Nikon 50mm Z-Mount Experience?

[Whiskeyman]

Does anyone here own and use any of the Nikon 50mm Z-Mount lenses? If so, what model and what are your impressions of it?

How about the 40mm f/2? (Although I'm wary of Nikon compact design lenses after owning the 50mm E-Series (Economy) lens that was part of a kit with my Nikon FM or FE a long time ago.)

What I see on the Nikon Z-Lens roadmap are 50mm lenses with maximum apertures of f/2.8, f/1.8 and f/1.2. I'm not sure why Nikon isn't going to offer the lens in a f/1.4 aperture. (Which, to me, is very desirable, yet shouldn't be as expensive as the f/1.2 version.) This missing option in the Nikon lineup has me strongly considering the Sigma Art Series 50mm f/1.4 instead of one of Nikon's 50mm offerings.

Thank you.

 

[John_DE]

I own the f/1.8 Z 50mm and I’m very pleased with it. However, I photograph mostly wildlife and some landscapes. I use the 50mm for people and some night photography. The f/1.8 works well on IR converted camera bodies with no hot spots and I do use it on a 720nm converted Z6.

For my uses, I have no need for a faster 50mm lens.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I own the f/1.8 Z 50mm and I’m very pleased with it. However, I photograph mostly wildlife and some landscapes. I use the 50mm for people and some night photography. The f/1.8 works well on IR converted camera bodies with no hot spots and I do use it on a 720nm converted Z6.

For my uses, I have no need for a faster 50mm lens.

Thank you, John_DE.

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

The 40/2 is exceptional value for money. But then so is the 50/1.2 -- it all depends on one's use case. [I own and use both]

 

[Whiskeyman]

The 40/2 is exceptional value for money. But then so is the 50/1.2 -- it all depends on one's use case. [I own and use both]

Thank you, ajm057. What do you think of the "build quality" of the 40/2?

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

It is cheap and plastic - but so what - the images it produces are great and it is perfect as a walkabout street lens - together with the 28/2.8 SE.
I use the 40/2 with a screw on metal lens hood.
AND I have not broken the 40/2 yet so it must be strong / robust enough for a gorilla like me to use.

 

[EricBowles]

I've got the Z 50mm f/1.8. It's a terrific lens and you can use it at f/1.8 or f/2. In the past, my 50mm f/1.4 was not sharp - just fast at f/1.4. You had to stop it down for sharpness.

I have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art. For stills, it's fine, but I could not use it recently for video because it was too noisy. I like the sharpness of the Sigma, but it's heavier and more expensive with a small benefit in image quality over the Z alternative. But the Z 50mm f/1.8 is a very good lens as well as being less expensive than the faster Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, and I think the Nikon has the edge.

The 40mm f/2 is a different kind of lens. It's certainly pretty good, but not as good as the faster primes. But the 40mm is so small you can just throw it in your pocket or camera bag without any worry about weight or even whether you'll need it. It's a very good option for a compact kit.

 

[Jamie Baker]

The 40 is so small, lightweight, and pretty dang sharp! Very affordable too. I have one in my bag for low light stuff, rarely used really.

 

[John Navitsky]

Does anyone here own and use any of the Nikon 50mm Z-Mount lenses? If so, what model and what are your impressions of it?

i have a 50 1.2. it's nice

I'm not sure why Nikon isn't going to offer the lens in a f/1.4 aperture. (Which, to me, is very desirable, yet shouldn't be as expensive as the f/1.2 version.) This missing option in the Nikon lineup has me strongly considering the Sigma Art Series 50mm f/1.4 instead of one of Nikon's 50mm offerings.

the 1.8 lenses are super sharp. so really the primary difference between their fast lenses (1.2) and their 1.8 lenses are aperture and if you need a shallower dof than 1.8, 1.2 is better than 1.4. if you just need a super sharp lens the 1.8 give it to you, you don't need to stop it down and it's a super value. and if the primary difference in image quality between the lenses is the aperture, having a bigger difference is better as it provides more differentiation between the lenses.

in general, if you just want a reasonably fast, very sharp lens, the 1.8 line will suit you fine. if you need/want a faster lens with a shallower dof, the 1.2 delivers more than the 1.4 would have with the only caveat being price.

it's possible they may go back and "fill in" their line with 1.4 lenses later, or maybe they'll let Tamron fill them in, but in terms of priorities for the product, it makes sense they get good lenses out (the 1.8 lenses), then give you the no compromise lenses, and then compromise lenses are sort of the last priority

$.02

 

[Whiskeyman]

I've got the Z 50mm f/1.8. It's a terrific lens and you can use it at f/1.8 or f/2. In the past, my 50mm f/1.4 was not sharp - just fast at f/1.4. You had to stop it down for sharpness.

I have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art. For stills, it's fine, but I could not use it recently for video because it was too noisy. I like the sharpness of the Sigma, but it's heavier and more expensive with a small benefit in image quality over the Z alternative. But the Z 50mm f/1.8 is a very good lens as well as being less expensive than the faster Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4, and I think the Nikon has the edge.

The 40mm f/2 is a different kind of lens. It's certainly pretty good, but not as good as the faster primes. But the 40mm is so small you can just throw it in your pocket or camera bag without any worry about weight or even whether you'll need it. It's a very good option for a compact kit.

Thank you, Eric.

The 40 is so small, lightweight, and pretty dang sharp! Very affordable too. I have one in my bag for low light stuff, rarely used really.

And thank you, Jamie.

 

[Whiskeyman]

i have a 50 1.2. it's nice


the 1.8 lenses are super sharp. so really the primary difference between their fast lenses (1.2) and their 1.8 lenses are aperture and if you need a shallower dof than 1.8, 1.2 is better than 1.4. if you just need a super sharp lens the 1.8 give it to you, you don't need to stop it down and it's a super value. and if the primary difference in image quality between the lenses is the aperture, having a bigger difference is better as it provides more differentiation between the lenses.

in general, if you just want a reasonably fast, very sharp lens, the 1.8 line will suit you fine. if you need/want a faster lens with a shallower dof, the 1.2 delivers more than the 1.4 would have with the only caveat being price.

it's possible they may go back and "fill in" their line with 1.4 lenses later, or maybe they'll let Tamron fill them in, but in terms of priorities for the product, it makes sense they get good lenses out (the 1.8 lenses), then give you the no compromise lenses, and then compromise lenses are sort of the last priority

$.02

Thank you, John. $0.02 check is in the mail!

 

[John Woodworth]

I have the Z50mm f/1.2. I bought it mainly for portraits where it is desirable to throw focus on the eyes with the rest of the face out of focus.

I don't have much experience with it, otherwise, since recently my photography has moved away from this type of work. It is very sharp wide open, and its field of focus is quite flat. Some wider shots at f/5.6 or so have caught attention from people because of the "rendering". One customer has a four-foot square portrait of a pair of Rhodesian Ridgebacks on the wall taken with this lens and every hair is super sharp across the frame.

I am hoping to get more time to explore this lens. When you drag it out, you really need to know how to maximize its unique properties and I am not there yet. I know there is a least one member here who is very knowledgeable and passionate about these types of lenses, and I hope he will speak up.

The Z50/1.2 is very large and heavy. It is also surprising how long it takes to crank the f-stop wheel to go from wide open to 5.6 when one is caught short on depth-of-field. Thus, it is not as useful for the event work I am doing currently.

There is no question about the quality of these lenses.

 

[Ivan Rothman]

Does anyone here own and use any of the Nikon 50mm Z-Mount lenses? If so, what model and what are your impressions of it?

How about the 40mm f/2? (Although I'm wary of Nikon compact design lenses after owning the 50mm E-Series (Economy) lens that was part of a kit with my Nikon FM or FE a long time ago.)

What I see on the Nikon Z-Lens roadmap are 50mm lenses with maximum apertures of f/2.8, f/1.8 and f/1.2. I'm not sure why Nikon isn't going to offer the lens in a f/1.4 aperture. (Which, to me, is very desirable, yet shouldn't be as expensive as the f/1.2 version.) This missing option in the Nikon lineup has me strongly considering the Sigma Art Series 50mm f/1.4 instead of one of Nikon's 50mm offerings.

Thank you.

Depending on what you are shooting, you might also consider the Z 85mm f1.8 lens. I own that lens and though I have only used it briefly so far, it looks like a beautiful lens. I hope top use it as a serious portrait lens. It is only a few ounces heavier than the 50mm 1.8 and only a few hundred dollars more expensive.

 

[StarDust]

I have the Z mount 1.2s 50 mm. It is amazing lens but large and expensive. It is my main lens when I am not on a bif mission

 

[lukemeup]

Z 50 1.8S is one of the 'best bang for the $' lenses released in the Z mount so far, imo.

 

[dabhand16]

I opted for the Z Viltrox 85mm f1.8 over the Nikkor one as in the reviews the consensus was that is is 95% as good as the Nikkor but costs under half the price. Inc delivery I paid £295 for mine and I'm very happy with it. Worth checking out Viltrox. They do a 56mm f1.4 and other focal lengths at f1.8.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I have the Z50mm f/1.2. I bought it mainly for portraits where it is desirable to throw focus on the eyes with the rest of the face out of focus.

I don't have much experience with it, otherwise, since recently my photography has moved away from this type of work. It is very sharp wide open, and its field of focus is quite flat. Some wider shots at f/5.6 or so have caught attention from people because of the "rendering". One customer has a four-foot square portrait of a pair of Rhodesian Ridgebacks on the wall taken with this lens and every hair is super sharp across the frame.

I am hoping to get more time to explore this lens. When you drag it out, you really need to know how to maximize its unique properties and I am not there yet. I know there is a least one member here who is very knowledgeable and passionate about these types of lenses, and I hope he will speak up.

The Z50/1.2 is very large and heavy. It is also surprising how long it takes to crank the f-stop wheel to go from wide open to 5.6 when one is caught short on depth-of-field. Thus, it is not as useful for the event work I am doing currently.

There is no question about the quality of these lenses.

Depending on what you are shooting, you might also consider the Z 85mm f1.8 lens. I own that lens and though I have only used it briefly so far, it looks like a beautiful lens. I hope top use it as a serious portrait lens. It is only a few ounces heavier than the 50mm 1.8 and only a few hundred dollars more expensive.

I have the Z mount 1.2s 50 mm. It is amazing lens but large and expensive. It is my main lens when I am not on a bif mission

Z 50 1.8S is one of the 'best bang for the $' lenses released in the Z mount so far, imo.

I opted for the Z Viltrox 85mm f1.8 over the Nikkor one as in the reviews the consensus was that is is 95% as good as the Nikkor but costs under half the price. Inc delivery I paid £295 for mine and I'm very happy with it. Worth checking out Viltrox. They do a 56mm f1.4 and other focal lengths at f1.8.

Thank you John, Ivan, StarDust, Luke and Graham.

Lots of food for thought from you, and the others who have posted.

Wayne

 

[O]

Does anyone here own and use any of the Nikon 50mm Z-Mount lenses? If so, what model and what are your impressions of it?

How about the 40mm f/2? (Although I'm wary of Nikon compact design lenses after owning the 50mm E-Series (Economy) lens that was part of a kit with my Nikon FM or FE a long time ago.)

What I see on the Nikon Z-Lens roadmap are 50mm lenses with maximum apertures of f/2.8, f/1.8 and f/1.2. I'm not sure why Nikon isn't going to offer the lens in a f/1.4 aperture. (Which, to me, is very desirable, yet shouldn't be as expensive as the f/1.2 version.) This missing option in the Nikon lineup has me strongly considering the Sigma Art Series 50mm f/1.4 instead of one of Nikon's 50mm offerings.

Thank you.

I have the 50mm 1.8 S, its very very sharp across the whole frame as well as at 1.8, excellent colour, seems very accurate, the pick of the bunch, in their lies the benefit for me.

I have some other FX 50mm lenses including Ziess that has a great uniqueness from F5.6 to F2 that Nikon Canon Sigma don't have, its a manual lens i am very happy with.

The key with any lens is to get a good sample.

Regardless of product be it Nikon Canon Sony etc or what something is branded MADE IN , Thailand Japan etc, its highly likely all or most or some of the components are made in China any way and in cases assembled in another location, that's the way of the world.

Nikon is as i have been led to believe using many Tamron lenses re shelled - rebranded Nikon ? for a range of the Z mounts, commercially it makes sense to reduce costs and improve margins.

Nikon glass will i assume have two levels, expensive and very expensive.

Only an opinion

 

[Roy]

Does anyone here own and use any of the Nikon 50mm Z-Mount lenses? If so, what model and what are your impressions of it?

How about the 40mm f/2? (Although I'm wary of Nikon compact design lenses after owning the 50mm E-Series (Economy) lens that was part of a kit with my Nikon FM or FE a long time ago.)

What I see on the Nikon Z-Lens roadmap are 50mm lenses with maximum apertures of f/2.8, f/1.8 and f/1.2. I'm not sure why Nikon isn't going to offer the lens in a f/1.4 aperture. (Which, to me, is very desirable, yet shouldn't be as expensive as the f/1.2 version.) This missing option in the Nikon lineup has me strongly considering the Sigma Art Series 50mm f/1.4 instead of one of Nikon's 50mm offerings.

Thank you.

So far I only have 10 of the Nikon Z lenses.
The problem with most lenses of the Nikon E era was consistent quality control.
I've found Nikon to be one of the best makers for quality control.
Nearly all the new Z lenses are amazing and a step up from almost everything else available - especially their PF lenses.
I love fast glass but my 50mm f1.2 is only good for low light and extra soft background portraits in a confined area.
The 50mm f2.8 is slow because its a macro.
The 40mm and 50mm f1.8 lenses are a great budget buy...

 

[Ivan Rothman]

So far I only have 10 of the Nikon Z lenses.
The problem with most lenses of the Nikon E era was consistent quality control.
I've found Nikon to be one of the best makers for quality control.
Nearly all the new Z lenses are amazing and a step up from almost everything else available - especially their PF lenses.
I love fast glass but my 50mm f1.2 is only good for low light and extra soft background portraits in a confined area.
The 50mm f2.8 is slow because its a macro.
The 40mm and 50mm f1.8 lenses are a great budget buy...

You have me beat. I only have 9 of the Z lenses. But I couldn't agree with you more in how much quality the Z lenses have. Even the 800mm f6.3 which is a PF lens is giving me some amazing pictures, even hand held, even in low light.

 

[Roy]

I've only found a couple of Z lenses to be less impressive than the other Z lenses.
But saying that is acknowledging that even those lenses Z lenses are a step up.
As a whole the Z lenses are outstanding and the main reason to go to a Z body...

 

[O]

You have me beat. I only have 9 of the Z lenses. But I couldn't agree with you more in how much quality the Z lenses have. Even the 800mm f6.3 which is a PF lens is giving me some amazing pictures, even hand held, even in low light.

Good to hear, and yes i agree the new Z glass is excellent

 

[Whiskeyman]

... I only have 9 of the Z lenses ...

Some slacker you are, then, Ivan!!

 

[Whiskeyman]

So far I only have 10 of the Nikon Z lenses.
The problem with most lenses of the Nikon E era was consistent quality control.
I've found Nikon to be one of the best makers for quality control.
Nearly all the new Z lenses are amazing and a step up from almost everything else available - especially their PF lenses.
I love fast glass but my 50mm f1.2 is only good for low light and extra soft background portraits in a confined area.
The 50mm f2.8 is slow because its a macro.
The 40mm and 50mm f1.8 lenses are a great budget buy...

I'm under the impression that the 50mm 1.8 will be my next lens purchase. The good thing about that lens is that it only delays my retirement by a day or two. Unlike a lot of the new lenses that would delay my retirement by weeks and months!

 

[Roy]

I'm under the impression that the 50mm 1.8 will be my next lens purchase. The good thing about that lens is that it only delays my retirement by a day or two. Unlike a lot of the new lenses that would delay my retirement by weeks and months!

A great lens - I have the 50mm f1.8 as well as the f1.2 version - its much lighter