Nikkor Z 28-135mm f/4 PZ officially Announced

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).



Today's official release coincides with Nikon announcing their updated RED cameras with Z mount and a significant firmware upgrade


18 elements in 13 groups (including 3 ED elements, 1 aspherical ED element, 4 aspherical elements) - optimal selections of Nikon Hikari proprietary optical glass

Elements with Meso Amorphous Coat (flare reduction)

Fluorine Coat (protective)

Screenshot_2025-02-13-10-20-01-599.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.


Screenshot_2025-02-13-10-20-36-206.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_2025-02-13-10-20-11-269.jpeg
    Screenshot_2025-02-13-10-20-11-269.jpeg
    145.3 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:

 
More on this topic in the thread below.

 
Yes, I think you are correct. Looking at Petapixel's video, it seems quite different. Only the focal length range in common.
The Matt Irwin video, based on shooting with it for around 6 weeks indicates numerous video centric features including an ability to zoom smoothly to 310mm equivalent in 4 k on a Z9, a "focus ring" compatible with an apparently common external geared drive standard, a hood compatible with matt boxes and a 95mm front filter size.
 
Is this lens made for stills or video only?
I understand that the lens doesn’t care how it is being used, my question is, if there is any benefit for stills shooters?
 
Is this lens made for stills or video only?
I understand that the lens doesn’t care how it is being used, my question is, if there is any benefit for stills shooters?
Only that it has internal zoom. It looks pretty good optically too. But the 24-120/4 makes a lot more sense for stills or even hybrid shooting.
 
Is this lens made for stills or video only?
I understand that the lens doesn’t care how it is being used, my question is, if there is any benefit for stills shooters?
Apart from the power zoom, I'm not sure you'd get any advantage over the 24-120 that's worth paying double the price. It has very little focus breathing, but so does the 24-120 (if you want to have that possibility for the occasional video). Maybe the fact the centre of gravity doesn't change as much, but it's not a super-heavy lens anyway.

Or perhaps it can increment the aperture more precisely? Even if it was possible, I don't know if the current Z cameras would support that, though.

EDIT: The weight and that big filter size alone would make me think twice...
 
Last edited:
A quick comparison. As someone who designed lenses, I'd say it's an "updated version" of the old Sony, probably manufactured by Tamron (which is a Sony affiliated company).

Same weight, aperture, features, size, front filter and price. Control buttons in the same place. MTF charts very similar and differences can be attributed to testing.

As far as optical design, same number of elements, same distribution of aspherical, ED and standard elements. The front and back of the optical train is identical, the middle is reconfigured.

I owned the 10yr old Sony which created a buzz as one of the first "hybrid" lenses. But sold it quickly as the only distinguishing feature was the power zoom which is a gimmick feature not important for my work. Otherwise it's heavy and optically mediocre to my eyes, certainly not as good as the G Master I now use.
N V S .jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
There’s a similar thread here
 
I’m getting GAS attack! Save me. 😂😂😂
I have the wonderful z24-120 and while my photography skills are absent, my video skills are a pigment of what little creativity I have.

I love the fact that there are some interesting new design features. I hope to see them rolled out to new non video lenses too.
 
The lens targets ENG people who are OK with its zoom range. It is a step up from the 28-400mm (with Synchro VR) that also has video features not found with most Nikon lenses. For wildlife video at the pro level the lens offerings from Canon make it the first choice.
 
I’m getting GAS attack! Save me. 😂😂😂
I have the wonderful z24-120 and while my photography skills are absent, my video skills are a pigment of what little creativity I have.

I love the fact that there are some interesting new design features. I hope to see them rolled out to new non video lenses too.
Haha, you and I both. I thought about getting this one as soon as I saw early rumours, I am sure my Missus will rip me a new one though. But it would be great as a travel-videography lens.

Now I need you folks to give me a few pointers to justify:

1. Your name
2. your years of experience
3. Your genre
4. List at least 10 points down

:)
 
But it would be great as a travel-videography lens.
Video I find is more about movement within a timeframe than ultimate pixel peeping resolution for a single image.

While I prefer to await feedback from experience video users, I get the impression it is better suited to long steady zooms offset by a little less bokeh ability in the corners at the telephone end of the just 2 focal lengths MTF provided.

For travel stills the lighter possibly resolution and overall bokeh better 24-120 is likely to remain my choice.
While I do not do much video, I think the 95 mm front element of this first "Z Cinema" lens and huge lens hood would make it less suitable for travel.

I am impressed by the "portrait with movement" clips released so far but note the use of gimbals, mics, external monitors etc to get the best out of it - once appropriate new skills have been mastered.
 
Movement, yes and Tonality or rather tonal range, also OFZ rendering. At least judging from how dynamic Range is a dominant concept in discussions and arguments about video on the internet.

.... the Yang to video as Sharpness is the Yin of debates about still photography
 
Last edited:
A quick comparison. As someone who designed lenses, I'd say it's an "updated version" of the old Sony, probably manufactured by Tamron (which is a Sony affiliated company).

Same weight, aperture, features, size, front filter and price. Control buttons in the same place. MTF charts very similar and differences can be attributed to testing.

As far as optical design, same number of elements, same distribution of aspherical, ED and standard elements. The front and back of the optical train is identical, the middle is reconfigured.

I owned the 10yr old Sony which created a buzz as one of the first "hybrid" lenses. But sold it quickly as the only distinguishing feature was the power zoom which is a gimmick feature not important for my work. Otherwise it's heavy and optically mediocre to my eyes, certainly not as good as the G Master I now use.
View attachment 107159
If that’s the case, judging from the MTF charts, whatever updates that were made resulted in a significantly sharper lens especially so on the wide end.
 
Last edited:
The schematic diagrams are obviously different.

If this high profile Nikkor zoom is designed and manufactured by Nikon, them it's Hikari Glass, which opens up the choices of ~140 types of glass for spherical lenses and ~20 types for aspherical lenses..... We know from the 58 f0.95S that what's coded as ED glass in the marketing schematics could well represent any of several different chemical formulae in the actual optical glass used to minimize chromatic aberrations.


Irrespective of MTF charts, the proprietary Nikon lens coatings will reduce flare, not least use of Meso Amorphous Coat.

Moreover, the mount geometry is distinctly different. Improved telecentricity should improve resolution etc in the corners.
 
Back
Top