be the 35/1.8S.
There’s not a huge amount in it but the S lenses are better in my opinion. A bit sharper and control distortion better
So the stabilisation on a Z6 will be provided bei the VR function only right? Digital not mechanical
Yes on the Z6 In Body Image Stabilisation (sensor shifting) is what gives you the equivalent of VR.
@@HamerReviews thank you!
Just bought a z5 with a 50mm 1.8. As a second lens, would you prefer the 28mm 2.8 or the DX 50-250mm 4.5-6.3 VR lens?
I bought this camera to hopefully turn this hobby to a profession. On Nikon’s website, they have a 26mm coming soon so i am hoping it is announced during CES next week.
With a Z5 I’d get the 24-50 or 24-70 F4 lenses - the DX lens wouldn’t be good on that camera
Hi there, nice review! I wanted to ask you, is there a reason to get this lens if I already have Zfc with both kit zooms, so is 28 2.8 sharper and more versatile (for stills), than 28mm on 16-50 kit lens? Or should I watch something else, like 40 f2 or S lenses? Thank you in advance for your opinion.
This is such a great question, thank you for asking. My answer may be a bit of a cop out but stick with me.
It’d be a great addition to your kit… if you like that focal length. The benefit of the 28mm is the aperture of 2.8 so it’s better for low light and allows you to get deeper out of focus areas and subject separation. I’d also argue it’s sharper to a degree as well. If you want to get closer and think the 40mm would be better, I’d get the 50mm 1.8 S instead. It is CRAZY sharp, and used not much more than the 40mm f2. It is bigger and heavier but it’s a step up for sure. On a Zfc it’s be a great portrait lens for instance. Hope that kind of helps.
I’d say it’s only worth upgrading from the two kit lenses if you feel limited. Work out what you feel limited by and then buy accordingly. 🙂
@@HamerReviews thank you!
i'm using nikon z6, if i go out of my house or on travel and need to carry only one lens which one will you recommend between 28mm f2.8 and 40mm f 2.0
I would probably pick the 28mm as I prefer a wider focal length.
Nice review. 🤙🏼
Just ordered one for a “fun” daily carry lens. You’re review was very helpful, thank you.
Very glad it was 🙂
Never understood why this has been heavily marketed as a dx lens. 2.8 is pretty slow on crop especially if you want to achieve a narrow depth of field. I was really hoping this would have been f2.
My guess is it’d have changed the size? I’m not sure to be honest. I do like it on DX, not quite sure I agree on DoF being an issue but maybe it’s just how I shoot. The 40mm F2 is excellent so far fyi
The 28mm 2.8 Nikkor is a pretty nice lens, so it survived the updates to auto-focus and now the Z-mount. However, there was a 28mm 2.0 manual lens which is significantly superior, one of the best lenses Nikon ever made. So why didn't it make the change up to auto-focus, then Z? Probably because it was relatively expensive to make and sold at a much higher price than other 28mm Nikkors. In its day, the pricing resulted in relatively few sales, and that probably would have continued. The 2.8 had a good reputation, was fairly cheap to make, and Nikon was facing the same economic pressure as all other manufacturers at the time. Much more profitable to drop the manual 28mm 2.0 and 3.5 going to auto-focus, particularly as popular interest was in zooms, not primes. Need for profit has turned Nikon into just one more of the bunch, rather than the "make the best you can" company of past years. The horizon for cameras like these, and their lenses, isn't that far off, so there is little interest in expensive product development when you can just slip a 40 year old product into a new, plastic skin and sell it marked up double what it cost a few years ago.
Another great video
Thank you!
Looks solid!
Is there a difference in AF between the Z5 and Z6.
I did watch a video where a Z5 was used with this lens or the 40mm F2 and really didn't work well. Trouble is I now can't find the video so I don't know which lens it was having a difficulty with.
The IQ is really good, especially compared to the older pro f-mount lenses. Often heavy vignetting bit of a let down. Interesting video, 10 minutes+ with a lot of talking :)
Agreed l, glad you find it interesting! 🙂
The whole Thailand vs Japan factory thing seems very strange. Where did that debate come from?
All I know is my Nikon D750 was built in Thailand and it is really badly built.
Skin came off twice
Eyecup came off within weeks
Live view button dropped off
Port doors buckled.
Shutter replaced. (Nikon design problem)
Ive also watched a video were a Nikon Z6 had all the same issues (except eyecup).
I just think they are cutting corners now to get in as much cash. My D700 was built really well no comparison to the D750. I'm really not sure about sticking with them. Just waiting for the Z6III / Z8 to see what they will do mid market. But Im probably going to get a A74.
I think it started off as the China vs Japan convo and just escalated from there. People just assume China therefore cheap and not well made (which obv is rubbish these days) but it’s just a convo that persists.
@Mark Shirley, sounds like a bad experience but equally I’ve had the same happen on a D1 and D300 all made in Japan at the time… rubber coming off, aputure base plate failing, I’ve had AF-S motors go on relatively new Japan lenses and a VR failure actually…
It can happen at any factory - but I don’t think the Thai factory is any more or less prone to it than the Japan one
And fair enough about going Sony, you need to pick the best tool for the job, the Canon kit is worth checking out too, very impressive
@@markshirley01 A7IV definitely isn't an upgrade. I almost made the switch from Nikon to it as well, but further research away from paid RUclips reviews is its is very cheaply made, the body actually caves in at the back when pressing the screen, the Eye AF is having issues locking on the opposite eye that is chosen or only puts the eyebrow in focus, the overheating is happening when taking stills as well now and the Z5 and Z6 still beat it in image quality. Nikon really needs to step their game up and get us a camera out that performs to our needs, but certainly don't downgrade to a camera that is already having so many issues.
The Z7ii and Z9 are built in Thailand so the quality has to be good.
Is good for portraits ?
Yep! As long as it’s environmental ones as it’s a bit short to just get head and shoulder style shots
As some who is just getting into photography over the last 2 years and is primarily using pretty ancient equipment by today's standards, I can never understand why having a body/lens with image stabilization is so important? Like I understand it's nice, but it's always seemed like a luxury, not a necessity
I guess one’s kind of move on? IBIS, VR gives more creative opportunity, shooting at 1/10 handheld and getting useable results makes a lot of things possible. Essentially more keepers across the board 🙂
vr would make the lens bigger and heavier.. kind of a weird gripe to have with it
I think lenses like the 18-55 prove that Nikon can make that tech plenty small. Personally I’d prefer it to have been slightly bigger and include it, especially on lenses that are so readily paired with the DX Z lineup
Nice review, well presented… but… you maybe should consider changing that table… 😜. But - well done 👍
Call me picky, you have discussed the lens but you haven’t really tested it! At f2.8 is it sharp in the corners? Does it vignette? Does it have distortion? Lens hood issues? How long is the focus throw and is it easy to manually focus?
🤷♂️ whatever you say? I mean I can only give my opinion, I used it for a couple of months and gave my verdict. From my perspective. A lot of people find this style useful, some don’t. If I try to be all things to all people I guarantee people would complain about the length.
I‘m not a channel that’s going to do deep analysis of every aperture, and every situation where you might use it. If that’s what you’re looking for there are a lot of channels doing that and I hope they give you the information that you’re looking for 🙂.
That being said, I’ll keep it in mind for future, maybe I’ll add some other parts. I generally find sample photos more useful than exact stats, to help people come to their own conclusions before a purchase.
why not z28-75/2.8
It’s a rebranded tamron lens so I’m not really in love with that one but it’s on my list to check out
Good lens, i have it. I treat it as pancake lens. Quality is good for cheapstreet wide lens
This kind of review is too old fashion and boring, try to do more interesting presentation.
Feel free to watch someone else’s content 🙂 - not everything appeals to everyone.
Good luck.
I like your reviews both for the content (without obsessive pixel peeping) and your relaxed style. Don‘t be put off by trolls.