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

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
Nevermess Regular Member • Posts: 441
Re: Nikon > Viltrox

thisisbenji wrote:

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.

Viltrox is just 100 gr more and I would accept it for the metal, better build. Also Viltrox is faster. If Viltrox is better optically I would never consider this 40 F2 plastic lens.

 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
goactive Senior Member • Posts: 2,106
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

You would be better off getting the new 24mm as it is a 42 on a DX and then if you get a FF you then get the full 28mm.

I have both the Z6 and Z50 so the 28mm is what i will be buying at some point or i might just get the wide 14-30 zoom f4 to get a even better range.

Then on my Z50 it will be around a 21-45 still quite wide on the Z50 for a smaller walk around camera with a little bit of zoom.

With wide lens like this and the new 40mm the background blur is never going to be that good vs using a zoom so the f2 is no big deal as in lower light the z cams are so so clean in higher ISO its not  a problem if its just f4.

We shot part of yesterdays wedding we did at F4 and 2500 ISO on the Z6 with no problem.

-- hide signature --

Started shooting digital back with the first 2MP cameras. Over 20 cameras later still going. I shoot family and people portraits, weddings, Sports and a little of everything.

 goactive's gear list:goactive's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon 1 V2 Nikon 1 J5 Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G +23 more
cali92rs Contributing Member • Posts: 603
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

FYI Pentax has had an APS-C 40mm f2.8 for years and folks seem to love it:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1002136-REG/pentax_21390_hd_pentax_da_40mm.html

thisisbenji Regular Member • Posts: 370
Re: Nikon > Viltrox

Nevermess wrote:

thisisbenji wrote:

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.

Viltrox is just 100 gr more and I would accept it for the metal, better build. Also Viltrox is faster. If Viltrox is better optically I would never consider this 40 F2 plastic lens.

From what I can tell, the Viltrox lens is more than 50% longer. That’s a huge deal breaker compared to the Nikon 28 and 40

Brueghel
Brueghel Senior Member • Posts: 1,278
Nopes
1

Unless it proves to be stellar (doubtful)

40mm is 60mm on APS-C. Not a particularly interesting focal length. But F2 is indeed interesting.

In any case, I believe it is dependent on your usual contexts

and.... it may well be that Nikon will restrict it to Zfc owners (at least for some time). They did it once, so they may do it agaan

 Brueghel's gear list:Brueghel's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Nikon D7100 Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR +4 more
Brueghel
Brueghel Senior Member • Posts: 1,278
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

Nevermess wrote:

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).

the Viltrox 23mm is very nice !

 Brueghel's gear list:Brueghel's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Nikon D7100 Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR +4 more
OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 266
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

I rarely do portrait, but, while I think the 40 mm can be good for that, wouldn't the 50 mm f1.8 be much better for not that much more money?

I personally have no interest in getting a lens because it can also used for FF, as I intend to stay APS-C. I think there are many others like me, though Nikon doesn't seem to recognize that, given that their strategy is all about pushing people to FX.

As for the Viltrox lenses, I think I will also end up getting one, probably the 23 mm. I have been eyeing those since announcement and they seem pretty good lenses for their price.

forg1vr Forum Member • Posts: 53
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

So far my only prime was the 35 1.8, and it served me well as a lense I could get a nice Bokeh with, and for outdoor people/portrait photography. Used it on many many occasions.

Since my daughter was born last year, she is of course my favorite subject - and since many things are still happening indoors, the 35 was just too narrow.

So I thought about the 28 2.8 - and had similar reservations about the aperture, and its not available yet anyways.

So what did I do? I bought the Viltrox 23, it arrived yesterday. Haven't had too much time to play with it yet, but since I also use my Z50 as a webcam for work, that focal length is already working out a lot better.

Further testing has to wait a bit, since I have to send my Z50 to Nikon for a repair of the rear LCD (I openend another thread on this topic).

Will I buy the 40 2.0? Mh, doubt it in all honesty. Sure, its compact. But in my mind, if I take a single compact lense e.g. to walk in the city, it's too tight for me. I would never be able to capture e.g. any building compleltey. And it is somewhat close to the 35 1.8. And that lense rarely has worked out for me in a city.

Since I carry my camera around my neck, 1cm more or less on the lense won't make that much of a difference to me. For walking around, the 23 1.4 Viltrox is, to me, a better candidate.

And if I look longer, yes, I'm still interested in that 18-140 Nikon has announced. And for portraits, the Viltrox 58 would be a contender. Even though not really a use case for me if I am being honest with myself.

So long story short, similar to what others in this thread have said, I think Nikon missed the boat in regards to focal lengths and aperture. They try to capture the DX audience with the FX lenses, but for me, ignoring my GAS that I have for the 40 2.0, those lense will probably not be coming to me. Gotta say it: Viltrox made the better move for DX users.

 forg1vr's gear list:forg1vr's gear list
Nikon Z50 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +1 more
Nevermess Regular Member • Posts: 441
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

Franz304 wrote:

I rarely do portrait, but, while I think the 40 mm can be good for that, wouldn't the 50 mm f1.8 be much better for not that much more money?

I personally have no interest in getting a lens because it can also used for FF, as I intend to stay APS-C. I think there are many others like me, though Nikon doesn't seem to recognize that, given that their strategy is all about pushing people to FX.

As for the Viltrox lenses, I think I will also end up getting one, probably the 23 mm. I have been eyeing those since announcement and they seem pretty good lenses for their price.

I would not consider 40mm good for portrait on DXC. 50 mm is the minimum. You can consider Viltrox 56 1.4 as it is only 329$ and has excellent reviews from actual buyers:

Viltrox 56 1.4 Buyers review

Nikon 50mm 1.8 Z lens is 597$ and it is also bigger, slow and heavier. If you are not planning to migrate to FF Viltrox might be the better choice.

 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
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Fwiw, I find a UWA zoom and a bounce flash to be amazing for photographing kids indoors.

I’ve been using my Z6ii + 14-30/4 + TT350N indoors to photograph my 7 month old while in playing with him and it’s been a great setup. 
That’s kind of a big setup though. So I see this 40 as more of something I can pop onto my Z50 and throw it in the diaper bag for when I want to grab a photo but I’m not necessarily doing “photography”. Currently I use the 16-50 for this purpose, but that lens is a bit uninspiring for me.

TheWillRogers
TheWillRogers Regular Member • Posts: 317
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
3

Franz304 wrote:

I rarely do portrait, but, while I think the 40 mm can be good for that, wouldn't the 50 mm f1.8 be much better for not that much more money?

The 50mm f1.8S is twice the price of the 40mm f2, hardly "not that much more money"

 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
thisisbenji Regular Member • Posts: 370
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
2

TheWillRogers wrote:

Franz304 wrote:

I rarely do portrait, but, while I think the 40 mm can be good for that, wouldn't the 50 mm f1.8 be much better for not that much more money?

The 50mm f1.8S is twice the price of the 40mm f2, hardly "not that much more money"

Twice as long, twice as heavy, twice as expensive. Not sure it’s the same use case. I’ll be happy to own both.

ANAYV Forum Pro • Posts: 22,221
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?

Not a focal length I would have any need for.

But there sure are others that would...and why it was made.

Stay healthy

ANAYV

OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 266
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

TheWillRogers wrote:

Franz304 wrote:

I rarely do portrait, but, while I think the 40 mm can be good for that, wouldn't the 50 mm f1.8 be much better for not that much more money?

The 50mm f1.8S is twice the price of the 40mm f2, hardly "not that much more money"

It goes down regularly to about 450 euros here, so I would say it's still very much affordable. Not saying it's cheap, but considering how stellar this lens is, it's still a good price, if you have a use case for it.

ANAYV Forum Pro • Posts: 22,221
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

EduPortas wrote:

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

What DX Z  lens is at 18mm?

I think 24mm (35mm terms) is the widest right now.

Some of us are hoping.for a 10-20mm Z lens.

and the

Stay healthy

ANAYV

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 😅

OP Franz304 Regular Member • Posts: 266
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

ANAYV wrote:

EduPortas wrote:

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

What DX Z lens is at 18mm?

I think 24mm (35mm terms) is the widest right now.

Some of us are hoping.for a 10-20mm Z lens.

Many  of us! I would love to see something like that, or even better a 10-24 mm lens!

Photodog2 Senior Member • Posts: 1,619
SE version?
1

I am going to use the 40 on my Zfc, but I am also going to do so for my Z6/7. I have been using the 43/1.9 Pentax on my crop bodies which gives me an equivalent 65mm. I also have a 40/1.8 Konica SLR lens that I have used adapted on my crop Sony.

In addition I have been using my 60/2.8G micro w/FTZ on my Z6/7. I also have the 58/1.4 Voigtlander on the FTZ, plus a 58/1.4 Minolta SLR on my FF Sony. They all work for me beautifully.

So the FL of around 60mm equivalent in a prime lens is something I am used to and looking forward to using on the Zfc. I'm just waiting to see if Nikon also offers it in an SE version that will match the aesthetic. If not, at its very reasonable price, size, weight, F2 speed, and usefulness on both FF and APSC, I'm still getting it. Nikon is going to sell a lot of this lens. It may single-handedly make 40mm and 60mm equivalent more popular than ever.

 Photodog2's gear list:Photodog2's gear list
Pentax K10D Pentax K-5 IIs Nikon D600 Sony a6000 Sony a7 II +9 more
iljitsch Senior Member • Posts: 1,094
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?

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.

Really? So far my impression was that the Z lenses were pretty much in a new class, and even though the 35 f/1.8 DX is very good and works well on my Z fc, with the FTZ in the middle it gets a bit unwieldy so I could see myself getting the new 40 mm. Also nice that it's full frame so useful when I upgrade to a full frame Z camera at some point in the future.

But forget that if it's worse than the 35 DX. Or even just not any better.

 iljitsch's gear list:iljitsch's gear list
Nikon D7100 Nikon Z fc Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D +7 more
Kharan
Kharan Senior Member • Posts: 2,211
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?

On FX, the 39-43mm range is simply my most used FL setting, no contest. So you can bet I’ll get this lens! It’ll also work wonders on the Z fc, as on DX, the same range is still something I use about 15% of the time.

-- hide signature --

"Chase the light around the world
I want to look at life
In the available light" - Rush, 'Available Light'

 Kharan's gear list:Kharan's gear list
Pentax Q Olympus PEN E-P3 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Nikon Z7 Nikon Z fc +22 more
jjz2 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,709
Re: Is anybody going to use the 40 mm f2 on the Z50/Zfc?
1

Kharan wrote:

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?

On FX, the 39-43mm range is simply my most used FL setting, no contest. So you can bet I’ll get this lens! It’ll also work wonders on the Z fc, as on DX, the same range is still something I use about 15% of the time.

This is an interesting experiment to analyze your shots on a zoom. And I've done that quite recently also.

I used to be all about my primes, but kind of switched to zooms 24-70/70-200 for utility purposes on working shoots.

On a recent quick outdoor portrait shoot, I used my 70-200 and didn't even look at the focal length, just tried to shoot naturally and see what landed...and looked the best to my eye.

Basically all my shots were in the 120-160 range... which surprised me, as I always just kind of went with an 85 or 105 type prime for portraits, b/c that's what everybody says you should get.

But obviously that isn't my preferred range when I have free reign. I'd probably do well with a 135mm instead if I were to get a prime in this range.

 jjz2's gear list:jjz2's gear list
Nikon Z6 Nikon Z5 Apple iPhone 12 mini
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads