I'm shooting the 14-30mm (since the middle of last year) and was lucky to grab a 24-200mm. Most of my experience with this scarce lens confirms all the good reviews I've read about it.
Comparted to my 14-24 2.8, the f/4 version is less prone to flare and shooting into the sun makes great stars at small apertures shooting landscape. My 2.8 even ghosted when the sun was behind me and forget about filters easily. The 14-24 2.8 was a great lens in its day on the F-system, IMO.
Since I'm older and hate packing as much stuff around, I opted originally to shoot with the 24-70 f/4 and 70-200 f/4 w/ftz adapted lenses and was quite happy until I lucked into the 24-200. That lens has replaced the other two though it's slow and the mid-to-long end compared to either.
For several years I was shooting m43 with a 14-150 and a 7-14. The IQ was fine and the video easy to do with that system and the size and weight were liberating! But out of 6-7 bodies I shot during these 4-5 years, only three are still working as they all had issues of one kind or another and several died. The build of the bodies just isn't as good as any of my Nikon bodies... And then there's the low-light I'm always shooting under. The files took a lot of work but still the photos came out fine. So I found that it was time to upgrade back to a more robust platform, though size and weight increased in the equation.
Now with a pair of Z 6 bodies and two lenses, I'm a very happy camper! Both lenses are more than capable of great image quality for 24mp and I'm not missing the higher res of the 800-810-850 and Z 7 bodies. I'd love it if the Z 6 had a sensor-shift like the Olympus EM-5 II which worked great when I needed more pixels for a few shots now and then, but overall, the 24mp files I get is pretty darn nice overall. I'd like a little more speed with my lenses, but even shooting higher ISOs, the IQ is fine even with these slower lenses. It's a little sacrifice for smaller and lighter hardware.
I've printed up to 60x40 with the Z 6 and have made some larger prints with the newer 24-200. I probably wouldn't image quality issues doing a 60x40 from it from what I've seen so far.
This week, I went retro on one Z 6 shooting with a vintage Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 zone focused and high-tech on the other with the 24-200. A small family vineyard and a hand-harvest of the grapes was my domain from the morning until early afternoon. It was nice simply putting both bodies on A, setting the ISO for "Tri-X" and just shooting away. At the end of the day, I was covered with dust and the grape juice from picking leaves from the bins crated a layer of mud on both cameras. I was perpetually blowing the dust off the front elements of both!
From the day's shooting 1/3 got tagged and overall, about 10% made the loose edit. From there seven rose to the top and five were from the Elmarit-M set for point-and-shoot. The other two were with the 24-200 at either end of the focal length. Overall, I was pleased with the results.
Since getting the 24-200, it has seldom come off the Z 6. I've photographed a few weddings, all outdoors, a baptism and betrothal, both starting outside then continuing into a historic church with a dark interior, photographed lots of landscape and fall colors in the Sierra Nevada. So far, little not to like about this lens and the 14-30. I've seldom used a tripod with the image stabilization with either lens, making me more mobile. I wish the 24-200 had a little more reach, like on my m43 all-in-one zooms, but I've got the long covered with the FTZ and lots of glass from years shooting the Nikon F system.
And then there's the ability to use nearly any vintage lens on the Z bodies is such a great joy especially this week's shooting with a nearly 40 year old lens and other opportunities I've taken shooting Leica glass from the 1950s that hasn't aged too well! Yet, with the key focal lengths now covered, many with redundancy and longer lenses on the way, it's down right fun again to go out and shoot!