What’s the Best Nikon Z Midrange Zoom?

I’ve had the privilege to check all of Nikon’s Z-series midrange zooms extensively over the final a number of years, each in the area and in the lab. Nikon hasn’t been shy about making them, both! There are six full-frame Nikon Z midrange zooms thus far, starting from the most cost-effective 24-50mm f/4-6.3 to the costliest 24-70mm f/2.8 S. Which one is greatest? In fact, that is dependent upon the photographer’s wants – in any other case, Nikon wouldn’t make so many of those lenses in the first place. However my hope with this text is to indicate the relative strengths and weaknesses of every lens to be able to make a well-informed buy.

Worth

The primary and most essential consideration when most photographers are choosing a lens is value. There’s a whopping $2000 distinction in MSRP between these six lenses! Right here they’re, so as from least costly to costliest:

1. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3: $400
2. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR: $900
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S: $1000
4. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S: $1100
5. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8: $1200
6. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S: $2400

These costs don’t embrace gross sales. The steepest reductions I’ve seen had been $300 off each the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8. In fact, you may as well purchase a few of these lenses (particularly the 24-70mm f/4 S) as a equipment lens, probably shaving a whole lot of {dollars} off the MSRP. So, simply take the checklist above as a common information, and attempt to discover some gross sales if you happen to can!

Weight

1. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3: 195 grams / 0.43 lbs
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S: 500 grams / 1.10 lbs
3. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8: 565 grams / 1.25 lbs
4. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR: 570 grams / 1.26 lbs
5. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S: 630 grams / 1.39 lbs
6. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S: 805 grams /1.77 lbs

The Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 has gained two contests in a row – it’s trying good thus far! And that’s the final time I’ll be capable to say that 🙂

As for the different lenses, 4 of them are in a fairly comparable vary of weights, whereas the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S is in a barely heavier weight class. I stay up for testing the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8, which is the craziest midrange zoom that now matches the Nikon Z system, with a weight of about 1165 grams / 2.6 kilos!

Dealing with Options

One facet of lenses that generally will get ignored in our rush to evaluate picture high quality is how they deal with. However for on a regular basis images, it could actually make an enormous distinction. Right here’s how I’d rank these lenses when it comes to dealing with, from greatest to worst

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8: This lens has a ton of bells and whistles, together with a perform button, an additional management ring, an A-M swap, and an illuminated show.
2. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S: All the similar dealing with options as the 24-70mm f/2.8 S, besides it doesn’t have an illuminated show.
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S: A giant step down – none of the dealing with options above, besides it has an A-M swap and might collapse for journey.
4. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR: Tremendous sparse design! There isn’t even an A-M swap. There may be, nevertheless, a zoom locking swap.
5. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3: No buttons or switches in any respect, though it could actually collapse for journey.
6. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8: Zero noteworthy dealing with options. There’s a zoom ring and a focusing ring, that’s it.

Personally, I’d put these lenses into three tiers. In the high tier of dealing with are the 24-70mm f/2.8 and 24-120mm f/4. In the subsequent tier is the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S; at the least it has an A-M swap. The opposite three lenses fall into the backside tier of dealing with, with hardly any controls in any respect.

By the means, all six lenses have nice climate sealing, even the most cost-effective Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3. I’d belief the design tolerances of the $2400 24-70mm f/2.8 the most for years {of professional} use, however possibly that’s simply my biases – in apply, I’ve by no means skilled any construct high quality points with any of those lenses.

Shut Focus

I’d like to see Nikon make a near-macro midrange zoom at some point, like Canon’s EF 24-70mm f/4 L (which has loopy 0.7× magnification capabilities). Nonetheless, the current choices for the Z system are hardly dangerous – it simply is dependent upon the lens. With the closest-focusing Z 24-120mm f/4 S, you may get some good close-up photographs of comparatively small topics like dragonflies, lizards, and flowers fairly simply. Right here’s how they rank, from greatest to worst:

1. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S: 0.39× (1:2.6) magnification
2. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8: 0.34× (1:2.9) magnification
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S: 0.30× (1:3.3) magnification
4. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR: 0.28× (1:3.6) magnification
5. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8: 0.22× (1:4.5) magnification
6. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3: 0.17× (1:5.9) magnification

Vignetting

Now it’s time for the lab checks! This isn’t an apples-to-apples comparability since all of those lenses have totally different focal lengths and most aperture values. However, I’ll present you the six vignetting take a look at outcomes and rank the lenses as greatest I can. It’s a number of information to look by way of, so I’ll summarize our findings as nicely.

In no explicit order, listed here are the charts:

Merely going by the highest vignetting worth, these lenses are surprisingly shut in efficiency. The excessive water marks (in stops of sunshine) are 1.96, 1.92, 2.01, 1.81, 2.47, and 1.79 stops of sunshine. Mainly, the solely actual outlier is the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 with its 2.47 stops of vignetting – every part else is inside a really comparable vary.

Nonetheless, that ignores the incontrovertible fact that a few of these are f/2.8 lenses, some are f/4, and a few are f/4-6.3 lenses! To not point out the totally different efficiency at varied focal lengths. Even the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 begins to have nice vignetting efficiency if you happen to simply zoom into 35mm and past.

So, rating them right here was actually subjective. I erred on the facet of evaluating the lenses at the similar aperture. I additionally penalized lenses with even a single dangerous rating, like the 24-200mm f/4-6.3, since all it takes is one dangerous focal size to trigger vignetting issues in an essential photograph!

1. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3
6. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR

Distortion

There’s an enormous vary on this take a look at. A few of the lenses nailed it, whereas others have near the highest distortion I’ve ever examined on a non-fisheye lens! Sure, distortion is correctible in post-processing – however excessive distortion correction can exaggerate optical points, particularly blurry corners, after stretching the picture again into place. So, it’s nonetheless higher to have a low-distortion lens than the reverse. Listed below are the charts, in the similar order as final time:

That’s a loopy vary of efficiency! On the excessive finish, we now have a whopping 5.82% barrel distortion on the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR. It’s amusing to me that many photographers won’t ever see this out-of-control distortion in any respect, as a result of Lightroom corrects for it by default (and the corrections can’t be turned off). To reply a typical query I’ve gotten, the “24mm” focal size designation is after distortion corrections have been utilized. Submit-distortion corrections, there is no such thing as a main distinction in area of view between the 24mm lenses right here.

As with final time, my rankings have some subjectivity, which is why I shared the charts! You can also make up your personal thoughts primarily based on the lab checks – however that is how I’d rank them in distortion:

1. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3
4. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
6. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR

Notice that there’s a fairly exhausting distinction between the high three lenses (that are all fairly good in distortion) and the backside three lenses right here.

Lateral Chromatic Aberration

That is one other space with a large unfold from greatest to worst. The excellent news is that even the worst offender right here has manageable ranges of chromatic aberration – nonetheless inside the vary the place post-processing corrections will normally not depart critical undesirable artifacts.

Listed below are the charts in the similar order:

I’m amazed by the glorious chromatic aberration efficiency of the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S lenses. Only a few midrange zooms have such low ranges of CA.

A small step down, however nonetheless fairly good, is the chromatic aberration efficiency of the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S and 28-75mm f/2.8. They each have low sufficient ranges that chromatic aberration corrections in post-processing will probably be extraordinarily efficient.

The Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 and Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 each have extra chromatic aberration than I’d have hoped. Once more, corrections will nonetheless normally be very efficient, however chances are you’ll run into conditions with each lenses the place CA isn’t 100% detachable, or the place you get tiny haloing artifacts upon elimination.

My rating?

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
3. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
4. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3
6. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR

It’s nonetheless subjective, however the tiers I discussed a second in the past are fairly clear – the high two lenses are a minimize above the center two lenses, that are a minimize above the backside two lenses.

Sharpness: Widest Focal Size

Time for the thrilling half! Nicely, everybody likes sharpness, it appears. I ought to level out that even the worst of those lenses when it comes to sharpness is nice sufficient for typical print sizes, together with along with your nostril to the paper. Nonetheless, for in depth cropping or for making massive prints from the highest-resolution sensors, you’ll discover some clear variations between them.

To begin, I’ll present all the lenses at their widest focal size (which is 24mm for 5 of the six lenses, and 28mm for the 28-75mm f/2.8). In the similar order as earlier than, listed here are our standardized MTF50 charts as measured in Imatest. Once more, it’s a number of information to digest, so I’ll be breaking it down by focal size and by portion of the body beneath:

At the widest focal size, the most aperture of all these lenses is both f/2.8 or f/4. Since f/4 is the first frequent aperture, that’s most likely the one which makes the most sense to over-analyze. (For those who anticipated below-analysis on this article, chances are you’ll be upset!)

Beginning with central sharpness, there’s a fairly clear set of two tiers. Tier one is comprised of the Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3. Tier two is comprised of all the different lenses! Sure, there are variations, however they’re all extraordinarily sharp in the heart with that one exception.

Midframe sharpness is a extra attention-grabbing battle. Right here, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S clearly stand above the competitors. The 28-75mm f/2.8 is a step down, however nonetheless the third greatest. The remainder of the lenses aren’t dangerous – even the 24-50mm f/4-6.3 is ok right here, though it is the weakest of the six lenses in the midframes.

Nook sharpness exhibits the largest variations, as anticipated. The weakest lens right here is the 24-200mm f/4-6.3. The 24-50mm f/4-6.3 and 24-120mm f/4 are a bit higher. The Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 and 28-75mm f/2.8 are roughly tied for second. In the meantime, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S is much and away higher than the relaxation.

As a substitute of making an attempt to mix all this into one rating, I’ll rank individually by parts of the body. Notice that once I say “tie,” it doesn’t at all times denote equivalent efficiency – generally it means the lenses common to comparable sharpness, however have comparatively stronger or weaker apertures.

Vast-Angle Middle:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S, Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S, and Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 (tie)
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
3. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
4. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

Vast-Angle Midframes (DX Nook):

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 and Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S (tie)
2. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
5. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

Vast-Angle Corners:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S and Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 (tie)
3. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3
5. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR

Sharpness: 35mm

Subsequent up is the efficiency at 35mm. This focal size is a relative energy of most of those lenses – they’re all fairly stable at 35mm. However that doesn’t imply all of them carry out equally nicely!

In the similar order as earlier than, listed here are my side-by-side lab measurements:

As with 24mm, the sharpest lens is arguably the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8, and the weakest is certainly the 24-50mm f/4-6.3. It’s a bit tougher to make an ideal head-to-head comparability now that the two variable aperture lenses have narrowed to f/5 and f/4.8 respectively. However, right here’s my try at rating them. There are some attention-grabbing surprises in the rankings this time!

35mm Middle:

1. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
2. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
4. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S and Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR (tie)
5. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

35mm Midframes (DX Nook):

1. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8, Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S, and Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 (tie)
3. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
4. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

35mm Corners:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
6. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

Sharpness: 50mm

That is the longest focal size on the 24-50mm f/4-6.3, and it’s additionally the focal size the place we see some main efficiency decreases from a few different lenses. Listed below are the full outcomes as measured head-to-head on our Imatest chart, similar order as earlier than:

There are some wild efficiency swings this time round! (Look no additional than the dreadful f/2.8 nook efficiency of the 28-75mm f/2.8, which thus far had been considered one of the sharpest of those six lenses.)

As soon as once more, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 has exceptional consistency and takes the cake as the sharpest of those lenses at 50mm corner-to-corner. But it surely undoubtedly is dependent upon the portion of the body that you simply’re contemplating. Right here’s how I’d rank them.

50mm Middle:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S and Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 (tie)
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 and Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S (tie)
3. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
4. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

50mm Midframes (DX Nook):

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
5. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
6. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3

50mm Corners:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
3. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S and Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR (tie)
4. Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3
5. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8

Sharpness: 70mm (and 75mm)

Now we attain the longest focal size for 3 of those lenses: the 24-70mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/4, and 28-75mm f/2.8. Will they exit on a excessive be aware?

The order beneath is the similar as earlier than, besides with the 24-50mm f/4-6.3 sadly not collaborating.

At this focal size, it’s like a curler coaster. The 24-70mm f/2.8 is as constant as ever, however the different lenses every have some clear strengths and weaknesses. Right here’s how I’d rank them.

70mm and 75mm Middle:

1. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8
4. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR

70mm and 75mm Midframes (DX Nook)

1. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
2. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
3. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR and Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 (tie)

70mm and 75mm Corners:

1. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8
2. Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
3. Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
4. Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
5. Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8

Sharpness: 105mm

Issues are quite a bit simpler to check now that solely two lenses are left! How do the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S and Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR evaluate at 105mm? Listed below are my lab take a look at outcomes:

No want for the rankings this time – the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S is sharper in the heart, midframes, and corners at 105mm. That mentioned, I’m pleasantly shocked that the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 manages good nook efficiency regardless of being a superzoom roughly midway into its lengthy focal size vary. At the narrower apertures from f/8 to f/16 that work nicely for panorama images, I actually don’t have any complaints about its efficiency.

Sharpness: 120mm and 135mm

We now have come to the finish of the line for the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S, which has put up an especially constant efficiency thus far throughout all its focal lengths. The story is analogous right here, too:

As earlier than, at a given aperture, the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S is sharper right here at each portion of the body. That mentioned, the nook sharpness outcomes are very shut. It’s not fairly a tie, since the 24-120mm f/4 has sharper corners at f/5.6 than the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 manages at f/6.3. However when you cease all the way down to f/8 and past, they’re utterly neck-and-neck. Once more, it goes to indicate that the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR just isn’t essentially a nasty selection for panorama images, if you’ll typically be capturing in that f/11 vary (particularly at such a protracted focal size, to get sufficient depth of area).

Sharpness: 200mm

Nicely, we all know the winner this time! However regardless that solely considered one of these zooms reaches 200mm, I wished to incorporate that chart for the sake of completeness. Right here it’s:

200mm is the weakest focal size on the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR. It’s nonetheless acceptable, however in the corners and midframes, it has what I’d name “f/16-level sharpness” it doesn’t matter what aperture you utilize. Whether or not that’s sharp sufficient on your wants or not is as much as you.

Separate, Detailed One-vs-One Comparisons

To pair with this text, I simply completed writing 9 different head-to-head comparability articles between many of those lenses, at a “one versus one” degree. I didn’t need to put all 9 of them on the homepage to keep away from crowding it out 🙂

Naturally, all the take a look at charts are the similar in these articles, however I am going into extra element with my evaluation and spend additional time speaking about different concerns like focal size, aperture, dealing with, and so forth. For those who’ve narrowed your selections down to 2 lenses, chances are you’ll discover that the related article beneath offers you a last push in the proper path:

Conclusion and Suggestions

I hope that together with all this information in a single place was helpful to you. If it made your head swirl, spare a second to do not forget that every particular person Imatest chart you see on this article took me and Nasim at the least an hour of testing to generate in the lab! However I think about it worthwhile, as a result of the means we take a look at lenses permits 100% comparable head-to-head comparisons like this one, the place you possibly can see the strengths and weaknesses of every lens at a granular degree.

So, which lens “gained” this comparability? For those who’re solely speaking optically, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S justifies its high spot in Nikon’s lineup with glorious, constant efficiency. The following tier of lenses is comprised of the 24-120mm f/4 S, 24-70mm f/4 S, and 28-75mm f/2.8. Every of these three lenses has some strengths and weaknesses optically, and I don’t really feel assured rating any of them as undoubtedly higher than the others – it relies upon what your priorities are. Tied for final are the Nikon Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 and Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3. (The superzoom is sharper of the two, nevertheless it has extra issues when it comes to vignetting, distortion, and chromatic aberration.)

However actually, I ought to repeat one thing I mentioned in the intro: Nikon wouldn’t make all these lenses if there have been a single most suitable option for everybody. I’d truly say that the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S is the greatest match for many photographers as a result of it manages such excessive efficiency whereas additionally reaching to 120mm. In the meantime, at a private degree, I purchased the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 as a result of it was a great match for my panorama images at f/11! I may make comparable arguments for all six lenses right here.

So, use this text as a suggestion, however finally, select a lens primarily based in your private scenario. Even the 24-50mm f/4-6.3 may make sense if you happen to want an ultralight lens, or if you happen to’re on a funds. (Although I’d undoubtedly think about the Nikon Z 28mm f/2.8 prime in its place if that’s your scenario.)

For those who discovered this text helpful, you possibly can thank us by shopping for any of your images tools by way of our hyperlinks at Photography Life. (It may be any tools, not simply no matter we linked to.) That’s the best strategy to give us a small fee and preserve PL working with out costing you something additional.

You will discover all six of those lenses at the following hyperlinks to B&H, in addition to on eBay if you happen to intend to purchase used:

Let me know in the remark part in case you have any questions! I’ve used all six of those lenses extensively in the area and could be completely satisfied to reply any questions that I can.