The Nikon Z 28-75mm f2.8 Lens?????

Timmyjoe

Timmyjoe

Veteran
Local time
10:48 PM
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,003
Can someone explain to me the purpose of Nikon creating a 24-70mm f2.8 Z series mirrorless lens, then a couple years later creating a 28-75mm f2.8 Z series mirrorless lens? WTF??? Was there such a huge demand for a slightly less wide and slightly more telephoto Z series zoom lens? I don't get it.

Best,
-Tim
 
Timmyjoe said:
Can someone explain to me the purpose of Nikon creating a 24-70mm f2.8 Z series mirrorless lens, then a couple years later creating a 28-75mm f2.8 Z series mirrorless lens? ***??? Was there such a huge demand for a slightly less wide and slightly more telephoto Z series zoom lens? I don't get it.

Best,
-Tim
Click to expand...

It appears that they did not create it but rather imported (from another company) or better, adopted it.
 
The 28-75mm about 1/2 the price of the 24-70mm f2.8. Build quality is almost certainly lower - it's not an S range lens. It's lighter, and the zoom range at the wide end is compromised. So, it's a marketing thing ......but no doubt Nikon will sell plenty of both.
 
Like others said: it is a cheaper alternative to the 24-70/2.8. If you do not need 24mm or extreme IQ - it is a really nice option. It would be on my short list if I was shopping for a normal lens in Z-mount. The problem imho is not (just) the 24-70/2.8 but the existence of 5 other normal zooms:
24-70/4
24-70/2.8
24-200/4-6.3
24-50/4-6.3
24-120/4
Confusing.
 
It seemed pretty obvious that the price difference is the reason. And how are those five lenses confusing to anyone who photographs?
 
Well, Tim, it's different strokes for different folks. Over the years Nikon has found out just what lenses people use in their everyday lives, whether for work or just the enjoyment of photography, and so they know just what focal lengths are most popular. So they are willing to supply us with whatever combination of focal lengths instead of doing the old "take it or leave it". Of course, it does make one wonder just what they are coming out with next, and should one hold out for that magical zoom lens that is just right both short and long.

PF
 
Was there such a huge demand for a slightly less wide and slightly more telephoto Z series zoom lens?
Click to expand...

Yes, it seems so.

The agile Tamron FE 28-75/2.8 has been proven a bestseller that managed to hit a sweet spot, despite all kinds of 24-70/2.8, 24-70/4, 24-105/4, 24-240 and small/cheap kit zooms being available for the mount. So why not for Nikon jumping on the bandwagon as well.
 
A few years ago, I held the Z6 with 24-70, and the combination felt like a dream. Fit nicely in the hand, balanced beautifully, and the lens felt like super high quality. The upcoming 28-75 is definitely a lower budget option for those who can't/won't spend the money on the 24-70 but want that focal length range.
 
During my brief (but very enjoyable) love affair with the Nikon Z series, I used the 24-70 and quite enjoyed it. This lens did everything I needed and wanted, and if I had decided to stay in the Z range it would have been my preferred optic for a one-lens kit. As things turned out, I decided to not invest in the Z range, for reasons not really relevant to this thread so I won't go into it.

If I were to buy this kit and Ii wanted additional lenses, for my purposes these would be a wide in the 20mm-24mm range and a short tele, say 85mm. This three lens kit would give me all the flexibility I need - it's also my preferred range with my current Nikons, with which I am perfectly happy and will go on using.

The 28-75 is definitely meh! and not really relevant to most users. Why Nikon decided to put it on the market will probably remain a company secret - I for one suspect they were made an offer for it from a third party manufacturer and decided to go along with it. Most of us will be avoiding it. Which is as it should be.
 
My favorite focal lengths are 85mm and 28mm. I never cared much for 24mm.

So, a 24-70 is pretty useless to me, if all I want out of it is 28mm.

The 28-75 is closer to my preferences. (But not close enough.)

- Murray
 
Over the years my favorite lens was the 24-120, but there was an issue, and that was barrel distortion. I hear that distortion is very well controlled on the Z lenses, mostly through the camera operating software. Now I haven't tried my old 24-120D on the Z5 yet, but I'm sure it will exhibit pretty much the same properties as before because you can only do so much with software. So some of these distortion improvements also have to be incorporated into the lens design. Now, as to the Z 28-75 f2.8, that wide aperture sounds tempting, but I still would rather have the Z 24-120 f4 S, and being $100 less expensive than the Tamron clone 28-75 f2.8 doesn't hurt either.

PF
 
With the 24-70/4S being exceptionally good and the Z system comfortably creating images at high ISOs I find it hard to see the attraction of a 28-75/2.8 that is larger/heavier, non-S and cost the same (list) (or even more if it isn't available with the kit discount).
It is not like the difference in 1 stop aperture is night and day when it comes to subject isolation.

Is there a more price sensitive segment that really need 2.8 and can't afford the the 24-70/2.8S? Wedding photographers that don't need the clinical sharpness of the S-line perhaps?
 
Nitroplait said:
With the 24-70/4S being exceptionally good and the Z system comfortably creating images at high ISOs I find it hard to see the attraction of a 28-75/2.8 that is larger/heavier, non-S and cost the same (list) (or even more if it isn't available with the kit discount).
It is not like the difference in 1 stop aperture is night and day when it comes to subject isolation.

Is there a more price sensitive segment that really need 2.8 and can't afford the the 24-70/2.8S? Wedding photographers that don't need the clinical sharpness of the S-line perhaps?
Click to expand...

The Sony system has done marketing research for Nikon and rest of the FF horde. The past 2-3 years saw the Sony FE ZA 24-70/4, despite being a Zeiss and both a bit cheaper and lighter, couldn't keep up with the Tamron FE 28-75/2.8.

The Tamron is no slouch optically. The Zeiss badge (and I'd say in a similar sense, Nikon's S designation) doesn't mean much when it comes to sheer quality - or the lack of it on those "vanilla" products. Then comes the trade off people would ponder on: 24mm or f/2.8. Which one makes the most difference? It's like asking the same old question of why bother with 50/1.4 when the cheaper and lighter 50/1.8 is actually better optically. Some people just want larger apertures, for video work and many other applications. Or just the peace of mind in low light.

Those who need the 24mm will go for it anyway. Having more choices is never a bad thing.
 
The 28-75 2.8 will be attractive to some event shooters. I have the 24-70/4S and love it. I'd love to have a 24-120 for daytime hiking/outings as that's a tremendous range of covering in an S line lens, but also have times that I'd enjoy having the f/2.8 aperture for the standard range. As is, I won't be biting on the older optical formula they used. I'd have considered it STRONGLY if they had used the G2 version, just as the G2 70-180 would be an instant pre-order from me if they brought it to native Z mount whether through Nikon or Tamron.
 
farlymac said:
You mean "was". From what I understand, Nikon skipped it and produced the 24-120 instead.

PF
Click to expand...

I didn't know this lens existed, and it kind of makes me envious of the Nikon Z system. 24-120 f4 is even more useful for me than 24-105, too bad nothing like this is available for the L mount or Canon EF systems.
 
Archiver said:
I didn't know this lens existed, and it kind of makes me envious of the Nikon Z system. 24-120 f4 is even more useful for me than 24-105, too bad nothing like this is available for the L mount or Canon EF systems.
Click to expand...

The 24-120 was my go-to lens for a long time, even with all the distortion. But since I have the 24-200 I'm not sure I need to invest in another FX zoom for a while. I mostly use the Z50, leaving the Z5 for adapted lens use. But I will one day get the 24-120, like when I can get my hands on a longer zoom such as the 100-400.

PF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom