I've had the 40mm f2 for over a year now. My experience is that it is a bit soft compared to other Z s line lenses - similar to the old 50mm 1.8 G. However, it keeps beautiful colours, has lovely bokeh and the 40mm focal length is surprisingly versatile. The upshot is that I don't use it for professional shoots, but it's an amazing 'chuck it on and muck around" lens. Love it for street style pics.
It performs better than the 50mm F/1.8G . The center sharpness is excellent from F/2 if you need edge to edge sharpness F/4 is the way to go. Given it's price as you say a fun lens
This was the first lens I picked up when I got my Z7II to get me started in the Z system. I've since added several more but this remains one of my favorites for its images quality to price ratio alone.
I've been on the fence about this lens for a while. After hearing your first hand thoughts and seeing the images it definitely has that 3D pop. Going to have to pick this up.
Use this lens on my Z5 for filming in addition to my D800. It's awesome and I have to say, for me when I take portraits this lens is even to sharp and crisp sometimes even at F2.
I picked this lens up a few weeks ago. We have a real estate photography business and this is great for "lifestyle" shots. I typically shoot with a Z6. I also picked up a Z30 to keep in my pocket when knocking around on weekends. I love the focal length on the Z6 and I love the 60mm equivalent on the Z30. It's now one of my favorite lenses. Great images. Decent bokeh at f2.0 with foreground subjects fairly close. Highly recommend and you can't go wrong for $276 which is what I paid at B & H. Great review. Nailed it.
I whish the youtube algorithm would recommend more videos like this. genuine, down to earth and straight to the point. thanks dude, I was wondering whether I should get this lens or save up for a s-line lens more down the road. I think I made up my mind now. cheers!
The 40mm f/2 Nikkor-Z is fabulous. It was the first Z mount lens I bought. I've used it a lot and it is still the one I use most. I love it for all the reasons you mention - it is compact, light weight, inexpensive and it has fabulous 'classic' rendering).
i got one, i buy this because 26mm 2.8 was to time more money. SIze and weight ist crazy, have no zoom, its plastic but i have to z6II and when i put this lens i can run all day long and be more creative, and end off the day i still feel my hand, when i was in munich with nikon z6 II and 24-70 2.8 sigma after 4hour i can feel my hand. really good, and qaulity ist fantasic. My wife have z6 with adapter and sigma 35 f1.4 ane she said this ist best setup, when she take my camero for 2min takie 2 photo she said this ist crazy she can imagine how good this is:)
I just ordered this lens and the 28mm and I’m waiting for them to arrive. Of course I have to watch every video I can find on both lenses. Thanks for this review. It’s helping me kill the time until arrival. I picked it up for my new zfc, but I’ll use it on my Z6II as well. The adapter is great, but look forward to having some smaller glass and compact design.
I got the 28mm one and I feel the same about it. Just like you said, the rendering is amazing, the images seem to have like a 3D pop to them. I went with the 28mm because I already have the excellent 35mm one, but this one is more compact and easier to carry. Thanks for the review, Nikon is killing it despite not being the popular kid on RU-vid/internet.
Eric, I just bought this one today and I will received it on Saturday!!!! I have a Nikon Z50 and I was looking for a good affordable prime that will give me that 60mm range (40mm in crop = 60MM)in my camera and thanks to your review I decided for this one... Will let you know how it goes!!!! 👍👍👍👍👍
I totally agree with you. I bought my 40mm on black Friday a little over a year ago. I bought it for street photography because it's a good compromise between the 35mm and the 50mm. You can really see the micro contrast when there's a lot of texture like on brick walls, rocks and other things like that. This is a great lens for black and white photos because you can really see the textures. I was really impressed with it the first time I edited my photos. I've also bought the 28mm but I don't see the same results with it. I think the 40mm is very under rated. And it's a sharp lens too. I'd say it's right up there with the S line in sharpness. And if you shoot at f/2 at the minimum focus distance is almost like a macro lens. It has an extremely shallow depth of field at that distance. You can do some creative stuff with it. And it's also a good portrait lens.
Tried out this lens in a store with a Z30 attached to it. Did a shot at the toy dog they have on the table and I must say it does look '3D' with the way the dog pops out of the screen. I am not buying it because 40mm is too wide for generic shooting of buses or trains (even though for APSC), but if I were in the market for a Z mount 35-40mm prime this would be it.
OK, this convinced me! Buying it this week, instead of the 35mm I was aiming for. Glad to see you enjoying the little 50 Planar as well. It is an underrated gem. I am blessed to own the 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss ZM, and really like it on the Z7 (oozes of pop and plenty of velvety feeling). Try it if you have the opportunity. Very flexible with one of those M to Z adapters with helicoid. But I also want an AF option, and the 40mm will be it. Thanks!
Hey brother, just what I needed to know. Big transition for me, bought a Z5 kit and it arrived yesterday. My 8th Nikon but my first mirrorless. My Sover Wong serviced F2 has been my favourite with a gorgeous Nikkor 35mm ais.
Just picked this lens up and got the SE version which has a totally retro feel to it. You may like switching it out. It’s $30 more but I agree on aesthetics and so it was worth it for me. I am gonna be selling my z6 soon (got a z6ii) and want the zfc. I think this SE lens on that is going to make me feel like I’m shooting on my first ever camera- a nikkormat! I know 60 with crop factor but still! Can’t wait.
I love this lens. It's all you said and doesn't weigh anything. Slightly wider than a 50mm and I like that for street and motorcycle rallies. F2 makes it a monster for night rallies and it more than sharp enough wide open.
This lens won budget lens of the year and for good reason - it renders really nicely with decent sharpness that does not seem clinical. At f/2 it is fast enough for most shooting conditions - and it is really small and light. Also, it does not focus breathe unlike the Canon 50mm 1.8 that is a bad breather. Although not as sharp or perfectly controlled as the Nikon 50mm 1.8 S, it is so good that you could probably shoot this lens in the 50's place for most things and get away with it. This lens is a steal at $249 and still well worth its $299 initial price tag.
I’m seriously thinking about this lens w the new Nikon zf. I totally agree w you here. I prefer lenses that are sharp, but not clinically sharp. I like character and softness too. I feel like the canon ef 50 1.4 has that. Is there any other lens on the Nikon lineup that has that character. How’s that zoom you showed? The 24-120?
AF is so fast in this lens. I love this lens, so compact , light , my go to for walk-around. This lens also very sharp at F2.8. At F2 I like the softness tbh, it gives an atmosphere to the picture. Definitely the most underpriced lens in Z lineup.
My favorite F mount lens is the 50mm f/1.4 G. The contrast and rendering of that lens is unlike any other Nikon lens I own (Nikon credits a "Super Integrated Coating"). It is $450 new and $250-300 used. It vignettes in a way that I like. It has chromatic aberration in a way I don't like so I might consider that 40mm for the Z camera.
Sort of wish Nikon would make a 35 f/2.8 Pancake too. But considering we have a 28 (7mm wider) and the 40 (10mm narrower) there may not be one, but it would be nice for street photographers. But there may still be some room for them to come out with one at some point, plus the 35 1.8 (while very good) is a bit on the larger side compared to the pancakes (obviously, because they open up 1.3 stops brighter and that's part of the reason) but a 35 2.8 pancake with good optics might also be a good option for some other applications too like landscape or general travel (even if it's not street photography specific) and if it IS a true pancake, then you could have a nice assortment, but I'm starting to think a 35 2.8 pancake may not come out due to the other two lenses already being out. I guess the 40mm might be the closest thing, as 28mm may be too wide (for street, although it's probably still a popular FL).
Thanks for the review. Have been thinking about getting this or the 28mm. I already use adapted Leica 35mm/1.4 & Zeiss 25mm/2.8 lenses that I love using on my Z6ii, but want an autofocus lens in this range for when I'm too lazy for manual focus. I'm tending towards the 28, though, since I think the 40mm would be a bit too narrow a field of view for my personal taste.
How are the m mount lenses performing on the z? The stack sensor is thicker than leicas therefore many say that you dont get 100% the lerformance on the lens. Especialy in the corners
Its so light, so fast the AF. Its really great .In f/2 its kind of soft , not so much , but in f/2.8 its so great. The minimum distance its about 30 cm. I'm really enjoying that lens. So much better in my Z6II than the 50 mm AF D 1.8 was in my D750
Thanks, great perspective. Keep an eye out for the 58 1.4 - if you liked the 3D pop of the zony 55 you might love that one. Big ugly lens but so much character.
Thanks for the straight up, down to earth video! It's like having my brother teach me about camera gear ha ha! Eric, can you or anyone please explain the difference between the 28mm and the 40mm lens? I have a Nikon Z6 body. It's my first full frame camera and I'd love to get one of these lenses as my first. I'm planning a trip to my home state, here in Australia, and out to the desert with my cousins for a big road trip. So I'll be shooting everything from wildflowers, to landscapes, camp fires and people. The weatherproof of the 40mm might be good for the dust factor. But apart from that, what are the differences between the two? Any tips would be appreciated.
@@ericrjennings Thank you! Yes, I think I will eventually. But I want to pick one and learn how to use the new camera on that. Keep life simple. And also get used to moving my body around to get the shot. So I think the 40mm might be the best place to start. Love the shots of the graveyard. They're really sensitive and respectful! If I can shoot like that, I'd be well pleased.
@@ericrjennings one more question… is there any distortion with the 28mm lens? I assume the 40mm would be closest to the human eye, especially on a full frame camera. So I’m curious to know how the 28mm fairs in this regard. Thanks for your time and help!
I was going to search for a review of Nikon Z 35 1.8 and found your new video about this 40mm and I think I know what you mean with 3D / pop like the Sony ZA 55mm 1.8, could you try the 35 Z?
It's a nice lens, but I think I'm going to get the 50 f1.8G and use the FTZ. Similar or better sharpness, an extra third of a stop and it's very cheap used. I prefer 50mm to 40mm too. Size is the downside, but I was using very heavy D700 and 24-70 2.8 until recently, so it's still very small and light to me lol
Hmm I believe the 40mm F2 is alot sharper and has better autofocus in photo/video. Alot smaller too with no ftz :) I've own both gave the 50 away ...still a great lens
The Minolta 45mm I think its a f2.8 has a cult following. I have the lens but I never really used it much because I hav the Olympus 45mm f1.8 also. Its a cheap lens on Ebay if you want to pick it up.
I must agree. Sharp enough to make salable photos. Don’t like 40 mm, Shoot DX on Z7 2 and you get 24 MP. Or better use super resolution in Adobe ACR and you get a huge cropable file same detail as original.
I have to say I get a little peeved at the pixel peepers reviewing this lens and picking it apart. There are some popping up now as 'long term reviews'. They seem like they consider themselves iconoclasts for bashing the lens. There is a thread among them that goes like this: it isn't sharp wide open and up close. One has to wonder why anyone ever expected a tiny, old design, sub $300 plastic mount lens to be sharp in the corners, sharp wide open and sharp up close? The lens is now $229 new. It seems so many reviewers cannot get past their test charts or their comparisons with lenses that cost literally three times more and are literally three times bigger. These types of reviews utterly lack context. For anyone on the fence about this lens, ask yourself why you want it. Do you need to do professional up close work at f2 that is sharp and bright in the corners? Not for you. OBVIOUSLY. And if you thought you needed a lens like that for $230 then, well, that's just not realistic and never has been. Do you need a light, fast, easy to carry lens that performs extremely well in most circumstances for what amounts to pocket change compared to most of today's lenses? Bingo. For that purpose this lens is an absolute jewel that you can get for under $200 used. It is truly a no brainer.
Optically this seems to be very good from all the reviews and samples I've found online. BUT- it's a plastic mount lens which is nuts given the premium prices from Nikon. I opted for the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 ART lens, and it eats the Nikon lens for lunch. It's Sigma's best prime normal focal length and goes almost unnoticed. The Sigma is also compared to Leica in terms of rendering. It absolutely pushes full frame near medium format quality images. It's also funny to hear these guys complain about longer/high element lenses being too long or too heavy - usually while they tote a 24-70 or 70-200 2.8 around. $300.00 for a plastic lens is still a bad idea.
Wow...of course shoul "Eat the nikon 40mm" But for that price LOL. I bought the 40mm f/2 instead of the Vitrox, even vitrox have more metal , I find that this 40 mm vs the 35mm from vitrox its more light and very sharp for the price.
@@Emulives I know what you mean. When Kai Wong reviewed it at debut for $1399.00 I said ...uhhh..nope. Then when it dropped to about 1/2 price at Adorama, I tried my luck and could not believe the insane quality. Emphasis on subject isolation, quality of bokeh very pleasing - almost cinematic. As for the Nikon lens here - yes I would be stoked about the images it creates, except $300.00 is still a chunk of change for plastic. Is the helicoid plastic too? Nikon (and the other manufacturers) got rid of mirror boxes, reduced body sizes and cut materials cost by significant margins - only to reward photographers with insanely high prices. I shoot Nikon FF and love my gear, but I don't like the direction Nikon is going. I hear really good things about Viltrox. Cheers!
Damned, tempting! But I need the 24-70, and the 50 mm 1.8 as well. Hard to make a decision! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-coi19ptZF7Q.html he loves the 50mm 1.8
