Nikon's Best Lens

[Fabian Joya]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

 

[Blisqua]

24-70 is too short for my taste. Were they ever to produce a 24-85 f/2.8 lens, I'd be interested. 70mm is not enough of a telephoto lens, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Satyaa]

24-70 is too short for my taste. Were they ever to produce a 24-85 f/2.8 lens, I'd be interested. 70mm is not enough of a telephoto lens, as far as I'm concerned.

For that the 24-120/f4s might be a better choice in my opinion.

The f/2.8 zooms are already big and heavy for my taste. Any longer focal length would make it worse.

May be, they can make a 24-105 with f3.2 or 3.5 to make it manageable.

 

[Satyaa]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

If you cannot find a fault, why don't you call it perfect?

I don't use the f/2.8 zooms, but I like what Nikon did here. Most brands have already perfected the standard f/2.8 zooms years ago. Finding ways to improve such an excellent lens further in this 'ii' is an achievement.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

I suspect that a big factor in that would be how they integrate the Z and RED cameras. The lenses have to serve both purposes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

 

[DVF Photography]

24-70 is too short for my taste. Were they ever to produce a 24-85 f/2.8 lens, I'd be interested. 70mm is not enough of a telephoto lens, as far as I'm concerned.

Perhaps you might want to consider the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Di III VXD? In my humble opinion it's one of the best lenses I've ever had. Optically it provides everything there is to desire, and it's fast enough for the darkest situations.

Yes, you lack a bit of wide end range, but I certainly don't miss it. And in the rare occasion that I do, I mount a 20mm f/2.8.
One other thing to consider is the weight (almost 1200gr). But that is a non-issue to me as well.

 

[rangel28]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

While I have no doubt this is probably Nikon's "best" lens, but "best" is truly subjective, and for some a lens like the 24mm-120mm f4 is a better option as it offers more range and is significantly cheaper. A working professional might indeed need the new 24-70 f2.8 S II, and they can write off the cost as a business expense, but a hobbyist like me would probably have to factor in the cost for a divorce lawyer once my wife figured out I spent for the lens, and she would also get half of everything I own.

So for me, the 24mm-120mm f4 is probably the better option.

 

[shuncheung]

24-70 is too short for my taste. Were they ever to produce a 24-85 f/2.8 lens, I'd be interested. 70mm is not enough of a telephoto lens, as far as I'm concerned.

Perhaps you might want to consider the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Di III VXD? In my humble opinion it's one of the best lenses I've ever had. Optically it provides everything there is to desire, and it's fast enough for the darkest situations.

Yes, you lack a bit of wide end range, but I certainly don't miss it. And in the rare occasion that I do, I mount a 20mm f/2.8.

It is good that you don't miss the wide end, but I don't even like 28-70mm/f2.8 (or 28-75mm) zooms because that 4mm on the wide end really makes a difference to me. My progression with Nikon F-mount f2.8 mid zooms were the 35-70/2.8, 28-70/2.8 and finally 24-70/2.8. In fact I still own all of them today (the 35-70 has fogged up inside and the AF-S motor on the 28-70 has died). I am sure the Tamron 35-150 is great, but we are back to 82mm filters and a 2.6-pound/1.165kg lens without optical VR.

Canon makes 24-105mm/f2.8 that also uses 82mm filters but is even heavier than the Tamron: 2.9 pounds/1.3kg and is $3200, but it has IS (VR) and is not that much more expensive than the new Nikon 24-70/2.8, whose initial MSRP is quite high IMO.

I stick with the 24-120mm/f4 S when I want a wider zoom range: longer in the tele side. And it should be clear that there are quite a few different ways to compromise on those mid zooms.

One other thing to consider is the weight (almost 1200gr). But that is a non-issue to me as well.

 

[sirhawkeye64]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

the "best" of anything is always subjective. For me, the 24-70 is a boring focal range. I might prefer ultra wide or soemthing in the telephoto range (say 85mm or longer) as these give a bit of a different view than what we normally see everyday (both with our own eyes or in all the photos being shared around the Internet). But for some the 24-70 MAY be the best for them/ their needs. I actually sold my Z Mark I lens recently as I found the 24-120 to be a "better" lens for my needs.

I think Nikon will refresh the 14-24 and 70-200, but beyond that I don't think they will go all out and replace all that many in practice, just the holy trinity of 2.8's as that's what is probably in most people's bags. I don't expect them to revamp or re-release updated versions of the 1.8's or 1.4's for example, or any of the travel zooms for that matter. Although when it comes to the travel zooms at least, I could see them release new variations of similar lenses, like a 20-200mm for example that would effectively "replace" the now 5-year-old 24-200.

--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *

 

[Bob A L]

100%. If I had to pick the least usable lens in the lineup, the 24-70 would be among the top contenders. I realize there apparently many that are wild about this range, so that's great that they have a new model. Just not enough focal length range for a zoom lens, and way too big physically for a general purpose, and not wide enough for really wide or long enough to even approach focal lengths in the telephoto range. But if it suits your style, go for it.

 

[Rodenmg]

I guess all those owners of the 58 0.95 Noct are having buyer’s remorse now.

Just kidding cause I think I understand what you mean. Best ever Nikon 24-70 f2.8, ok, maybe. But I’ll wait to see some side by side comparisons with V1 before I’d even go that far. I don’t doubt the V2 is better in some ways but, I’d like to see actual comparisons. And I don’t mean by some paid talking head on YouTube.

You don’t happen to have some comparison shots you could share, do you?

--
... Mike
... https://www.flickr.com/photos/198581502@N02/

 

[Fabian Joya]

24-70 is too short for my taste. Were they ever to produce a 24-85 f/2.8 lens, I'd be interested. 70mm is not enough of a telephoto lens, as far as I'm concerned.

For that the 24-120/f4s might be a better choice in my opinion.

The f/2.8 zooms are already big and heavy for my taste. Any longer focal length would make it worse.

May be, they can make a 24-105 with f3.2 or 3.5 to make it manageable.

Weight is no longer a concern. The weight of the 24-70/2.8 II is pretty much equal to the 24-120/4.

 

[Fabian Joya]

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

If you cannot find a fault, why don't you call it perfect?

I can find faults with it. Which is why it's not perfect.

 

[Fabian Joya]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

the "best" of anything is always subjective. For me, the 24-70 is a boring focal range. I might prefer ultra wide or something in the telephoto range (say 85mm or longer) as these give a bit of a different view than what we normally see everyday (both with our own eyes or in all the photos being shared around the Internet). But for some the 24-70 MAY be the best for them/ their needs. I actually sold my Z Mark I lens recently as I found the 24-120 to be a "better" lens for my needs.

Not the point I was trying to make. In terms of a "complexity/performance ratio" if you will, the 24-70/2.8 II ranks near, if not at, the top.

 

[Fabian Joya]

I guess all those owners of the 58 0.95 Noct are having buyer’s remorse now.

Just kidding cause I think I understand what you mean. Best ever Nikon 24-70 f2.8, ok, maybe. But I’ll wait to see some side by side comparisons with V1 before I’d even go that far. I don’t doubt the V2 is better in some ways but, I’d like to see actual comparisons. And I don’t mean by some paid talking head on YouTube.

You don’t happen to have some comparison shots you could share, do you?

No, I sold my original 24-70 F2.8 some weeks ago. IMO, the original lens is already an excellent lens. Whether it's worth replacing depends on what you value. For me, the $1500 cost difference is well worth the improvements offered by the new lens as it's a lens I use all the time. Amortized over six years, the cost is no more than a Netflix subscription.

 

[Rodenmg]

I guess all those owners of the 58 0.95 Noct are having buyer’s remorse now.

Just kidding cause I think I understand what you mean. Best ever Nikon 24-70 f2.8, ok, maybe. But I’ll wait to see some side by side comparisons with V1 before I’d even go that far. I don’t doubt the V2 is better in some ways but, I’d like to see actual comparisons. And I don’t mean by some paid talking head on YouTube.

You don’t happen to have some comparison shots you could share, do you?

No, I sold my original 24-70 F2.8 some weeks ago. IMO, the original lens is already an excellent lens. Whether it's worth replacing depends on what you value. For me, the $1500 cost difference is well worth the improvements offered by the new lens as it's a lens I use all the time. Amortized over six years, the cost is no more than a Netflix subscription.

I have a V2 coming from Lensrentals.com next week. I plan to do some side-by-sides with my V1.

 

[brucet]

"Best" is very subjective. Who for? Landscape? Portrait? Macro? Street? Budget?

 

[m_black]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

the "best" of anything is always subjective. For me, the 24-70 is a boring focal range. I might prefer ultra wide or soemthing in the telephoto range (say 85mm or longer) as these give a bit of a different view than what we normally see everyday (both with our own eyes or in all the photos being shared around the Internet). But for some the 24-70 MAY be the best for them/ their needs. I actually sold my Z Mark I lens recently as I found the 24-120 to be a "better" lens for my needs.

I think Nikon will refresh the 14-24 and 70-200, but beyond that I don't think they will go all out and replace all that many in practice, just the holy trinity of 2.8's as that's what is probably in most people's bags. I don't expect them to revamp or re-release updated versions of the 1.8's or 1.4's for example, or any of the travel zooms for that matter. Although when it comes to the travel zooms at least, I could see them release new variations of similar lenses, like a 20-200mm for example that would effectively "replace" the now 5-year-old 24-200.

Actually, ALL the early 1.8 primes need refreshing. Not optically, except maybe the 35, but physically. They need to have control rings in addition to Fn buttons to match the newer lenses. I can't use my 85 1.8 the same way I use any of my other lenses. (I have the control ring set for ISO). It's not as big a deal for photo but for video or hyrbid work there are compromises on work flow/operation.

 

[m_black]

100%. If I had to pick the least usable lens in the lineup, the 24-70 would be among the top contenders. I realize there apparently many that are wild about this range, so that's great that they have a new model. Just not enough focal length range for a zoom lens, and way too big physically for a general purpose, and not wide enough for really wide or long enough to even approach focal lengths in the telephoto range. But if it suits your style, go for it.

Depends what you shoot. Anything over 300mm are the least usable lenses on the line up for me. The 1.4 primes are sharp in the centre only. I don't compose only in the middle. If you do any kind of event, wedding, corporate, editorial, even some street or architecture, the 24-70 is a bunch of 2.8 primes in one housing. It's the Swiss army knife in the tool kit. For video gimbal use its my most used lens. The new one is lighter and constant length, and a bit sharper. I've used it for 5 paid gigs since getting it and I'm wild about it lol. It's the lens that always comes with me no matter what other lens I plan to use that day. It's great.

 

[Fabian Joya]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

the "best" of anything is always subjective. For me, the 24-70 is a boring focal range. I might prefer ultra wide or soemthing in the telephoto range (say 85mm or longer) as these give a bit of a different view than what we normally see everyday (both with our own eyes or in all the photos being shared around the Internet). But for some the 24-70 MAY be the best for them/ their needs. I actually sold my Z Mark I lens recently as I found the 24-120 to be a "better" lens for my needs.

I think Nikon will refresh the 14-24 and 70-200, but beyond that I don't think they will go all out and replace all that many in practice, just the holy trinity of 2.8's as that's what is probably in most people's bags. I don't expect them to revamp or re-release updated versions of the 1.8's or 1.4's for example, or any of the travel zooms for that matter. Although when it comes to the travel zooms at least, I could see them release new variations of similar lenses, like a 20-200mm for example that would effectively "replace" the now 5-year-old 24-200.

Actually, ALL the early 1.8 primes need refreshing. Not optically, except maybe the 35, but physically. They need to have control rings in addition to Fn buttons to match the newer lenses. I can't use my 85 1.8 the same way I use any of my other lenses. (I have the control ring set for ISO). It's not as big a deal for photo but for video or hyrbid work there are compromises on work flow/operation.

Agreed. The handling & controls of these is really subpar. In addition, I think bokeh improvements on the 35mm and 50mm are in order. I have no doubt that Nikon could manufacture a much better 35mm f/1.8 today, for the same price/cost.

 

[Pierre Lagarde]

The new Nikon Z 24-70 F2.8 S II lens is wonderful! It improves upon the already excellent original in every way.

While there may be lenses that deliver optically superior results, when accounting for the complexity of designing a fast standard zoom lens, this is IMO Nikon's best accomplishment to date.

What Nikon delivers here is nothing short of astounding. This is a lens that twenty years ago it would be hard to imagine could exist.

For all practical purposes, this lens is sharp corner-to-corner wide open *and* delivers outstanding bokeh (across the entire focal range), is practically free from optical defects, focuses with lightning speed, offers superlative contrast & color, all while weighting about the same as the 24-120 F4 lens (and only 175g more than the 24-70 F4!). And it's an internal zoom!

Sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

Is the lens perfect? No. But it's honestly quite challenging to find any fault with it.

What is also very encouraging is that Nikon has listened to its customers and added pretty much every item that was on anyone's wish list to this lens!

This is the first refresh of a Nikon Z lens, and I do think it portends well for the future. Over the next 5-6 years I believe we will see a significant refresh of Nikon's Z lineup, with improved ergonomics, lighter weight, faster focusing speed and improved bokeh being key themes.

A Z9 II with next-generation AF is likely also right around the corner, to match the focusing capabilities of this new lens.

While I have no doubt this is probably Nikon's "best" lens, but "best" is truly subjective, and for some a lens like the 24mm-120mm f4 is a better option as it offers more range and is significantly cheaper. A working professional might indeed need the new 24-70 f2.8 S II, and they can write off the cost as a business expense, but a hobbyist like me would probably have to factor in the cost for a divorce lawyer once my wife figured out I spent for the lens, and she would also get half of everything I own.

So for me, the 24mm-120mm f4 is probably the better option.

You're certainly not alone : https://photographylife.com/the-best-nikon-lens-of-all-time