thanks for the review. i ended up buying this lens as well and have similar thoughts. given it's price tag being less than half of the s line it's certainly producing at a more than satisfactory level
I know this is an older video but because this lens is on sale for $246, I am seriously considering picking it up and giving it a try and see how I like it compared to the 50 1.8 S - I find the 50mm to be too tight and sometimes the 28mm too wide. If I could get the images that I enjoy more out of this 40mm little lens, I could part ways with the 50 and 28mm and be happy with just this cheap lens.
Dude I love this lens. And it’s not as fast focusing as the 50 1.8, but that’s being picky. I’ve almost used them all and this is still the best value. I always find myself coming back and mentioning jt, in comparison to everything else haha. Get it on sale because even it’s regular price is WAY undervalued
@@ZWadePhoto I hardly even use my 50 1.8 S - it's a great lens but honestly....I find it sort of boring for what I shoot. One thing I noticed with the 40mm is the "3D" kind of pop which kind of gives it that filmy vibe where as the 50 S is just so perfect, clean, smooth and clinical. Great for portraiture! But I don't do portraits. Also the minimal focus distance is a lot better on the 40 f2 than that 50mm which is more useful for me. Hope I'm not bothering! Just trying to find out what I really like. It's tough trying to find out what works best for your shooting style, having people tell you "you must have this lens!" Doesn't always work for everyone haha.
For sure! Viltrox is doing a good job though. The 85mm is a little hot on highlights in broad daylight but nothing a filter or good photographer can’t work around
Great lens to put on camera for walk through the city or woods. feather weight so you do not need to carry a heavy bag full of lenses. For casual work, 26 mm, 40 mm and 85 makes a light weight set. If I need ultimate sharpness, Leica M lenses are adapted however
I have both the 28 and 40mm lenses and love them both. I bought them for their low profile and sizes. They have a similar look and feel on my cameras as the old AIS 50 and 28mm F lenses I have and have used on my F3 and FM. While those lenses are solid metal construction, the size is about the same, perfect for walking around, street photography, and family shots. While they are plastic, they are plenty solid enough, and they are sharper than any of my old f mount lenses. They do seem to have a character similar to the Nikon D primes and give a look I can’t get with the S glass. I really love them both. They are fun to use and produce great images
this lens is so great...Have all the time on my Z6 II even today. Is so good for weddings, and other events to shoot most of the time. Great for small group shots... Totally worth the price. Really good quality . For me even better them when I used a 50 mm 1.8 back in the DSLR
Picking this up later today. The S line is out of my budget currently so it was either this or the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 but for the price, I bought this instead. Also, glad I'm not a pixel peeper.
Wade - For all my paid shoots and gigs, I shoot the Z 24-70 2.8s - it's a marvellous lens and I'm very happy with the results. For walk around and as a second body on my paid shoots, I have the 35mm Z1.8s - this lens is gorgeous too and the results truly remarkable. However, both of these lenses on my Z6ii bodies are a little heavy for street and casual walk around. Do you think I'd be disappointed with this 40mm lens? I'd prefer it to be WR, but some say with the plastic mount that it kind of is. I sometimes think my S lenses are a bit sharp and too clinical. Do you see some kind of different/artistic/softer rendering with this lens compared to the S lenses? Thanks for the great Vid.
It’s hard to be disappointed with this lens, even if it were at a higher price. Yea Z lenses are a little surgically precise with not a lot of character, but insane optical performance. This lens is for sure not as sharp as say, the 50mm f/1.8s, but it’s still sharp. I love this lens personally
I find it interesting watching the reviews on this lens. People almost universally give it great reviews, but there is a sense that they do it begrudgingly. I guess that's because it's the cheapest full-frame Z lens Nikon makes, and it has a plastic mount. But it seems to have a lot going for it.
The price difference between the two is ridiculous. For what? Looking different? I would support the retro design being more expensive if it had a metal mount. The current price difference is probably fair haha couldn’t cost them more than 50 bucks
It's an OK lens. The build quality is shit, it doesn't even have a metal lens mount, other than the screws there is probably not a single piece of metal in the construction. The optical quality is good, not great. It needs to be stopped down to f4 to be acceptably sharp edge to edge. Compare this build quality, optical quality and price point with other systems and USD300 is not that cheap anymore. I got the SE version and I was a bit disappointed. My disappointment could have been addressed with a metal lens mount. For comparison, the Canon RF 28mm f2.8 is equally small and has a METAL lens mount.
Right on darkslide. We can disagree on the optical quality. I think its great at the price point. But, yea, I agree, I think there is little excuse for not having a metal lens mount these days. Thanks for watching.
Plastic mount gripe is understandable, but edge to edge sharpness is typically overrated. Which one of the sample shot did you feel would have been improved it it had sharper edges?
@@PhotoBug3042 If you've ever had the much cheaper, smaller and sharper EF 40mm f2.8, you'd ask why a more modern lens, that's bigger and more expensive is worse. And it's not just two different products from two different point in time: Canon's new RF 28mm pancake is also better than the Nikkor Z 28mm, both in build quality and image quality. I've grown into both the Nikkor 28 and 40 by now, but I think they are overpriced in both the SE and normal variations for what they are. They should be cheaper.
