Awesome product with very poor execution!

[skyrunr]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!



Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

 

[NikonShoot3r]

Interesting....only owned a couple of F mount primes...no Z mount..but content with zooms

 

[Orsonneke]

I have this lens on my Z8 since out hit the shelves.

I use for street and very happy with it.The AF is more noisy than other lenses on the z range , but still very acceptable IMHO , the lens is very sharp where it is supposed to be for its purpose it was conceived for.Far better than the XF 27 on my fujies.

The quality is very good for a pancake! And that what it is : a pancake lens!My rating would be a 4,5 /5.I am very happy with this lens.

Just some random shots in the kitchen with the Z8











--

gunther geeraerts

Explore gunther geeraerts’s 999 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

500px

500px.com

 

[Stavrosf]

I also love this lens on my Z Fc. I have a filter on the lens and this helps on the noise of the lens. But, of course I do not consider it ideal for video.

 

[CliveTJ]

I don’t know whether you’re helping me….you’re certainly raising good questions.

I’ve sold my 28 2.8 to be ready to buy the 26mm whilst it’s on sale. I want it for my Z fc but more for my Z7ii as a casual walkaround lens in U.K. and European towns. Noise generally shouldn’t matter too much but it’s not easy to assess.

Small with low weight are important to me for my use cases so I’m still tempted.

 

[skyrunr]

I just don't think the price is justified with this issue, but we SO NEED a lens like this! It just doesn't make any sense. Even the S lenses that are are not silent, and I do notice them compared to Sony's and Canon's offerings. One of the RF lenses was noisy, nothing like this lens, but I don't remember which one.

• I'd consider adapting a Sony G lens with the Fotodiox adapter, which I should have by Friday. If f2.8 is enough the Tamron 20-40f2.8 is pretty slick.
  
  
• If you need faster than F4, you'd probably benefit/want f1.x anyway. Especially since it is more for low light (already compromised) than shallow DOF.
  
  
• Even my affordable Samyang 45mm f1.8 e-mount prime is silent.
  
  
• I like the 24-50 more than the 28f2.8. You've probably seen my comparison photo:

--
SkyRunR
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
TIPS: Be kind, RT#M, use gear not signature, limit/shorten replies with quotes!
'The first casualty, when war comes, is truth' - Hiram Johnson (1866-1945)

 

[sirhawkeye64]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

While it is noisy, I think given it's size and compactness they likely had to compromise on a silent AF motor and thus we get a noisy one. I think for most purposes other than video or where you need to be dead silent, this lens is still OK.

For those that need silence can get the slightly quieter (and slightly more expensive) 24mm (and pick up about 1.3 stops at the same time). But I'd say given it's size, I would consider it acceptable. $500 is a bit pricey though, and I couldn't see myself paying a penny more, and yes it probably should be less like around $400. I don't know that adding VR to a 26mm (even if used on a DX body) would help that much (as most primes under say about 100mm don't have VR in general unless maybe they're macro lenses). VR is less effective at shoter FLs.

I guess at the end of the day, there are other options, but nothing this small or compact. LIke I said, the 24mm is an option but it's larger and more expensive, but quieter and probably slightly better optically and you get 1.3 extra stops. These pancakes are all about compromises. They might be loud, they might not be the sharpest (compared to a other premium primes) but they offer a reasonable balance between size, weight, and cost overall (although the 26 is the on higher side; the 28 and 40 pancakes are very reasonably priced).

--
NOTE: If I don't reply to a direct comment in the forums, it's likely I unsubscribed from the thread/article..

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

Try the z 28/2.8 - I have the SE Version

i am amazed you expected more from a very cheap mushroom lens.

 

[skyrunr]

Try the z 28/2.8 - I have the SE Version

i am amazed you expected more from a very cheap mushroom lens.

Cheap?! It is a $500 mushroom. Admittedly, I don't really know the edible 'shroom market for comparison. I do plan on grabbing a 28f2.8SE when I find the right deal. I had to order a Zfc kit to try it out when it was released. LOL I kind of prefer the 24-50's range and sharpness.

 

[curiousmike1300]

I've only had the lens for a couple weeks now, and while I agree it is surprisingly noisy, it isn't that bad to me.

I disagree about making it twice as large; just get the 28 2.8 if you don't care about size.

It's expensive for what it is, but I was willing to pay that because I wanted its size, focal length and the overall image quality is good enough for me.

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

 

[sirhawkeye64]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

Try the z 28/2.8 - I have the SE Version

i am amazed you expected more from a very cheap mushroom lens.

I think he did. Skyrunr (if you know him from his past posts) is a bit of a gear head I think (look at his profile). I think he may have sold the 28 at some point (seems like he buys and sells a lot based on his profile, which there is nothing wrong with it, but it also does sort of explain some things about him). I'm not knocking him, I'm just saying.

Yes noise was one of the concerns on the 26 and it's valid, for video use mostly as you don't want the audible AF noise, and it is a bit pricey for what it is. But it's also the widest pancake prime we have to date for FF, otherwise you're only other option is the larger, more expensive 24 1.8 or the 20 1.8 which are not small by any means in comparison.

Personally I would get the 28 (again, I sold mine too) over the 26 partially due to cost reasons (the 28 being about $200 less but still probably about the same optically).

 

[Virtual Photon]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

Let's summarize:

You think it is too expensive, jitters in AF-C on lower cost bodies, has noisy focus, lacks VR, isn't 1.8, and lacks the aesthetics of an SE version.

I don't particularly disagree with your assessment (though I haven't used the lens) but I'm still trying to figure out what you think is so 'awesome' about it. 'Cause it's a pancake?

 

[jjz2]

I just received this lens from B&H. I fully researched the lens and the MTF's are more of what I'd like compared to the S lenses I've tried. Sharp center and smooth drop off, similar to the 24f2.8D I owned and enjoyed for years; mostly on DX. I heard people report that it was noisy, but I thought how noisy can a new $500 lens be?!

Well this is an unacceptable level of noisy. Especially for the cost, and when AF-C jitters on non Z8/Z9 bodies. I'm not even sure I'd be interested in this lens at half the cost. The 24-50 is slow, but pretty good for this purpose. The noise rules out use for video/vlogging or intended use in quiet spaces such as museums, churches, theater, and galleries. I would be VERY happy if Nikon made a lens twice as large as this but quiet, with VR for DX bodies, and maybe the size would allow for a f1.8. It is nice to know something like this is possible though. I hope they try again, and even consider an SE version with an aperture ring (smooth and friction, btw.)

It's the noisiest mirrorless lens I've ever used and I've used about 25 of them. Forget about video, you'd need off camera mic for sure... it's audibly loud enough for many people to hear around you just taking photos esp if you are walking around in a museum or something. And to me, this should be a de facto inconspicuous walk around lens...

I got rid of mine and now have the 24 1.7 DX.

I was using it on my Zfc, with no use case for FF, so, so far I'm ok with the size trade off to get a faster lens that isn't noisy.

I would have never ordered it though if I had known about the 24 1.7 DX, that lens came out right after I got the 26mm 2.8 though, literally within 2 days... ugh.

Happy with the 24 1.7 DX so far though.

 

[Bunjo]

A pancake lens has been on my wish list for years but I was disappointed with the 26mm f2.8 on my Z30. The image quality was impressive but the ergonomics of the pancake lens irritated me. The lens was not so small once you added the lens hood, and you needed the lens hood to add a skylight filter and a regular front lens cap. It was a tad too long too, for my purposes. It was noisy although that didn't bother me as I do very little video.

So I traded it in and got the 24mm f1.7. Now that is much better.

 

[skyrunr]

I guess it is pretty simple, and I was clear. I want a non-compact (compromised IQ/CA), non-S (too long), non-pancake (noisy) prime. From my chats with others here, many of us are on the same page.

 

[CliveTJ]

I finally bit the bullet and bought the 26mm. Pricewise it is expensive, it helped that I got it during the current sale and from what seems to be the only U.K. Nikon dealer who sells with an extra discount. It cost £444 incl VAT. Selling two unused lenses to MPB funded the purchase.

I was worried that noise would be a problem but it’s ok for me. It’s like a lot of screw drive lenses in terms of noise. On AFC it will “chatter” but for my uses AFS or a little AFC is all I need.

Initial pics are great and the size is exactly what I wanted. My two Z bodies are already arguing over who gets to have the lens mounted

 

[Michael Firstlight]

As usual, it depends on your application and needs.

I use it on my Z9. I need a pancake lens for event work like weddings. Most of the time I'm using my stellar Tamron 35-150mm 2.0-2.8 lens for most of an event. If I need super-wide and superior quality, I'll use my Z 14-24mm 2.8, but due to its size and weight I use it only for specialty shots and won't carry it on me - it comes out and back into my roller case the few times I need it. So when I need something wider than 35mm, the Z 26mm 2.8 is perfect. I keep it in a tiny belt pouch and can pull it out in a few seconds and put the Tamron on my holster while using it. Those that don't shoot events might not appreciate how much you have to carry on your body all day. I rarely carry two cameras on my body. The quality of the Z 26mm is stellar for the price and my 26mm isn't that noisy on the Z9 (the focus speed on the Z9 is also lightning-fast) - so the other reports kinda baffle me.

I rate the Z 26mm 2.8 five stars for being a super-thin pancake lens. Show me an alternative that is as thin, and fast, with equal IQ,

Mike

--
The one thing everyone can agree on is that film photography has its negatives. It even has its positives and internegatives.

 

[Orsonneke]

As an everyday street and snapshot lens , I am astonished how good this lens performs.

Just a quick example (Z8).I must admit it is noisy but most of the time the environmental noise is more of an issue.A 4,5 /5 for me!



--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/159705946@N03/
https://500px.com/p/gunthergeeraerts?view=photos