Neat article about the 14-30 f4S

[Terri French]

Has this already been shared? I loved her photos!!...Oh to be young again!!

Here Are Exclusive NIKKOR Z 14-30mm f/4 S Lens Sample Photos

 

[Phil K]

It’s a very good lens. I took a trip recently to Guilin and I paired it with the Z7. The other lenses I brought were eventually left in the bag untouched.

 

[Bohdan]

Is it available in North America yet?

 

[Phil K]

Probably not. I borrowed a sample from a pro.

 

[Bohdan]

Probably not. I borrowed a sample from a pro.

Ahhh.. impressions?

 

[Phil K]

I like it’s compact size and relatively light weight. AF is fast and image quality very good, with a bit of vignetting which is just mild. F/4 is fast enough most of the time.

 

[Walter Rowe]

Those images are compelling. I have the 24-70/4S and admit there are times when I wish I had wider field of view. Have to put this on my wish list.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Honestly, I think this is the first Z lens that actually takes advantage of the larger mount. I don't remember any rectilinear FF SLR mount lens @ 14mm without a bulbous front end. You'll only see those kind of lenses in M-mount. From the looks of it, the upcoming 14-24mm 2.8 S will look to accept filters as well. I have no doubt this lens will be insanely good!

 

[Martin Norden]

The 14-30 is such a nice compact lens, not shot any images I could keep as it was attached to Nikons own Z7 when I had the opportunity to play with the lens but I can vouch for the facts that the lens focuses very quickly, handles very well and from the shots I looked at on the screen is sharp across the frame. Certainly the Nikon photographer who let me use the lens was very impressed and stated that it was way better than the f mount 14-24 and 16-35 lenses, they also wondered now the f2.8 Z version due out at some point in the future was going to improve on the Z 14-30 f4 as it is soooo good ITHO.

 

[hotrod4x5]

I wish they'd make a larger range zoom next instead of redundant lenses with one stop better aperture.

 

[gryphon1911]

To be honest, looking at the images from the article, I'm not impressed by what I'm seeing. I know I'm pixel peeping, but those images are just not critically sharp anywhere. I went over to the Flickr link and looked at them full resolution.

I'll need to hold out any further judgement until I get a chance to check it out myself....but based on the online images so far, it would be a "no buy" for me.

 

[Martin Norden]

Have a look at the YouTube channel Ricci Talks, Ricci works for Nikon school and has access to the new gear well before the YT pundits, I like the channel he seems fair with his reviews (but he does work for Nikon as has been pointed out), Ricci has been using the 14-30 for a few months so have a look at his latest video which is on his channel and see what you think.

 

[davidzvi]

I wish they'd make a larger range zoom next instead of redundant lenses with one stop better aperture.

They need a 70-200 f/4 or even a 70-300 f/4-5.6 (both would be even better). Just look at these comparison, the wide and standard zooms make a pretty compelling package when compare to the Olympus E-M1 mkII with the Olympus 14-28 and 24-80 EQ glass.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Pa]

They need a 70-200 f/4 or even a 70-300 f/4-5.6 (both would be even better). Just look at these comparison, the wide and standard zooms make a pretty compelling package when compare to the Olympus E-M1 mkII with the Olympus 14-28 and 24-80 EQ glass.
View attachment 1635754

Interesting size comparison. I wonder how the weights compare.

The EM-1 II has a very good sensor for µ4/3, but it's not as good as the Nikon Z cameras.

 

[davidzvi]

They are pretty much the same weight.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[hotrod4x5]

They need a 70-200 f/4 or even a 70-300 f/4-5.6 (both would be even better). Just look at these comparison, the wide and standard zooms make a pretty compelling package when compare to the Olympus E-M1 mkII with the Olympus 14-28 and 24-80 EQ glass.
View attachment 1635754

24-105 would make me happy.

 

[Pa]

24-105 would make me happy.

Same here, especially if they included a macro capability like the old 28-105 AF-D.

 

[davidzvi]

24-105 would make me happy.

They should have gone to 105mm or 120mm, but I'm guessing size was the driving force.

 

[gryphon1911]

They need a 70-200 f/4 or even a 70-300 f/4-5.6 (both would be even better). Just look at these comparison, the wide and standard zooms make a pretty compelling package when compare to the Olympus E-M1 mkII with the Olympus 14-28 and 24-80 EQ glass.
View attachment 1635754

I just talked this weekend with one of my camera store contacts and he said that the Nikon rep shared some interesting info about the upcoming 70-200/2.8 z-mount. Supposedly, it is smaller than the f-mount versions from the past. He hinted that it would be around the same size as the 70-300/4.5-5.6VR. He also was able to handle the 24-70/2.8S and it is smaller and lighter than the 24-70/2.8VR f-mount equivalent. If the AF speed and lack of sound of the current lenses are any indication, then new 70-200 might be something to lust after...although that is about all I'll likely be doing with a guestimated price being around $2600-$3000 USD.

So good news on that front. That plus the rumors of potential lower end z mount mirrorless and a bunch of "consumer grade" z-mount glass will keep me happy for a while.

 

[davidzvi]

I just talked this weekend with one of my camera store contacts and he said that the Nikon rep shared some interesting info about the upcoming 70-200/2.8 z-mount. Supposedly, it is smaller than the f-mount versions from the past. He hinted that it would be around the same size as the 70-300/4.5-5.6VR. He also was able to handle the 24-70/2.8S and it is smaller and lighter than the 24-70/2.8VR f-mount equivalent. If the AF speed and lack of sound of the current lenses are any indication, then new 70-200 might be something to lust after...although that is about all I'll likely be doing with a guestimated price being around $2600-$3000 USD.

So good news on that front. That plus the rumors of potential lower end z mount mirrorless and a bunch of "consumer grade" z-mount glass will keep me happy for a while.

Have you seen pics of the new Canon 70-200 f/2.8? Though I've noticed that I've only seen pictures of the lens at 70mm and I haven't seen any beyond that.

Specs on the 24-70 f/2.8 Z-mount show it's lighter than the original 24-70 f/2.8 (non VR),