- Mar 20, 2017
- Central Ohio
- Real Name
You're not alone. An S-line 60-210/240 keeping it to a 3.5x to 4x with a slight overlap in order to control size would be great. That would give people two VERY nice premium kits:.....The 200-600 will be an interesting lens. However, I’m SHOCKED to not see a 70-300 variable aperture lens, or a 70-200 f/4 lens. That seems like a really glaring omission from the lens line-up IMO.
Yeah, it's very odd that Nikon did a fantastic job of offering its users an ultra-compact UWA and normal lens, but then have nothing to offer on the telephoto end. A collapsing 70-200 f/4 would've been an instant buy from me, but it now leaves me in this odd predicament of what to do for telephoto for travel with my Z6. This past summer I used a 70-300 AF-P on an FTZ which worked well, but it's not my preferred solution.You're not alone. An S-line 60-210/240 keeping it to a 3.5x to 4x with a slight overlap in order to control size would be great. That would give people two VERY nice premium kits:
14-30 f/4 + 24-70 f/4 + 60-210 f/4* -- A set of 3 premium collapsible lenses that would make a nice small travel kit.
14-30 f/4 + 24-105 f/4 + 100-400 f/4* -- A set of 3 premium lenses prioritizing reach over compact size.
* could be f/4 or f/3.5-5.6, there's more to premium than just a constant aperture IMHO.
The Z-mount 14-30 and 24-70 are so much smaller than the F-mount 16-35 and 24-120 that I'd love to see a similarly compact 60-210 mid range telephoto (one can always dream).
Edit: meant to attach this for comparison.
That's what I'm planning for our upcoming trip to southern Italy and Sicily in May. Of course the 24-70/4S will be the lens I'll use most of the time. However, I'm considering taking my 200mm f/4 AIS instead of the 70-300. I used it for my "long" lens on a trip to France several years ago and it worked out fine but I also had the 24-120 as the main lens.This past summer I used a 70-300 AF-P on an FTZ which worked well, but it's not my preferred solution.
Planning out a multi year lens roadmap is HARD.Yeah, it's very odd that Nikon did a fantastic job of offering its users an ultra-compact UWA and normal lens, but then have nothing to offer on the telephoto end. A collapsing 70-200 f/4 would've been an instant buy from me, but it now leaves me in this odd predicament of what to do for telephoto for travel with my Z6. This past summer I used a 70-300 AF-P on an FTZ which worked well, but it's not my preferred solution.
As you said, you could go 24-105 and then 100-400, but now you have a much larger and heavier kit, and to be honest I don't need 400mm of reach for my typical travel photography. 200mm of reach is more than sufficient.
Unlike the Olympus 12-100/4 Pro lens (equiv to the 24-200 in FL), the Nikon 24-200 is probably not an S-line....depending on the optics. It's not an S-line lens but we can hope.
Planning out a multi year lens roadmap is HARD.
There are marketing, manufacturing and strategic considerations that we will never know about.
But of course some of the WHYs will never be released, cuz that would be telling the competition too much.
- I don't know why Nikon did not bring out the faster f/2.8, 24-70 and 70-200 zooms early.
- Some of the pros may have been waiting to convert to the Z system, until the f/2.8 lenses were available.
- Maybe Nikon wanted to bring out the PRO level Z cameras with the f/2.8 lenses, for the Olympics.
- Unfortunately this allowed Canon to get "bragging rights" to having the f/2.8 lenses out.
- How do the f/4 zooms fit into a plan with the f/2.8 zooms?
- Having a 70-200/4, I think the smaller/lighter f/4 line makes great sense for many of us, who do not NEED the f/2.8 aperture.
- Extending/collapsing vs internal zoom.
- For smoothness of zooming, I prefer an internal zoom.
- For shorter lens length, I prefer the extending zoom.
- But an extending zoom is probably FATTER than an internal zoom, so it is not as compact as it seems.
- WHY the f/0.95 lens?
- To me, that seemed like a waste of limited development and manufacturing resources, for a SMALL market.
- Maybe it was to PROVE the Z mount's speed potential.
View attachment 1655155
From the Nikon site, the roadmap above shows the f/2.8 and f/4 lines.
What seems obvious on the roadmap is, that the f/4 line forks with the 24-70 down one leg and the 24-105 down the other leg.
So what is the next lens after the 24-70/4?
Does it merge to the 100-400, or is it an unannounced 70-300? There are logical reasons for both alternatives.
Then Nikon confuses the roadmap by putting the DX lenses in the middle of the FX lenses.
Nikon should have either put the DX lenses at the bottom, or made a separate DX roadmap.
The issue for the DX guys is, the Z50 does not have IBIS, whereas the Z6/Z7 do, so the DX guys want a long lens or alternate FX lens with VR.
This makes the decision to use a FX lens on a DX camera more difficult in the Z world than it is in the F world.
In the F mount lenses, the VR is in the lens, not in the body, for both FX and DX.
Example, I was considering the FX 24-120 for my DX camera. The lens has VR, so I don't lose that function. I do not lose anything by using a FX lens on my DX camera.But in the Z mount, the 24-105 probably does NOT have VR, so with the D50 which does not have IBIS, there would be no IS.
Canon and Nikon definitely took different paths and personally I question Canon's more than Nikon, and not just because I prefer Nikon.Unlike the Olympus 12-100/4 Pro lens (equiv to the 24-200 in FL), the Nikon 24-200 is probably not an S-line.
But as a GP travel lens, it would probably be "good enough" for many. Especially if they don't blow up the image too much.
It's like the old question, "how many MP, do you need for a 4x6 print?"
Based on how good the S-line lenses are, I have hope that the non-S-line lenses would be equally improved over the non-pro F lenses.
i have faith and confidence in Nikon that they can make a good non pro optic. That’s not just from my hope and prayers but from real world delivery with lenses like the 35mm and 50mm f/1.8 f-mount primes and the 70-300/4.5-5.6E AF-P, 10-24, and 18-55 zooms....depending on the optics. It's not an S-line lens but we can hope.