Industry News: Nikon officially announces the 14-24mm F2.8 S and 50mm F1.2 S for Z-mount

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
  • Jul 20, 2010
    9,731
    2,396
    Canada
    www.canonrumors.com
    The Ultra-Wide NIKKOR Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S and Powerful NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.2 S Lenses Bring Groundbreaking Advancements in Optical Performance and Design to the Nikon Z Series
    MELVILLE, NY (September 16, 2020) – Today, Nikon Inc. unveiled two exciting additions to the rapidly expanding NIKKOR Z lens lineup, demonstrating the brand’s commitment to the evolving Nikon Z series. These new full-frame S-Line1 lenses showcase the superior optical performance and capabilities of the Nikon Z mount for photographers and creators. The ultra-wide angle NIKKOR Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S is the world’s shortest2 and lightest2 full-frame f/2.8 zoom lens with a 14mm field of view, enabling a versatile range to capture expansive views including cityscapes, landscapes, astrophotography and more. Meanwhile, the NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.2 S is the paramount fast-aperture prime lens engineered for optical excellence to help Z series users achieve unrivaled power, exceptional sharpness and show-stopping bokeh...

    Continue reading...


     

    twoheadedboy

    EOS R5
    CR Pro
    Jan 3, 2018
    293
    427
    Kenosha, WI
    112mm filters on that 14-24! I complained about needing 82mm filters on the 15-35 but 112 is crazy. And I much prefer Canon's approach of giving you 35mm focal length in the zoom, or down to 11mm if you cut off at 24mm...I use both 15mm and 35mm a lot and would have to switch lenses more if I was cut off at 24mm.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    Billybob

    800mm f/11 because a cellphone isn't long enough!
    May 22, 2016
    262
    518
    What's more important? Saving 200g or gaining 11 mm extra zoom? PLUS IS ?
    I'm sure there are a lot that will prefer the 11 mm and the IS.
    I don't care about IS at the wide end when IBIS is so good. However, the tradeoff between an extra mm on the wide end versus 11mm on the long end is important. I came down on the side of the additional 11mm, but I'm not sure I would make that choice if Canon had stuck with the traditional 16-35mm range. I like UW in the 12-15mm range, but if I'm using a zoom, I want it to be versatile. 14-24mm is too narrow and just doesn't go far enough into the normal range. I don't want to have to switch lenses for citiscapes. Accordingly, 15-35mm is "good enough" at the wide end and gives me enough flexibility at the long end. This allows Canon to release a more specialized UW lens like an 11-20mm f/2.8, whereas Nikon will likely need to release a 2.8 zoom that goes sub-20mm to 35mm.
     
    Upvote 0

    AaronT

    EOS RP
    CR Pro
    Jan 5, 2013
    266
    593
    112mm filters on that 14-24! I complained about needing 82mm filters on the 15-35 but 112 is crazy. And I much prefer Canon's approach of giving you 35mm focal length in the zoom, or down to 11mm if you cut off at 24mm...I use both 15mm and 35mm a lot and would have to switch lenses more if I was cut off at 24mm.
    Maybe Nikon is trying to cut down on vignetting on their 14-24 with that large front glass. The Canon 15-35 has about 4.5 stops of vignetting at 15mm and F2.8, among the highest out there. There is always a trade-off. Most top line mirrorless have IBIS so IS isn't necessary, specially at the wide end.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    Bert63

    What’s in da box?
    CR Pro
    Dec 3, 2017
    1,071
    2,334
    59
    Bodies change. These S lenses have been really fantastic.


    Couldn't agree any stronger. It's just a bit of a shame (to me) to see Nikon so far behind the pack. I was in love with the 850 back when I bought my 5D4 and if not for glass I think I would have owned that body and could very well have been a disappointed Nikon shooter when this big push to mirrorless began.

    Great glass (always) and great images. I just happen to believe that their mirrorless line is a bit behind the curve.
     
    Upvote 0

    Maximilian

    The dark side - I've been there
    CR Pro
  • Nov 7, 2013
    4,225
    4,862
    Germany
    I don't care about IS at the wide end when IBIS is so good. ...
    I don't care about any of those either as I am not planning to invest into such lenses in the near future.
    But I've seen enough discussions here that I can imagine which lens will sell better. But time will tell.

    However, the tradeoff between an extra mm on the wide end versus 11mm on the long end is important. I came down on the side of the additional 11mm, but I'm not sure I would make that choice if Canon had stuck with the traditional 16-35mm range.
    ...
    That is your opinion which I fully respect. But I am sure there are several more to one side or the other or even having a third or fourth opinion.
    Question (to the companies) is how they found out via market research which lenses would give them the best market approach.
    Canon went that and Nikon the other way.
     
    Upvote 0

    twoheadedboy

    EOS R5
    CR Pro
    Jan 3, 2018
    293
    427
    Kenosha, WI
    I don't care about any of those either as I am not planning to invest into such lenses in the near future.
    But I've seen enough discussions here that I can imagine which lens will sell better. But time will tell.


    That is your opinion which I fully respect. But I am sure there are several more to one side or the other or even having a third or fourth opinion.
    Question (to the companies) is how they found out via market research which lenses would give them the best market approach.
    Canon went that and Nikon the other way.

    It probably has more to do with the lens it is replacing in the non-mirrorless line, than anything about the larger market including shooters not on a Nikon platform.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    Maximilian

    The dark side - I've been there
    CR Pro
  • Nov 7, 2013
    4,225
    4,862
    Germany
    It probably has more to do with the lens it is replacing in the non-mirrorless line, than anything about the larger market including shooters not on a Nikon platform.
    I think Canon did show that by building up a RF lens line that they were willing to think things completely new.
    Personally I have no interest in buying a 28-70/2 lens but I welcome Canons courage to make it.
    Also they made a 15-35/2.8 IS out of a 100% trinity buy 16-35/2.8. Again some more courage.
    If Nikon is right, that all the people loving the "old" 14-24 will get the new S lens they're fine - but they didn't add any extra mm or some IS, so they didn't show courage.
     
    Upvote 0

    degos

    EOS RP
    Mar 20, 2015
    428
    371
    Personally I have no interest in buying a 28-70/2 lens but I welcome Canons courage to make it.

    Courage? Courage is putting your life in harm's way to achieve something.

    Signing-off a fancy lens for development and production doesn't involve courage because there's no risk to the individual or company. It might just end the year with slightly less money that it couldn't manage to spend ( i.e. profit )
     
    Upvote 0

    Maximilian

    The dark side - I've been there
    CR Pro
  • Nov 7, 2013
    4,225
    4,862
    Germany
    Courage? Courage is putting your life in harm's way to achieve something.

    Signing-off a fancy lens for development and production doesn't involve courage because there's no risk to the individual or company. It might just end the year with slightly less money that it couldn't manage to spend ( i.e. profit )
    Questions:
    Do you run a company?
    Are you in charge of R&D or production invest?

    If so I wonder that you are talking about that knowing that this could destroy a companys future.
    E.g. doing wrong like Nikon 1 series. I am sure they still suffer from that. And because of that Nikon is playing safe.

    If "courage" it the wrong word for you replace it by "entrepreneurship".
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 users
    Upvote 0