Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 263
Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Hi,

this is just out of personal curiosity, but I have been wondering whether some of you out there are going to buy the 40 mm specifically for use on DX.
For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.
What are your thoughts? Do you shoot this FL often on DX?

Barnie25 Regular Member • Posts: 135
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

If I didn't have a 50mm 1.8 S, I would highly consider getting the lens. Its probably great for people portrait work. I also think you can get good landscape shots with it. I use my 50mm 1.8 S to great success for landscape / city photography.

 Barnie25's gear list:Barnie25's gear list
Fujifilm X-T3 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS
thisisbenji Regular Member • Posts: 370
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
8

Yep! I plan to put my 40/2 on my Z50 and eventually when they release the 28/2.8 I’ll get that for my Z6ii.

To me, 60mm equivalent on the Z50 is just about perfect. That’s very close in focal length to the 58/1.4 that everyone seems to love.

p5freak Senior Member • Posts: 2,979
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Franz304 wrote:

Hi,

this is just out of personal curiosity, but I have been wondering whether some of you out there are going to buy the 40 mm specifically for use on DX.
For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.
What are your thoughts? Do you shoot this FL often on DX?

I am going to try the 40/2 on the Z50. But i am pretty sure it wont beat the 12 year old 35mm f1.8 DX, which only costs half the price. Its an excellent lens, razor sharp even wide open.

-- hide signature --

Stupid is as stupid does - Forrest Gump

JohnNewman
JohnNewman Contributing Member • Posts: 945
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Franz304 wrote:

Hi,

this is just out of personal curiosity, but I have been wondering whether some of you out there are going to buy the 40 mm specifically for use on DX.
For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.
What are your thoughts? Do you shoot this FL often on DX?

No, I used to have a 50mm f1.8 which I used on a Sony Nex 7. For me, not long enough to be a useful portrait lens and not wide enough for general use. Now if I used full frame it could be an interesting focal length but not on an aps-c body. YMMV of course.

John

 JohnNewman's gear list:JohnNewman's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX90V Nikon Z50 Nikon DX 18-140mm F3.5-6.3 VR Apple iPhone 13 Pro
peripheralfocus Veteran Member • Posts: 4,855
not that unusual
5

Franz304 wrote:

Hi,

For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.

Everyone has their own personal experience of focal lengths, and there's no right or wrong there.

But just felt like noting that 58mm lenses were once fairly common as a sub-category of "normal" focal lengths on 35mm cameras. Many of the major manufacturers made them, and the ones that didn't make 58mm typically made 55mm models to fit the same category. They are normals that lean a little more in the portrait direction--good for waist-up environmental portraits, for example.

So, the 60mm-equivalent on DX of this new Nikkor is not that out of the ordinary.

I'm personally a little on the fence about that general focal length--like you, I find it to be a little in the middle of where my natural inclinations go. But I don't think Nikon is off the reservation here; there is long precedent for lenses around 58-60mm equivalent, and many people have liked them and made good use of them.

skyrunr
skyrunr Senior Member • Posts: 1,782
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

In these cases using a zoom lens to shoot at those focal lengths for a day to find your personal preference.
For me, 24/28mm eq can be too wide for eye detail (color.)  50mm eq can be too long for shots in a smaller room.  33-35mm is a better balance between 24mm and 50mm.  Being a little faster than the kit, a little wider than the 50-S, a little softer (not an S,) and A LOT smaller is a fair compromise.  The 40f2 might be slightly better for subject isolation. 
Video users may want/have to just deal with the larger s-primes or a manual  third-party 1.4 lens.  It will be interesting to see the pro video and vlogger reviews on this lens.

Most smartphones are 28f2 these days.  SLR images with wider or zoomed focal lengths will set your photos apart from everything else.  I couldn't decide between the 28SE or 40 so preordered both and will keep whichever one shoes up first wins.  I just want something compact (like 1.8G primes,) and better than the 16-50 or 24-50 offer.

-- hide signature --

SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
'Out of the darkness there must come out the light.' Bob Marley

 skyrunr's gear list:skyrunr's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon Z50 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G +11 more
KR Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,331
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
8

p5freak wrote:

I am going to try the 40/2 on the Z50. But i am pretty sure it wont beat the 12 year old 35mm f1.8 DX, which only costs half the price. Its an excellent lens, razor sharp even wide open.

I'd be surprised if it doesn't "beat" the older lens quite handily, actually. All Z lenses to date have bested their F-mount counterparts, and the few samples they've released for this lens look better than what the older lens is capable of (my recollection was that the out of focus backgrounds in particular were generally jagged and unpleasing). Plus you'll get to ditch the FTZ.

 KR Photo's gear list:KR Photo's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 Nikon Z 35mm F1.8 +4 more
OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 263
Re: not that unusual
1

peripheralfocus wrote:

Franz304 wrote:

Hi,

For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.

Everyone has their own personal experience of focal lengths, and there's no right or wrong there.

But just felt like noting that 58mm lenses were once fairly common as a sub-category of "normal" focal lengths on 35mm cameras. Many of the major manufacturers made them, and the ones that didn't make 58mm typically made 55mm models to fit the same category. They are normals that lean a little more in the portrait direction--good for waist-up environmental portraits, for example.

So, the 60mm-equivalent on DX of this new Nikkor is not that out of the ordinary.

I'm personally a little on the fence about that general focal length--like you, I find it to be a little in the middle of where my natural inclinations go. But I don't think Nikon is off the reservation here; there is long precedent for lenses around 58-60mm equivalent, and many people have liked them and made good use of them.

Oh certainly, it is for sure a matter of personal preference too! I just find that for me that FL is kinda never used on DX, but for others it may be another story. Still wish Nikon made at least one proper DX Z prime, but oh well...

OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 263
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

skyrunr wrote:

In these cases using a zoom lens to shoot at those focal lengths for a day to find your personal preference.

Yup, already did that with the 16-50 mm. That's where I realized that used very little the FL between ~35 mm and ~45 mm. That's why I say that it is probably not the right lens for me

For me, 24/28mm eq can be too wide for eye detail (color.) 50mm eq can be too long for shots in a smaller room. 33-35mm is a better balance between 24mm and 50mm. Being a little faster than the kit, a little wider than the 50-S, a little softer (not an S,) and A LOT smaller is a fair compromise. The 40f2 might be slightly better for subject isolation.
Video users may want/have to just deal with the larger s-primes or a manual third-party 1.4 lens. It will be interesting to see the pro video and vlogger reviews on this lens.

Most smartphones are 28f2 these days. SLR images with wider or zoomed focal lengths will set your photos apart from everything else. I couldn't decide between the 28SE or 40 so preordered both and will keep whichever one shoes up first wins. I just want something compact (like 1.8G primes,) and better than the 16-50 or 24-50 offer.

I was initially very interested in the 28 mm, as it would be a really good FL for me on DX. However I was a bit disappointed when they announced it was going to be f2.8, as that's not great on DX if you want to be able to do low-light photography. I really wish Nikon made some proper DX primes, but I guess I will have to get a Viltrox at this pace.

EduPortas Contributing Member • Posts: 675
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
3

Franz304 wrote:

What are your thoughts? Do you shoot this FL often on DX?

Absolutely yes, for two reasons:

1) If I ever upgrade to a Nikon mirrorless FX body I'm good to go.

2) The "kit" zooms already available for the Z50/Zfc cover the very wide 18mm and the very long 250mm. The only gap for my work is a very sharp lens that lives at F2 for interview/portrait work.

This new 40mm covers that need beautifuly and does not cost an arm and a leg like the "S" primes.

I like "normal" lenses since the wider options tend to distort facial features. So again, another positive mark for the 40mm.

I'm sure the quality is there for the more expensive glass, but for general convenience and quality/price ratio the 40mm seems like a logical choice, since I like to keep my kit as hidden as possible from other people.

So yes, for a commercial shoot in a restaurant, for example, that also includes a video interview with the cheff, my kit will be the 18-55 kit zoom and this sharp prime. That's it.

Oh, and a bunch of batteries since Nikon refuses to sell an AC adapter for the Z50 😅

skyrunr
skyrunr Senior Member • Posts: 1,782
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

They seem too long and heavy in comparison.  Having used Sony and Canon as well, I prefer the consistent ergonomics of the Z lenses.  I agree on the 28mm not being f2 as well.  It is often difficult for me to justify swapping off my 24-70F4S for two stops.  I'll use lighting or a monopod because it lacks VR.

There's certainly room for a variable aperture faster DX lens, maybe a 16-35f2-4, about the size of the 14-30F4S, but I don't see that happening.

Nikon made some proper DX primes, but I guess I will have to get a Viltrox at this pace.

-- hide signature --

SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
'Out of the darkness there must come out the light.' Bob Marley

 skyrunr's gear list:skyrunr's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Nikon Z50 Nikon Z7 II Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G +11 more
jjz2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,694
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Eh I'd say it's quite a popular portrait length. See 58mm .95, and 58mm 1.4G. Those are top of the line professional lenses.

For general use (walk around/street), yeah, I think it's kind of tight though.

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon Z5 Apple iPhone 12 mini
Nevermess Regular Member • Posts: 440
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

Franz304 wrote:

Hi,

this is just out of personal curiosity, but I have been wondering whether some of you out there are going to buy the 40 mm specifically for use on DX.
For me 40 mm is a weird focal length on DX (it's 60 mm FF equivalent) and it feels too narrow for most of the photography I do. It's also kinda wide for portraits, so to me this is kind of a no man's land.
What are your thoughts? Do you shoot this FL often on DX?

Wait for some tests. It might turn out that new Viltrox 33mm F 1.4 could be better lens. For sure it is faster and has much better build (all metal).

 Nevermess's gear list:Nevermess's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +4 more
thisisbenji Regular Member • Posts: 370
Nikon > Viltrox
2

But it’s also bigger and DX only. For me 80% of the draw on this 40/2 is it’s size and weight. I have a few of the bigger primes and they’re great, but they’re hard to casually carry. This 40/2 should make any of the Z cameras small enough to fit in just about any bag. Right now, the only two lenses that do this are the 16-50 and 24-50. Those lenses are okay, but for me, they’re just too dark in most scenarios.

Dave1235 New Member • Posts: 12
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
5

For me, Nikon missed the boat.  I looked closely at the 28mm 2.8, but there was something about the output in the samples I just didn't like.  I find the 40mm to be too tight on DX, because if I was going that far, I'd just go to the 50mm 1.8.  However the real reason Nikon missed is because Viltrox beat them to the punch.  I bought the 23mm 1.4 from Viltrox 10 minutes after I saw a sample photo.  It isn't a perfect lens, but it is pretty darn good.  My Z50 was just a snapshot camera I carried when I didn't want to carry a big camera.  That 23mm made me like the Z50 a LOT more than I did before.  I would have preferred Nikon be the ones that hit that spot first, but they didn't.

OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 263
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
2

Yup, completely agree. Both the Z50 and Zfc are basically screaming "use me with a compact prime!". Nikon could have easily designed a couple of compact f1.8 DX primes to launch together with those cameras, but sadly didn't. Oh well, at least third parties are slowly coming to Z mount, so one can still hope of seeing more DX lenses one day.

p5freak Senior Member • Posts: 2,979
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

KR Photo wrote:

p5freak wrote:

I am going to try the 40/2 on the Z50. But i am pretty sure it wont beat the 12 year old 35mm f1.8 DX, which only costs half the price. Its an excellent lens, razor sharp even wide open.

I'd be surprised if it doesn't "beat" the older lens quite handily, actually. All Z lenses to date have bested their F-mount counterparts, and the few samples they've released for this lens look better than what the older lens is capable of (my recollection was that the out of focus backgrounds in particular were generally jagged and unpleasing). Plus you'll get to ditch the FTZ.

We shall wait and see. In this video its said to be softer than the 1.8/50, and you can clearly see that in the comparison shot of the color card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO3fT1Lyrow

-- hide signature --

Stupid is as stupid does - Forrest Gump

KR Photo Senior Member • Posts: 1,331
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

p5freak wrote:

KR Photo wrote:

p5freak wrote:

I am going to try the 40/2 on the Z50. But i am pretty sure it wont beat the 12 year old 35mm f1.8 DX, which only costs half the price. Its an excellent lens, razor sharp even wide open.

I'd be surprised if it doesn't "beat" the older lens quite handily, actually. All Z lenses to date have bested their F-mount counterparts, and the few samples they've released for this lens look better than what the older lens is capable of (my recollection was that the out of focus backgrounds in particular were generally jagged and unpleasing). Plus you'll get to ditch the FTZ.

We shall wait and see. In this video its said to be softer than the 1.8/50, and you can clearly see that in the comparison shot of the color card.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO3fT1Lyrow

Softer than one of the sharpest lenses Nikon has ever made? OK.

I'm glad you like your 35. You should stick with it. But you won't ever see anyone attempt to compare it to the 50mm f/1.8 S lens, because they aren't even in the same league.

 KR Photo's gear list:KR Photo's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon AP-F 70-300mm F4.5-5.6E Nikon Z 24-70mm F4 Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 Nikon Z 35mm F1.8 +4 more
TheWillRogers
TheWillRogers Regular Member • Posts: 312
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

If I didn't have an N80, 35mm f1.8G and 50mm 1.8G I would absolutely be jumping on the 40mm f2.

 TheWillRogers's gear list:TheWillRogers's gear list
Nikon Z50 Nikon 10-20mm F4.5-5.6 VR Nikon Z 16-50mm F3.5-6.3 VR Nikon Z 50-250mm F4.5-6.3 VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +9 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads