Z mount native lenses

[johnvanatta]

I don't think I can go as far as very good, at least not at the wide end. I don't mind low performance at f4, but I was really hoping things would be cleared up by f8. Distant objects in the corner never seem to get good at 24mm...like the mountain in the top right of this test shot. 24mm, f8. I can tell at a glance, without any scrutiny, that it looks bad. A limitation I'll have to compose around.

[armand]

It seems the new 14-30 is building up a bad rep in regards to its corners, particularly in the 14-17mm range. Some say it's fine and it's close to Sony 12-24 but there are many contrary opinions.

I'm sitting and thinking about the Nikon choices in new lenses and I'm not so sure they are the best choices. I compare to what Sony has in stock now.

For example.
Wide: the 14-30 is likely better than the 16-35 F4 but not than 12-24 F4 or 16-35 F2.8 . If the new 14-28 is not going to be significantly better than Sony's options than I don't see how they can explain the mount advantage they claim.

Allround lens: while the 24-70 F4 S is convenient and light the more versatile range from Sony, 24-105, is not that much heavier and is said to be sharp enough.

[faberryman]

I think the larger throat diameter advantage only plays out with fast aperture lenses with large rear elements. The 50mm f/1.8 S lens is only ranked 38th among lenses in DxOMark scores, so it was not much of an advantage for that lens. It is obviously no Otus (which ranked 2nd). Perhaps the upcoming 58mm f/0.95 S lens will be something special.

[kers]

.... The 50mm f/1.8 S lens is only ranked 38th among lenses in DxOMark scores, so it was not much of an advantage for that lens. It is obviously no Otus (which ranked 2nd). Perhaps the upcoming 58mm f/0.95 S lens will be something special.

Place 38 of ALL lenses and in a lot of ways more useful than the Otus.
It costs 1/6 of the price of an Otus...it weighs less than half...
It is a completely different animal.
It is weather protected unlike the Otus; it has AF unlike the Otus; It is made in a way focus breathing is low- for video.
Its image quality is very good and on par with the best 50mm lenses for FF like the Sigma 50mm

[faberryman]

Place 38 of ALL lenses and in a lot of ways more useful than the Otus.
It costs 1/6 of the price of an Otus...it weighs less than half...
It is a completely different animal.
It is weather protected unlike the Otus; it has AF unlike the Otus; It is made in a way focus breathing is low- for video.
Its image quality is very good and on par with the best 50mm lenses for FF like the Sigma 50mm

What does any of that have to do with the new dawn in optics announced with a larger throat diameter?

[kers]

I think the larger throat diameter advantage only plays out with fast aperture lenses with large rear elements...

I can partly agree with your first part...
The S bajonet /short flange gives also new design opportunities for wide angle lenses as the mentioned 14-30 f4 , a lens small, lightweight with good quality optics.

[BernardLanguillier]

I think the larger throat diameter advantage only plays out with fast aperture lenses with large rear elements. The 50mm f/1.8 S lens is only ranked 38th among lenses in DxOMark scores, so it was not much of an advantage for that lens. It is obviously no Otus (which ranked 2nd). Perhaps the upcoming 58mm f/0.95 S lens will be something special.

Sorry, but that is one smart comment if I have ever read one... and yes I am being ironic.

As already advised, read the list, the 50mm f1.8 is totally outstanding in absolute quality and its price to performance ratio is unheard of.

So if anything, this fully supports the claims made by Nikon about the additional design flexibility afforded by the new mount.

I have started to use the 14-30 f4 and my first impression is very positive but I’ll have to review more images to form a full opinion. Anyone expecting such a compact and affordable design to be perfect at all settling is not being realistic. To me it comes awfully close to being the ideal travel ultrawide and nobody else is even trying to compete with this form factor.

Cheers,
Bernard

[hogloff]

Sorry, but that is one smart comment if I have ever read one... and yes I am being ironic.

As already advised, read the list, the 50mm f1.8 is totally outstanding in absolute quality and its price to performance ratio is unheard of.

So if anything, this fully supports the claims made by Nikon about the additional design flexibility afforded by the new mount.

I have started to use the 14-30 f4 and my first impression is very positive but I’ll have to review more images to form a full opinion. Anyone expecting such a compact and affordable design to be perfect at all settling is not being realistic. To me it comes awfully close to being the ideal travel ultrawide and nobody else is even trying to compete with this form factor.

Cheers,
Bernard

But if the Nikon mount provides such an advantage in lens design...why the heavy software correction on the 14-30 zoom?

[BernardLanguillier]

But if the Nikon mount provides such an advantage in lens design...why the heavy software correction on the 14-30 zoom?

Because providing an important advantage isn’t synonym to making a compact, cheap and imperfection free lens possible?

Cheers,
Bernard

[faberryman]

Because providing an important advantage isn’t synonym to making a compact, cheap and imperfection free lens possible.

The Nikon 14-30mm f/4 S lens costs $1300, so while compact, it is not cheap.

[KLaban]

What does any of that have to do with the new dawn in optics announced with a larger throat diameter?

Do you loose sleep over those emails promising you untold wealth or a larger penis?

[faberryman]

Do you loose sleep over those emails promising you untold wealth or a larger penis?

No, which is why I am taken in by Nikon's large throat diameter marketing. Of course fan boys think these new S lenses are the second coming.

[KLaban]

No, which is why I am taken in by Nikon's large throat diameter marketing. Of course fan boys think these new S lenses are the second coming.

How did you find them?

[faberryman]

How did you find them?

People referring to them of LuLa.

[BernardLanguillier]

No, which is why I am taken in by Nikon's large throat diameter marketing. Of course fan boys think these new S lenses are the second coming.

Fine... if the mount has nothing to do with it, then only the superior lens technology of Nikon can explain the measured performance and price perfo/ratio of lenses such as the 50mm f1.8 S.

Does that work better for you?

Cheers,
Bernard

[jtmiller]

As a retired systems engineer who owns none of the new Z cameras or lenses:

A lens designer has to trade off a lot of variables to minimize quite a few distortions as well as achieve some additional desirable results like minimal breathing, minimal flare, etc.

If a solution is found that allows one of those distortion minimizations to be delegated to software with acceptable outcome and as a result improve the results in the remainder, what is the complaint?

The system of hardware, optics and software produce a digital result, not an analog film one. There is no perfect choice, only tradeoffs.

I guess I don't see the issue.

BWDIK

jim

[hogloff]

As a retired systems engineer who owns none of the new Z cameras or lenses:

A lens designer has to trade off a lot of variables to minimize quite a few distortions as well as achieve some additional desirable results like minimal breathing, minimal flare, etc.

If a solution is found that allows one of those distortion minimizations to be delegated to software with acceptable outcome and as a result improve the results in the remainder, what is the complaint?

The system of hardware, optics and software produce a digital result, not an analog film one. There is no perfect choice, only tradeoffs.

I guess I don't see the issue.

BWDIK

jim

I don't see the issue with using software to cleanup the optics...but it was touted here and many other places how this larger mount will allow much better lenses ( optics ) than other mounts. I'm not seeing the optics being any better...just average with software cleanup...sort of like the phone cameras.

[armand]

From the examples I saw the software was correcting the distortion but in the process it was stretching the corners and make the resolution worse, in some examples the starting point wasn’t that bad but after correction there was a significant deterioration. In other examples it just went from bad to worse.

[kers]

i completely agree - auto distortion is a bad thing. At all times it should be able to turn it off.

[faberryman]

Fine... if the mount has nothing to do with it, then only the superior lens technology of Nikon can explain the measured performance and price perfo/ratio of lenses such as the 50mm f1.8 S. Does that work better for you?

It certainly makes more sense since Nikon has other DxOMark 44 lenses in the smaller F-mount. The 50mm like the 85mm are the simpliest to design with a wide aperture and so, as expected, are less expensive than the others. Let's see how the other Z mount lenses fare at DxO before jumping to conclusions as to the cause for their good performance.