Are third party Z-mount lenses a waste of money?

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

More context would be needed to answer your question. Most modern lenses are better than older lenses. There will be times when I want to use my 70-180f2.8 over my 24-120F4S, times where I will prefer the 24-120F4S, and times where I'll want the 85-S.

Sigma makes excellent DX lenses for the z-mount. The Viltrox AIR and LAB series look interesting too. I'll also point out that used third party lenses offer an even better value.

All that matters is that you are happy with the results from whatever lenses you decide to use.

--
SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
“The quickest way to make money at photography is to sell your camera.” – Anonymous

I sympathize with your inclination to stay with Nikon lenses, especially if they are auto focus.

My copy of the Voigtlander 35/2 Apo Lanthar is optically amazing and much smaller than any S-series Z lens. I haven't directly compared it to the Z 35/1.8 S however.

F786 said:

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

Well, Viltrox makes a number of inexpensive and quite good APS-C lenses for Nikon Z DX cameras, like the 25mm, 35mm, and 56mm f1.7 lenses. All are quite good and inexpensive. Nikon also only has the 24mm f1.7 DX prime that completes with the Viltrox 25mm, and does not make other DX primes.

I have no issues with the Viltrox DX lenses. They are sharp, focus quickly enough, and have USB-C ports so they can always be updated with the latest firmware.

F786 said:

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

In the past I've bought some third party lenses for F-mount that I ended up either liking or hating. I told myself that with Z mount I would stick to Nikon-brand native mount lenses, but the Z-mount is actually getting a lot of third-party love.

Voigtlander Nikon Z mount lenses are great, if you enjoy manual-focusing. Especially the APO-Lanthar models. I have the 35mm and 65mm APOs , which are very sharp corner to corner and have really nice colors. I also bought the 40mm f/1.2 NOKTON, and that lens is also great even wide open, though the CA wide open is not as well-controlled as the APOs. That lens is more about character wide-open, but sharpens up really nicely stopped down by f/2.

Tamron is also making pretty good glass for Nikon Z. The 35-150mm f/2-2.8 doesn't have a Nikon equivalent and performs quite well. A great alternative to the 24-70 and 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses.

I bought the Laowa 10mm f/2.8 Zero D which is an auto-focusing UWA lens and has no Nikon equivalent at the moment. It has quite a bit of vignetting, but is sharp even wide open for such an extreme focal length. I'm not a huge fan of the colors or white balance it produces, but most people would probably not even notice any difference. It's something I can fix in post, since I shoot everything in RAW. I'm being extremely picky here. It's great if you need to go that wide.

The links lead to their respective lens sample galleries.

--
http://www.dreamsourcestudio.com
@TheSoaringSprite

Loyal Nikonistas will tell you to avoid 3rd party lenses.

I can tell you I have 3 Z mount 3rd party lenses and and a couple of Z mount lenses -- they all work very well. I also have lots of nikon F mount lenses and at least a dozen 3rd party F-mount lenses. For F-mount, some of the 3rd party Sigma ARTs are clearly better than their Nikon equivalents. They all, except for some old screw drive nikon lenses, work very well on my Zf with the FTZii.

I have not wasted my money.

First of all, I wouldn't lump all third-party lenses into one category. I am sure there are some "cheap junk" third-party lenses, but certain Tamron and Sigma and others are very good.

During the F-mount DSLR era, once I received a Sigma 35mm/f1.4 Art lens test sample around 2013 or so. I tested it on my D800E and was impressed. Eventually I bought one myself when Amazon had some Christmas sale. That Sigma lens is as good as any Nikon Nikkor lens I have used, and in fact that is the only non-Nikkor F-mount lens I own, til this day.

In reality, the "Nikkor" 70-180mm/f2.8, 28-75mm/f2.8 ... are designed by Tamron and manufactured, to Nikon standards, at Tamron's factory. They may have the Nikon logo on them, for all practical purposes, those are third-party lenses and they are very good.

Since the Z mount has the shortest flange distance and the widest mount diameter, for any 3rd-party lens that is designed to work on Sony, Canon, L-mount: Panasonic and Leica, as well as Nikon, they cannot exceed the limitation of the narrower Sony E mount and the 20mm flange distance for Canon RF and Leica L. I call those "the worst of all worlds" design and they carry some inherent disadvantages against lenses specifically designed for Nikon Z only. The disadvantage may be small, though.

I have tried some Tamron lenses and am very impressed with their image quality : Tamron 90mm macro is as sharp as Nikon z mc 105, and focus much faster; Tamron 28-75g2 is very close to z 24-70 f2.8s, although its close up corner image quality is a bit soft; Tamron 50-400 and Tamron 150-500 is sharper than my copy of z100-400 at 400mm and they are as sharp as z180-600, so I sold z100-400 immediately, but their VR performance is not very effective.

I have always looked at each lensindividually. As opposed to viewing it strictly as 1st party vs 3rd party.

I have no problem paying for a good Nikon lens. But I also realize that I dont need "good nikon lenses" for all of the shooting conditions/focal lengths I use. If I were a type of person with a mindset that "I'll probably just want the 1st party lens anyway" then yeah I would probably just spend big up-front.

As it is, I appreciate my Viltrox 16mm 1.8 for what it is, and I wouldn't throw the Tamron 35-150 f2.0-2.8 out the window if I unwrapped it on Christmas day.

Except for the 180-600, I purchased all Nikon "S" lenses, feeling I didn't want to sacrifice on image quality. I like to take shots of night time rocket launches from the Kennedy Space Center, so I needed a faster, wide angle lens that would only be used for this purpose. For such limited use, it didn't make sense to pay $2K+ for a Nikon version so I "gambled" and bought the Viltrox 16mm 1.8. I have to say, it meets all my requirements, I was genuinely surprised, I love the lens.

I'll stick with my Nikon 14-30 F 4 S for travel and landscapes but am really happy with Viltrox and may look at some of their higher end offerings in the future.

In the case of the TT Artisan 75mm f/2 that I have for my Zf, there is no equivalent lens from Nikon, in terms of focal length, max shutter speed, size and weight, or shooting experience (aperture ring). It's a thing in its own right, not a cheap version of an existing Nikon lens. Whether it's a thing you like depends, of course, on your own tastes and interests, but I'm certainly not finding it a waste of money. It's not perfect (the minimum focus distance, for example, is a disgrace) but it's a sturdy, well made lens, optically very sound and its autofocus is accurate and reasonably fast. It's easy to carry, points well, is fun to use, and for the price is an excellent walkaround lens if you like a mild tele prime in that role.

--
Instagram: @yardcoyote

rangel28 said:

Well, Viltrox makes a number of inexpensive and quite good APS-C lenses for Nikon Z DX cameras, like the 25mm, 35mm, and 56mm f1.7 lenses. All are quite good and inexpensive. Nikon also only has the 24mm f1.7 DX prime that completes with the Viltrox 25mm, and does not make other DX primes.

I have no issues with the Viltrox DX lenses. They are sharp, focus quickly enough, and have USB-C ports so they can always be updated with the latest firmware.

Click to expand...

We are on the same page. As DX shooter I prefer to mostly use zooms for convenience but the slow f/6.3 aperture of the 16-50mm and 18-140mm DX zooms I purchased for my recently acquired Z50II had me looking for faster glass. I found the better Chinese primes hard to ignore given that Nikon only has the 24mm f1.7 DX at present and IMO isn't likely to add more small DX primes in the future.

What's not to like about these 3rd party lenses? Decent IQ in a very affordable at current pricing, compact, and firmware upgradable package. Just this week I received the Viltrox AF 25mm, 35mm, and 56mm f/1.7 Air primes. I also chose the TTArtisan AF 75mm f/2 over the Viltrox 75mm f/1.2 Pro lens due mostly to weight and size concerns. These lenses will compliment my Z50II providing a small and lightweight kit.

Normally I would have waited to consider adding some primes if there had been no concern of tariff related price increases.

• John

F786 said:

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

This is a little complicated.

For the most part Nikon Z glass is the better way to go. But there are situations where spending $2500 on a Nikon 135 Plena is just not practical for quite a few people. I have some disposable income and I still thought about the Pena carefully prior to finally getting one.

So there's plenty of rationale in going with the Viltrox 135 LAB, which will be close to the Plena and provide wonderful images for a lot less money.

Then there are premium lenses, such as my Voigtlander 50mm APO, which compliment my Zf and Nikon really has nothing to compete with it, so that decision easier.

Wallets and sense of value vary.

Robert

--
"You're gonna need a bigger boat."

Other brand lenses are not as good as Nikon's but they're not a waste of money.

Whether you will dislike them, replace and thereby incur more cost at the end will depend on what you're looking for. That's a possibility.

Bottomline is that good glass will cost money. Some considerations...

• Voigtlander lenses will be on par with Nikon lenses and they are just as expensive
• Nikon's own pancake lenses are just over $200 and they compare in performance with Viltrox lenses
• Within Nikon lenses the newer f/1.4 versions are not considered as good as the S line f/1.8 lenses

I use a Tamron 28-75/2.8 G2 and I am happy with it. I also have a Viltrox 20mm. It worked well until I put a filter on it. I think the filter is bad and makes the images a bit hazy. I need to test removing the filter. I got a Viltrox 75/f2 and I am liking the portraits from it.

If I was shooting architecture, landscapes, etc., where sharpness and zero distortion are critical, I might not use these lenses.

Satyaa said:

Other brand lenses are not as good as Nikon's but they're not a waste of money.

Whether you will dislike them, replace and thereby incur more cost at the end will depend on what you're looking for. That's a possibility.

Bottomline is that good glass will cost money. Some considerations...

• Voigtlander lenses will be on par with Nikon lenses and they are just as expensive
• Nikon's own pancake lenses are just over $200 and they compare in performance with Viltrox lenses
• Within Nikon lenses the newer f/1.4 versions are not considered as good as the S line f/1.8 lenses

I use a Tamron 28-75/2.8 G2 and I am happy with it. I also have a Viltrox 20mm. It worked well until I put a filter on it. I think the filter is bad and makes the images a bit hazy. I need to test removing the filter. I got a Viltrox 75/f2 and I am liking the portraits from it.

If I was shooting architecture, landscapes, etc., where sharpness and zero distortion are critical, I might not use these lenses.

Click to expand...

I think you mean TTartisan 75mm f/2, which is a great lens for its money: great sharpness and colour rendering.

I have three non-Nikon Z mount lenses and two non-Nikon F-mount lenses that I use on my Z bodies. All five are class leading in my opinion and according to online reviews.

Paddler213 said:

I have three non-Nikon Z mount lenses and two non-Nikon F-mount lenses that I use on my Z bodies. All five are class leading in my opinion and according to online reviews.

Click to expand...

And these five great lenses are... which ones?

F786 said:

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

I currently have only Nikon lenses. But there are some third-party lenses out there that may well be worth a look. I have not tried them though (yet ). Most notably:

- The Voigtlander 50/2 and 35/2 APO Lanthar (though MF only)

- The Viltrox LAB series lenses (optically great though some people report issues - so proceed with caution until these are sorted, probably by firmware updates)

- Tamron has a fair number of excellent bang-for-the-buck lenses (28-75 GII, 150-500, 50-400), though these may be of the type where you may want "the best" eventually (and therefore spend twice, as you put it)

This list is not exhaustive, just some of the lenses that caught my attention.

F786 said:

I have stayed away from purchasing third party lenses for the Nikon Z-mount. In fact I have never bought a third party lens since I have been shooting.

I feel that while these lenses may be less expensive, that I would likely eventually realize the difference in quality (image, build, overall performance), and so will end up buying the comparable Nikon lens and so spend twice.

Unless, there is/are any third party lenses for the the Z-mount that are so comparable in quality that one is highly unlikely to have to "upgrade" to a Nikon branded lens.

Are there?

Your input is greatly valued and I thank you in advance!

Click to expand...

I don’t have any third party lenses for Nikon z but I do have the following third party lenses which are awesome sigma 65 for full frame if they made it in z I would have it but it works with an adapter, and for dx the sigma 56 small and light and awesome and the Viltrox 75 which is simply amazing lens. As far as I can see no reason not to buy. I don’t find the t artisan as good .

My TTartisan 75mm f/2 that I got for about 140€ was definitely not a waste of money. It's not the best lens I've used, but man is it punching above its pricepoint.

Really great lens that I would have happily paid 300€+ for.