I love how good Nikons current lenses are, specially the cheaper ones. A 300 Dollar lens that performs that good on a 45mp camera is incredible, even thou i still hate that "clean" minimalist design of these modern lenses. Gimme at least a yellow ring!
Just incase anyone is thinking of getting this lens. Just get it! It's really handy to throw it in your bag and its a great performer. Im used to shooting the S-Glass lenses and this performs well above its price point. Really useful to have it on you especially if you are just on a day out somewhere, having a wide option in the bag you don't notice carrying is just more encouragement to shoot more frames.
"Pretty natty" 😂 I'm excited about this lens and the new 40mm. I think it might convince me to get into Nikon if it's quick to focus, or they develop a slightly smaller entry level FF camera.
Hi Christopher, nice review as always! Do you have any considerations also regarding coma? I know it’s not a super fast lens but it may be interesting to try some nightscapes with it. Thanks!
I’m still waiting for the full frame version of the Z fc. This nikon lens it’s impressive to be a kit lens. You can’t get this quality from the Sony kit lenses sadly
I've used this with extension tubes a lot for macro shots. It remains really sharp stopped down and the wider angle gives a less typical perspective for macro.
I'm curious, with the plastic lens mount, wouldn't it naturally have a bit of weather sealing because water tends to bead on plastics as opposed to flow to creases and crevices like they do with metal? I ask because Nikon claim drip and dust resistance, and I think that little plastic shroud on the mount is why they claim that.
Water has a high surface tension, so I am never too worried about some droplets even with unprotected lenses, if plastic or metal. And as plastic is made out of oil, maybe that helps for repelling better. The high pressure between mount and lens and maybe a little bit more softness of the plastic mount compared to the stiff metal might help for compensating some tiny uneven parts. I would assume the creases of metal lenses are not the problem because typically they are circular with the mount. Overall, as there are millions of different plastic mixtures we might never know if that mix of the 28mm would really help at the end ... but with their claim, maybe they considered this compensation intentionally
My Canon EF-S 24MM STM lens is similar in principle and is a great walk around lens. Pancake lenses are super discreet and can produce great quality images.
I'm a modern photographer so I don't really go for retro designs with cutting edge digital sensors. If I wanted retro I'd get a couple Nikon Fs. Nice review though. Thanks!
Great Chris! But I really, really wish u would finally start adding tests of sunstars (not electric lights, the real sun) in your reviews! Please give me a like, so Chris can see it, if u are on my same opinion. Greetings
I wish Nikon would produce a Z7 in the style of the ZFC (so in the style of their iconic old film cameras). 20 MP on APS-C just leaves a bit to be desired imo. On another note, it would be highly interesting to see how it performs in comparison to the old 28mm lenses from Nikon. These from the 1980 are supposed to have still fantastic image quality but are also hopelessly overpriced.
Nikon hit the right spot when they decided to produce a vintage looking camera and lens. But why apsc, I wish also the 35mm or ff sensor. Although being the this 28mm able to fit a ff sensor they may produce another vintage looking camera with a ff sensor, maybe with few video features but monochrome.
I have to say for the price of this lens (if you get the non-SE version, which has the same optics) it's a great little lens if you want something that goes light and don't mind the slower aperture and slightly wider angle of view over the standard 35mm 1.8 S lens, although the 35 is probably much sharper wide open, but that lens is about 3x as much as this lens. If would say if you're doing portrait work or serious street photography, maybe get the 35, but for casual shooters, the 28mm (either one) is a good option and seems to perform very well, in fact quite surprising for a $300 lens. To the part about it not being an f/2 lens, I think this would have required it to be a bit larger (diameter, and possibly longer as a result) and a bit heavier and expensive. I think for its intended use (general street photography, possibly some landscape photography and an all-around inexpensive pancake) it does a good job at that. Plus, I think at 28mm it's borderline perhaps too wide to get the really nice out of focus backgounds that you could get even on a 35mm so that may be a few reasons why this lens is not an f/2 (the 40 f/2 might be better for this ,despite it's longer FL). But my guess is that it came down to cost mostly. An f/2 version likely would have added another $100 or so to the price. I would buy the SE version if it had a click-able aperture ring, and too bad Nikon did NOT do this because that would be perfect for that style of lens (the non-SE lens, obviously not). I would probably get the SE to be honest in case I did get a Zf or Zfc though as it would match a bit better (not that the non-SE lens stands out like a sore thumb on those bodies, but the retro styling does go better with the retro body design obviously).
I’m curious about your thoughts on Nikon’s 28-300mm full frame lens for DSLRs, I’ve seen a few video reviews about it but they weren’t anywhere near as thorough as your reviews.
It centainly looks nice. but with the plastic fantastic ZFc, it's really a plastic fantastic combo. DF, being the first in the retro style Nikon digital camera series, still had metal finish on it. ZFc being plastic is probably cutting down too much
Thanks for your thorough and clear reviews Christopher! I dithered for a long time before deciding to snag one of these - I had tried one in a shop and wasn't very excited. But, after looking at reviews like this one, I thought I'd give it a go. I've completely changed my mind - I love it on my Z6 - very light and capable. I got the regular model though, I think it suits the new Zs better.
really liked that picture of the menu setting around 5:15. maybe consider including that in all of your reviews? not that it would make anything technical better but it would be just another little piece to bring your reviews from perfect without noticing it to noticeable perfect nonetheless keep up the amazing work!👍
Oh, it's plasticky. When I saw it paired with Zfc I thought it would be like Fujifilm lenses in build quality. It's a shame because it looks like the old Nikon F mount lenses from the past.
Your reviews are always great, no one goes in so much depth as you. But if I may suggest something - does not apply to this specific video, but in general - it would be great if you could please mention in reviews, whether the camera and/or lens firmware is updated to their respective latest versions, because this is something super important. Some issues you mention on some videos for example, can sometimes be corrected in more recent firmware updates.
Great suggestion - this should be mandatory. In fact you'd think manufacturers would require it so that potential customers viewing an older review might be aware that, say, autofocus is much better now because the review they are watching pertains to an old firmware.
@@Bill-NM Right. I have the XF 18-55mm which I use on the Fuji X-T4 and on the review video, there was flickering while you zoomed in, while being used on the X-E3. The lens was presented as having issues with flickering due to the variable aperture control. But in fact it does not exhibit the same behavior on other Fuji cameras...
This confirms ff lenses perform better on crop cameras in terms of corner sharpness since your using more if the sweet spot of the lens. Take that tony.
We're spoiled on E mount with the inexpensive Tamron 20mm/24mm/28mm F2.8 trio. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WV8XIhxh5xM.html Ideally Nikon and Canon would bless third party lenses to really strengthen their lineups.
Good review! I brought the lens and tried out. I didn't get the same results. Maybe I am not using the lens in the right situation. I tried for landscape and close-up and I thought that the color was not sharp on the Z5.
He did. Just search Nikon 40mm 2.0 Z and it is the first video. The 40mm is a great lens for the money and almost as sharp as the 50 1.8 in my opinion.
nikon df is still the better camera, probably the best most usable thing if u dont want video. I do want video so I hold off. Prices on the df are still high.. why? because its got a top sensor.
Price of the Nikon Df remains high due to demand. You can't really get a good and fair comparison between the Df and Zfc since they are two different formats.
From what i saw on youtube reviews that 24mm F1.8 from viltrox is really good, really close to the nikkor Z 24mm F1.8 in image quality, but it's also bigger than the 28 F2.8 ( 87mm and 370g vs 43mm and 155g ).
At 4:23 you state the Zfc is less demanding than the Z7... The 21MP DX sensor is exactly identically demanding as the 45MP FX is. If you go super precise the Zfc is actually more demanding having a pixel pitch of 4.2, while the Z7 comes in at 4.35 :D
This is great. Usable on both DX and FX Z bodies. 28mm and 40mm will be 42 and 60mm on DX. Usable focal lengths. However, DX needs a 19mm to have a true 28mm.
I just get this one and love image quality of this len . It's provide more saturate color and contrast compared to 24-70 f4s and surprisingly fast af than i expect. Overall it's worthwhile every penny you paid.
picked that one up today for 170€ to go on my Z6. Killer deal ! I don't much care about the retro look, it's a very good small and compact lens for walk around, it keeps a full frame camera light and that's really appreciated !
not sure how you can recommend this unit... largely plastic, f/2.8 max aperture... not super crisp across the frame wide open... seems to me you are becoming less judicious. Regards!
Optically it performs well and it’s less than $300. Seems to deserve a recommended despite the plastic mount, no? It’s so light the plastic mount is a non issue.
It is an excellent performer for the price perhaps you could point me to a 28mm lens that costs less than £300 that does better ? If you don't want the faux retro look the the optically identical lens costs nearer £250. In real world use close up test charts are not what wide angle lenses are designed for it works very well.
@@jimstirling7223 sure. if you're a hobby photographer, I agree. If you're trying to stay a step ahead of the competition professionally, no. By your standard then, every lens has some value and should be recommended. I guess I was under the impression recommendations were given on objective performance criteria for the price. Fuji has a 27mm for not much more that's better.
@@M.Redsky the Fuji 27 is a crop lens and doesn’t perform as well in a few areas… and is more expensive. For what it is it’s a great performer, also don’t think the lens’ intended audience are pros looking for the best.
