Z 24-70mm f2.8 s feedback and experience

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).

wotan1

wotan1

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
I am interested in your feedback and experience with this lens,

I heavily prefer high IQ lenses and have had this on my wish list for some time. I just got one and am evaluating whether to keep it.

It is rainy, we are in monsoon season in Seattle and I am not going to get this baby wet yet so instead I am writing to the gang seeking your thoughts.
 
Member's gallery
The best 24-70/2.8 there is.
Daily driver in our studio even at f/5.6
It’s like having 4 prime lenses in one.
Exceptional quality at 24mm 35mm and 50mm
70mm is soft.
For 70mm we change to the 70-200 which is noticeably better at 70mm.
 
Member's gallery
I had this lens on my wish list but couldn't justify the purchase as I have the Z 24-120 which is a terrific lens except for low light. I shot a few indoor kids basketball games with it and swapped for the 50 1.8 which was nice and bright but often either not wide enough or not long enough. Then an excellent used opportunity came up, I jumped on it and received it last week. So far I'm delighted. It was great for shooting indoor basketball last week. When we get better weather (New Jersey) I will take it out and shoot more while it is still briefly under warranty.
 
Member's gallery
I owned two versions of the 24-70 F mount and was never completely happy with them. The Z 24-70 2.8 S has made all the difference I could have expected. I guess nothing is perfect but this lens is the best I have used in this range of focal lengths. I have the 20, 50 and 85 S primes, but I do not hesitate to use this zoom for demanding work, including landscapes. Hope you enjoy it.
 
Member's gallery
I wonder if there is about the physical size of the Z mount that makes the Z glass so impressive? Or is it just the computerization improvements that make it so? Both perhaps? Reason that I bring this up is that with my advancing age and some physical limitations, I simply can no longer hump around a heavy bag loaded with fast, heavy zooms. My grandkids visited last week and I knew that we would be out running around from dawn to dusk, so I bought a Z 24-200/6.3 lens. I had tried a variety of “super zoom one lens” Nikons in the past and was not happy with any of them. Just not close to what I needed IQ wise and back then, 6.3 meant pretty poor hi iso performance.

Happy to report that the Z 24-200 was far superior to the old F mount models and with better low light sensor performance coupled with some terrific Topaz software, 6.3 became less of an issue. The 6.3 max aperture does prevent obtaining more shallow DOF though, but I can live with that for personal snapshot stuff.

Don’t misunderstand me - the superzoom isn’t in the same league with the pro lenses being discussed here, but it is surprisingly good and WAY easier to carry around all day. The cherry on top was that it was on sale for $700, which made it my least expensive Nikon lens purchase since forever. I wouldn’t dream of using it for gigs, but when I need to go lightweight, it is a game changer.
 
Member's gallery
CoyoteCreationsNW said:
I owned two versions of the 24-70 F mount and was never completely happy with them.
Click to expand...
Interesting observation. I thought my 24-70/2.8 F mount was the best thing since sliced bread. Until I began using the Z version. Wonder what it was that disappointed you with the F version. Seems most folks I know had reactions similar to mine. I would have suspected sample variation in your case, but you had two. Would love to hear more about your disappointment .
 
Member's gallery
RickW said:
Interesting observation. I thought my 24-70/2.8 F mount was the best thing since sliced bread. Until I began using the Z version. Wonder what it was that disappointed you with the F version. Seems most folks I know had reactions similar to mine. I would have suspected sample variation in your case, but you had two. Would love to hear more about your disappointment .
Click to expand...
For things like fashion red carpet or close event work The F mount version did an acceptable job on either my D750 or D850, When I took it ourdoors for group pictures or landscapes, it was noticeably softer at and beyond the Dx circle. This better sharpness from center to edge was the biggest improvement for me. I used the F mount version on my Z6ii and Z7ii with the FTZ adapter before I brought the Z mount version. Still quite usable but after I brought the Z mount, it became a favorite lens and more often used than the primes for some work, particularly studio and fashion.
 
Member's gallery
CoyoteCreationsNW said:
For things like fashion red carpet or close event work The F mount version did an acceptable job on either my D750 or D850, When I took it ourdoors for group pictures or landscapes, it was noticeably softer at and beyond the Dx circle. This better sharpness from center to edge was the biggest improvement for me. I used the F mount version on my Z6ii and Z7ii with the FTZ adapter before I brought the Z mount version. Still quite usable but after I brought the Z mount, it became a favorite lens and more often used than the primes for some work, particularly studio and fashion.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I did very little landscape or large group stuff, so I guess I never paid much attention to the edges. No question though that the Z lenses are simply incredible. Btw - my beloved F mount 24-70/2.8 was the model before the more recent stabilized version.
 
Member's gallery
Here are the MTFs for the two lenses,
Wide and tele. They basically confirm everyone's observations: all great, Z better than S, softer edges. Modern premium primes in the range will be sharper at the edges, which would be apparent on a 45mp sensor.

24-70 2.8 MTF.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
I am disappointed with the Z24-120 and schlep this one instead.
Click to expand...
@Nimi what you were dissapointed with that lens?
I am also not very impressed of it. I The sharpnes for me is not the most important factor but the lens is a kind of "flat" ... So, there is no deepnes in colours, no embossed microcontrast .. somehow without a big character. What I cannot tell for example about Z 70-200/2.8, this one is a WOW-lens
I am just curious about your opinion.
 
Member's gallery
ElenaH said:
@Nimi what you were dissapointed with that lens?
I am also not very impressed of it. I The sharpnes for me is not the most important factor but the lens is a kind of "flat" ... So, there is no deepnes in colours, no embossed microcontrast .. somehow without a big character. What I cannot tell for example about Z 70-200/2.8, this one is a WOW-lens
I am just curious about your opinion.
Click to expand...

Same experience here. No pop, which is typlicslly attributed to microcontrast, the transition to the oof region and the creaminess of the background. Zooms are notoriously lacking in that department and the three 2.8s are the exception. For what I use footage, it is just too sterile and digital.

Of the Nikon lenses I own, the Nikkor 85/1.2 is the best in this department, followed by the 135 Plena. Overall, the Fuji GFX 110/2.0. I'm putting a Voigtlender through its paces right now, and so far it looks very promising.

If you're interested in the topic, Google Zeiss vs. Leica. But be prepared to deal with some rabid fanboys.
 
Member's gallery
@Nimi can you share which Voigtlander you’re looking at? I’m shooting all Voigt M glass on a Z8, with the exception of my new 600 PF.

Edit: I’m following this thread as I‘m considering the 24-70 S... love my MF glass, but the zoom is more convenient for some travel.
 
Member's gallery
MMoretti said:
@Nimi can you share which Voigtlander you’re looking at? I’m shooting all Voigt M glass on a Z8, with the exception of my new 600 PF.

Edit: I’m following this thread as I‘m considering the 24-70 S... love my MF glass, but the zoom is more convenient for some travel.
Click to expand...

The F version of the 24-70 is superb and optically I prefer it better to the Z. It's heavy.
 
Member's gallery
MMoretti said:
I’ve looked at this lens for my kit, as a more portable alternative to my heavy/bulky Zeiss 15/2.8 Distagon ZF.2
Click to expand...

This will be primarily for video/timelapse and always shot at f8 or 11. And I don't shoot night/stars. So on paper and from what I've seen so far, it excels. I'll report back with samples.
 
Member's gallery
Nimi said:
The 15/4.5. If I like it I'll pick up a 35/2.
Click to expand...
Voigtländer are amazing lens. I even think they are better than Zeiss .. They have the best colour ever! Very deep and saturated, very nice blue colour (the best blue I have ever seen), excellent sun-stars. These lenses also have a very pronounced 3D efect! even more than Zeiss. The lens are very good for timelapse becasue the aperture is not electornical but mechanical and will not change from shot to shot. They also have very nice sharp-to-unsharp transition.
Both Zeiss and Voigtländer are made in Cosina factory as far as I know.. .the same quality I would say.
I love definitelly the Voigtländer colours more that Zeiss colours!
 
Member's gallery
Interesting comments about the Z 24-120mm. I absolutely love this lens and the way it renders. Now the Z 85mm f1.8 was a disappointment for me. I found it lacking in the same way Nimi and ElenaH found the 24-120mm. I ended up keeping my F mount 85mm f1.8. I have the Voigtlander 15mm f4.5. A very fun lens to use for the right scenarios. Build quality is excellent as Voigtlander's typically are.

2023Z72_5978© Doug Andrews 2023.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Elena, I’ve been shooting Voigtlander since picking up the 125/2.5 APO Lanthar five or six years ago. (It’s said that Cosina stopped producing this lens only because they got the contract to produce the Zeiss 100/2 Makro.) I bought a Z7 as soon as it was released mainly for adapting my MF glass and have since added several CV lenses in M mount including the well-regarded 21/1.4 and 40/1.2 Noktons. I can’t remember the last time I mounted either my Zeiss 25/2 or 15/2.8…
 
Member's gallery
Following the comments on this thread, I’m going to look for a 24-70/2.8E over the Z version for my next trip (self-driving) to Namibia this fall (September-ish); I’m seeing them now in the US$800 range. I’ve just picked up a 600 PF which I‘ll shoot on my Z8. The wide zoom will share time on my D850 with the 120-300 (+ 1.4 TC, as appropriate). And, I’ll bring along my Voigtlander 21 and 40 lenses for around towns, landscapes, beer time, etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top