Scribblings About Things
Updated Tamron 35-150/2-2.8 Usage Page
It has been about a year since I purchased the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8.
I’ve been using it with the Z6II, mainly for outdoor location-based assignments, and have updated its equipment discussion page with some further observations and thoughts that I have on this lens after using it.
Hope the information may be useful to anyone looking to get the lens (or trying to find out more about the lens).
Evolution of Chinese Lens and Accessories Makers
In recent times there have been plenty of releases of lenses and camera accessories from Chinese manufacturers, and truth be told I am impressed with the rate that they are improving their products and innovating.
I strongly believe that healthy competition would bring about improvements and innovations, so with the rise of Chinese lens manufacturers, I think that us as consumers would benefit as a whole since the entire industry would be competing with each other to bring out more original and interesting products.
There have been several reputable camera accessories brands from China from a while back, such as Godox’s lighting accessories and triggers, Smallrig’s L-brackets and cages, and DJI’s drone systems, just to name a few. However, when we think about lenses, the initial releases of camera lenses from China were, blatantly speaking, clones of older lens designs, and tended to be only manual focus only. Most of the time they were just not up to current standards - usually thought of as cheap lenses to play around with, and could pretty much only take decent images once stopped down to around f/5.6 or so (and even so their performance is still just decent at best).
Fast forward to today, and we can see lenses from several Chinese manufacturers which incorporate modern AF systems tuned for use with mirrorless cameras, and some manufacturers also come up with their original optical designs and innovations (such as incorporating USB ports directly in the lens to facilitate firmware updates) - which is a far cry from the past where they were simply replicating old optical designs. Many of these manufacturers also do tend to cater to a certain niche - some examples include TTArtisan and 7Artisans catering to the general crowd with good price-performance lenses; Laowa (previously Venus Optics) with their probes, high magnification macro lenses and low-distortion ultra wide-angle lenses; Viltrox with product lines catering to compact sizes (Air series) or high performance lenses (Pro and Lab series).
That said, the fast rate of iteration does have certain consequences - namely with so many models flooding the market with similar nomenclatures, it is often quite confusing and difficult to determine if a particular model is the latest design or one from a previous generation, and due to that their resale value do not hold well too since a newer model is always just round the corner. Combined, these make a purchase from a Chinese manufacturer still a sort of a small gamble, even if they are pretty reputable.
However, credit should be given where credit is due, and the fact that they are improving so fast and bringing so much more value to the photography community as a whole is definitely worth commending.
Right now, there are still certain drawbacks from getting lenses from Chinese manufacturers, namely:
The coatings used on their lenses are still pretty simple and do not always eliminate flares and ghosts, even in simple backlit situations.
Quality control is not as stringent, and as such there are quite a bit of sample variance (although this has been improved recently according to most users, but still not up to par as the more established lens manufacturers)
They still do not have a proper track record on their build quality and long-term reliability, especially for the newer offerings with autofocus mechanisms (which is a given since they just entered the autofocus playing field pretty recently).
AF algorithms are reverse-engineered so firmware updates are required for compatibility with newer bodies. However it is hard to predict when support or firmware development would stop for current products.
Customer service is pretty much non-existent according to most users; if you buy from a reputable store they might handle the returns/warranty issues for you, but chances are if you need repairs it might take a long turnaround since they do not have regional repair offices.
Similarly there is no pro-support for their lenses, and thus the risk is too high for working photographers should the lens malfunction.
These drawbacks, especially that on the lack of support, are the main reasons why I have not personally purchased and owned lenses from the Chinese manufacturers, even though some of them are really intriguing to me (like the recently released Viltrox 135/1.8 LAB).
But I think that as these manufacturers grow and improve their reputation, they would start addressing these shortcomings as a way to distinguish themselves from the less reputable brands, and in my opinion that would be the start of a new era of reliable high performance lenses from them.
I have used third party lenses in the past for the F-mount (various lenses from Sigma, Tamron and Samyang), and am still using one now as a workhorse lens on the Z-mount (the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8 Z). It is definitely great to have more options on the table if the lenses from Chinese manufacturers prove to have reliable build quality and start to have proper support for them.
As mentioned earlier in this post, I do believe the rising of the Chinese lens manufacturers would spur healthy competition amongst the other manufacturers too, so I am certainly looking forward to how this industry would shape up in the coming years.
Nikon NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.2 S Announced
A couple of days ago the Nikon NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.2 S was announced.
The dedicated special contents page and technical specifications of the lens can be viewed here:
This is a highly anticipated lens by many photographers ever since its silhouette appeared in the Z lens roadmap a few years back, and I would expect that this lens would be in pretty high demand for some time, even though its price tag does lean towards the high side.
When the Z 35mm/1.4 was announced last year, it caused some commotion within the photography community as it lacked the “S” moniker and many were expecting a flagship f/1.2 lens. After the initial commotion had simmered down it became quite obvious the Z 35/1.4 was a new line of large aperture compact(ish) lenses which renders like the more classic F-mount equivalents, and this was further cemented in place by the Z 50/1.4 that was released later that year.
Back to the 35/1.2S itself, it deserves its “S” designation and flagship 35mm status in every sense. Sample images from reviewers around the globe all show that it has very good sharpness within the region in-focus, and the transitions to the out-of-focus regions are smooth and beautiful, with very pleasing rendering of specular highlights in the background.
Nikon gave it all the coatings that were available to them, which helps in delivery high clarity images and highly suppressing ghosting and flaring in backlit situations - again this was nicely documented and shown in many of the images in the sample gallery that were backlit by the sun.
The lens also suppresses focus breathing optically, and seems to work very well for cinematographers or videographers who shoot with the entire width of the sensor and not having to worry about software cropping to compensate for focus breathing issues.
While I personally am not in the market for this lens since I do not shoot with a 35mm focal length much, I am very much impressed with the performance of the lens and am truly excited for anyone who has been anticipating and waiting for this lens ever since it appeared on the roadmap.
It is definitely a no compromise lens (with an equivalent price tag and physical size to go with), and seeing how Nikon devotes itself to correct optical flaws physically rather than via software for a flagship lens is definitely something worthy of praises.
With this release, the 35/1.2S finally completes the Z lens roadmap, and for future products only Nikon themselves know exactly what is cooking in their secret labs. Fingers crossed for a modern version for the Ai-S 105/2.5 with similar physical dimensions!
Nikon NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.4 Announcement and Opinions
The Nikon Z 50mm f/1.4 has been officially announced.
The official press release and specifications of the lens can be viewed here:
It follows the footsteps of the previously announced Z 35mm f/1.4, providing users with more options for prime lenses.
Similar to the Z 35/1.4, it comes with two rings - one dedicated manual focus ring and one customizable control ring. It also maintains the same 62mm filter thread size, similar to both the 35/1.4, 35/1.8S and 50/1.8S.
In Japan it is priced very similarly to the 50/1.8S, which also follows the design and pricing strategy of the 35/1.4 35/1.8S pair.
And like the wide angle pair, in addition to the aperture differences, the 50/1.4 also does have other features that differs from the 50/1.8S:
The 50/1.8S has the more advanced Nano-crystal coatings, whereas the 50/1.4 has the more standing SIC coatings.
The 50/1.8S has ED glass elements in addition to aspherical elements.
The MTF for the 50/1.4 shows a steeper sharpness falloff when moving out from the central region, whereas the 50/1.8S has a more balanced sharpness profile throughout the frame.
There is no A/M switch on the 50/1.4.
The differences make a nice proposition for the 50/1.4, as the slightly less corrected lens, together with tis wider aperture, gives the lens a bit more character and a touch of softness when used wide open.
Marketing material also mentions their stance on both lenses:
The 50/1.4 is targeted towards users who want to make use of the wider f/1.4 aperture for softer bokeh and more background blur, as well as for users looking to have a touch of soft character in the lens for more flattering natural portrait shoots.
The 50/1.8S is targeted towards users who want to have good sharpness and resolution across the frame at all apertures, yet maintaining a natural looking bokeh and background blur.
And even if the S-line designation is missing from the 50/1.4, it is still built to the robust Nikon standards with weather sealings in place, so it can definitely be a workhorse lens if one desires the character of the images it produces.
With this announcement, Z system users now have several options in the “normal” range:
The 50/1.2S for best subject and background rendition at the expense of weight, size and price
The 50/1.8S for best image sharpness and resolution across the frame at all apertures
The 50/1.4 for thin DOF shots with some character in its sharpness rendition and falloff when used wide-open
The MC 50/2.8 if you want to double your normal lens as a macro lens as well
The 40/2 for a small compact package without much compromises to image quality
This also opens up several possible future product predictions, such as:
If the 85mm focal length follows similar design philosophies, perhaps we could see a compact 85mm f/1.4 to complete the 85mm trio.
Still hopeful for a compact 105/2.5 equivalent, or a 135/2.5 which could complement the Plena 135mm.
Definitely excited to see how this line of compact wide-aperture lenses would play out!
Nikon NIKKOR Z 35mm f/1.4 Announcement and Opinions
Just earlier today, the Z 35mm f/1.4 was officially announced.
The official press release and specifications of the lens can be viewed here:
This release came as an interesting surprise in several ways for most people, including me, though not in a bad sense.
As a f/1.4 lens, it is reasonably light and compact, not that different from the Z 35/1.8S itself. They also managed to keep its filter thread size at 62mm, so if anyone is thinking of switching to this from the 35/1.8S at least the filters can be reused.
It also comes with two rings - one dedicated manual focus ring and one customizable control ring. Most of the earlier f/1.8 S-line primes (everything minus the Plena), and the compact 28mm/40mm only come with one ring, so it seems like an new design and handling direction that they are going in.
In Japan the expected street price for the lens at launch is around JPY 95000, which comes in just a little under the Z 35/1.8S. It is indeed a nice change in times where everything just seems to get more and more expensive, so am grateful that they are coming out with affordable wide-aperture lenses.
Its direct competitor would be Nikon’s own Z 35/1.8S (as I have subconsciously compared to above), especially since they are in similar price brackets and size, and based on the specs shown so far, here are some of the key differences:
The 35/1.8S has the more advanced Nano-crystal coatings, whereas the 35/1.4 has the more standing SIC coatings.
Based on MTF curves the 35/1.4 is less sharp wide open with a steeper sharpness falloff, whereas the 35/1.8S is sharper wide open and maintains the sharpness across the frame better.
The 35/1.4 does not employ multi-focusing system found on the 35/1.8S.
Aesthetics wise, the 35/1.4 uses more plastic than the 35/1.8S, which has a metal focusing ring and metal “rear ring”.
There is no A/M switch on the 35/1.4.
With this as a reference, I think here are what are some of the concerns to look out for when reviews of this lens drop in the coming weeks from both reviewers and users:
When closed down to f/1.8, how does the performance of the two lenses compare?
How does the 35/1.4 perform close-up since it does not have close-range correction of the multi-focusing system?
How fast does the lens focus, and how well does it track moving subjects?
How flare resistant is it in backlit situations since it lacks the more advanced coatings?
And on top of this, I think this release also brings forth several questions regarding their lens strategy:
There was a 35mm S-line lens on the roadmap, and is this supposed to replace that or is a S-line 35mm still in the works? (Personal opinion: I think a S-line 35mm is still in the works, but they decided to launch this first to ride on the highly video-capable Z6III)
Does this release indicate the start of a new line of wide-aperture affordable non-S primes?
While I am not in the market for a 35mm lens, I am glad that they are giving users affordable options and sincerely hope that this indeed is the start of a new line of compact lenses - a modern compact version of the AI-S 105/2.5 would be a beautiful piece of work!
Does Photography Gear Matter? (2024 Version)
We all know that the Nikon Z6III is going to be officially announced later today, and I thought while waiting for the official announcement I would like to share a bit on my opinions on this particular topic.
The topic on how important is the role of photography gear has always been a hotly debated one amongst photographers - much akin to “Protective Filter vs No Filter” or “Tilt Screen vs Fully Articulating Screen”.
I know I might be opening a can of worms here, so just as a foreword these are solely my personal opinions and I would just like to share them out over here, hoping that this insight could be of use to someone or perhaps be a point of a healthy discussion. You are definitely more than welcome to disagree with them if my ideas and principles differ from yours.
So to answer the question, if I were to give a clear-cut “Yes” or “No” answer, I would say “Yes, photography gear does matter.”
But we all know life is not always black and white, and never simple as a “Yes” or “No”, and thus if given the chance to further elaborate on the answer, my answer would be “Yes, photography gear does matter, but only if you know what you are after or lacking specifically, and understand what kind of compromises were made or had been made. More expensive gear does not always mean more useful gear.”
Many people who mention that photography gear does not matter normally do mean it as goodwill, that chasing the latest and greatest gear would not improve your photography (the infamous Gear Acquisition Syndrome, or G.A.S), but rather spending the time or effort to improve your creative vision would be more beneficial. They usually also cite the example that a seasoned and experienced photographer would be able to create images with a basic camera and kit lens as well.
These are points that I do agree with - especially that GAS is a terrifying rabbit hole to fall into and thinking that getting the next shiny piece of equipment would magically improve your photography is a dangerous thought.
So now, if I agree with this, why do I still say that I believe that photography gear matters?
As I said earlier on, I believe that the gear matters if you have a creative vision that you want to achieve, or need to improve on a certain aspect of your workflow - neither of which is possible without spending time learning and getting used to your current gear first.
Going back to the example whereby an experienced photographer would be able to take photos with a basic camera - I have no doubt that this is definitely true. However the next, and more important question would be, “Is it the wisest choice to use said gear when on an assignment?”
I am pretty sure I would choose a piece of equipment that has more direct physical buttons and robust build on my assignments as it would just be more efficient for me.
Giving some more specific examples:
Shooting subjects from far would require telephoto lenses.
Shooting subjects real close would require macro lenses or lenses that have very short minimal focus distances.
Shooting subjects with smooth background blur would require big-aperture lenses.
Shooting subjects that move around haphazardly requires a body that can lock on and track effectively.
This list can go on and on, and it drives the point that I am trying to bring here - the gear does matter in getting the shot - either being a real physical requirement, or making getting the shot easier.
What it does not do, however, is magically make you a better photographer. Sure if you use a 600mm f/4 you could easily shoot birds and wildlife with all that smooth bokeh - but things like framing, learning about heat distortion, knowing how to place the background for least distraction, anticipating the birds’ movements etc. - these are other factors you have to learn and experience in order to master the art.
And we also have to understand that every camera body and lens is a gear with a set of compromises - be it compromises in image quality, build quality, aperture ratings, autofocus motors and speed, zoom ratings, weight, size, price, etc.
Want a wide-aperture good quality lens? Be prepared for a heavy and expensive piece of equipment.
Want an all-in-one zoom lens? Be prepared for slower apertures and image quality sacrifices.
Want an all-in-one zoom lens with crazy wide aperture? You better be owning a palace and a jeep to lug that gear around.
Another important thing to know is that gear or set-up that works for someone else might not work for you. Many event photographers I personally know of use a 24-70/2.8 + 70-200/2.8 set-up, which pretty much covers most scenarios with ease. I, however, never got used to the 24-70 lenses properly, so I would prefer a 24-120/4 + 70-200/2.8 combination over that.
One factor that many people seem to forget is that the so-called “pro-grade” lenses are also usually more massive and heavier, and whether you actually enjoy carrying all this extra bulk and weight would lead to how often your camera leaves your house with you.
Quoting from my personal experiences, while I do use the 70-200/2.8 for work often, in my private time I reach out for my 85/1.8 or 40/2 way more frequently just because they are easier to carry around.
To summarize everything (#tl;dr),
I believe gear does matter - whether to make taking a shot possible, or to make taking a shot easier
Getting the most expensive gear might not mean getting the best gear for yourself - what requirements you need is specific to your use case and creative vision
Learning what gear to get requires you to first learn what limitations you face in your current set-up
Always know that what works for someone else may not always work for you
As an ending note, try not to be lured by GAS too much and just enjoy what you have - you do already have gear, and that is all that matters!
Challenges in Designing Kit Lenses
Earlier this year Petapixel had an interview with someone from Nikon’s engineering department, and one of the topics they had talked about was the challenges faced when designing kit lenses.
Personally I found this part of the interview very insightful as this is a topic no one had talked about openly before, and while subconsciously I had a vague idea of why certain decisions were made, reading the comments made from the engineering division itself definitely put things in perspective.
To briefly summarize what this particular section of the interview was about, Ohshita-san (from Nikon’s Third Designing Department in Nikon’s Optical Engineering Division) mentioned that the design and manufacture of each lens has to be considered individually, and depending on what their identified target audience was they would tune the performance and specifications towards their needs.
He continued by saying that among these, kit lenses were the most challenging to make, as they had to be made affordable, lightweight and compact, and yet be able to showcase what the system is capable of and have an impactful first impression for new users to the system.
Truth be told, the term “kit lens” does not usually bring about a good impression of a lens, analogous to how the first zoom lenses made were vastly inferior to their prime counterparts, and most users (including myself at the beginning of my photography journey) view kit lenses as a cheap lens that comes with the body that works just OK.
Reading through this particular point mentioned in the interview, it did make me stop and appreciate the effort that went into designing a kit lens that is bound by so many different constraints, especially these days whereby many high performing kit lenses are available that do not compromise on image quality.
Looking back at when the Z6 and Z7 were first launched, it became quite clear why the 24-70/4S was the first lens to be launched together with the new mount and bodies - they had to provide a lens that could perform very well throughout its zoom range so as to portray what the new mount was capable of, yet they also had to make sure the lens had a small enough footprint to maintain the image of mirrorless cameras being more compact and convenient, and all of this with a severe price constraint slapped on it as it was meant to be a lens paired with the initial bodies to bring new users to the system.
As the lens lineup grew over the years, many people (including me) did move on to other primary lenses by outright replacing the 24-70/4S or upgrading whilst still keeping it as a backup; mainly with the 24-70/2.8S or the 24-120/4S.
This was only possible, in my opinion, because when the 24-70/4S was launched it showed the promising potential of the new mount and new technology used in the optical design, so it was easier to convince users of the Z-mount to upgrade to a different primary lens based on one’s needs, knowing that the whichever path chosen there would not be heavy compromises on the image quality.
If we look at the current FX standard zoom lens lineup for the Z mount, we can argue that there are many other lenses that could be paired as a kit with a Z body these days - and that is definitely the case whereby in different bodies have different “kit lenses”, which also differ by country and region as well.
If we take a look at the offerings in Japan, for the FX Z-bodies, we have/had these kits available:
Z5 with 24-50/4-6.3 or 24-70/4S or 24-200/4-6.3
Z6 (discontinued) with 24-70/4S
Z7 (discontinued) with 24-70/4S
Z6II with 24-70/4S (not available at launch - available much later after the Z6II’s initial launch)
Z7II no kit option
Z8 no kit option
Z9 no kit option
Zf with 40/2 SE
Some other countries and regions do have different kits available, and unfortunately I do not have any information as to why such a marketing decision was made. I do sometimes envy the other regions where you could obtain the 24-120/4S as a kit - it is totally not an option here at all!
Anyway minor rant aside, now with the Z6III launch upcoming, I do foresee that it could be available as a kit, which brings the question which lens would it be coupled with?
While I think that without a doubt the 24-70/4S and the 24-120/4S are definitely prime candidates as kit lens for the Z6III, either both kits are available or only one of them is available is up for debate - one being a more budget friendly version, whilst the other being a more versatile all-in-one lens.
However, I do think that if Nikon plans to market the video specs of the Z6III, as according to the rumored predictions are supposed to be class-leading for this price bracket, it would not be surprising to also see a launch of a PZ-styled zoom lens that is more catered towards the video market (similar to the DX 12-28/3.5-5.6 PZ), and having that offered as a kit with the Z6III as well.
Which might also perhaps explain why the Z6III seemed to have its launch delayed?
Nevertheless, moving back to the main topic on kit lenses in general, I think that I can understand why a kit lens is so important in a brand’s lineup, as it acts as a showcase example of what is possible to users which would lead to potential upgrade sales down the road. And for this I think my respect for kit lenses - and the amount of thought given into designing and manufacturing them by the engineers, have gone up significantly.
Personal Impressions on Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S Lens
So right now it is pretty much Sports Day season in most schools in Japan, and my daughter had hers last weekend. I decided to rent a copy of the Nikon Z 100-400/4.5-5.6S lens last weekend to cover the event since I doubt my 70-200/2.8S would provide enough reach for me (and am indeed thankful I went ahead with the rental!).
It was my first time handling the lens outside of the shop demo context, and there were many new interesting observations that I made when using the lens this time round that I did not notice when I played with it in the camera shops/showrooms in the past:
The weight and physical length of the lens at 100mm is pretty similar to that of the 70-200/2.8S, so I got accustomed to the lens’ weight distribution pretty much the moment I picked it up.
The wider girth of the lens, together with the more forward placement of the control ring, did make me accidentally hit either the manual focus ring or the control ring more often than I would like - I had to turn off both the MF in AF mode option and the custom control ring function to prevent any accidental setting changes.
AF locks on very fast, even on the Z6II I was using it with.
AF accuracy, however, did have some interesting quirks - when shooting a burst of slightly static (i.e slow moving) subjects while testing, usually in a burst of 5 shots in AF-C single point mode there would be 1 or 2 shots in the middle of the burst that lost focus. I thought this would be caused on the VR recentering itself in VR normal mode, so I changed to VR sport mode and accuracy got better, although still not at 100%.
For portraits at 400mm Eye-AF worked better than single point AF, as I guess any minute vibrations that caused framing changes would be compensated by the subject detection shifting the AF points via subject detection.
At portrait distances the lens renders very nicely with crisp details, regardless of focal length chosen, both wide open or using it as a “constant 5.6” lens.
At longer “sports distances”, and using it nearly exclusively as a 400/5.6 lens, the lens does exhibit some sharpness drop, and some slight AF accuracy drop. Though in all honesty it could also be due to user error on my side too as I could not pan the camera fast enough for the AF to lock properly.
And finally I also learned that 400mm is indeed hard to control!
It was definitely a fun experience shooting with that lens, especially more so when watching the little one playing around too.
The lens is also every bit as phenomenal as I expected it to be, albeit with some handling quirks, and I am glad that I went on ahead to rent it for the event as my 70-200/2.8S would never be able to provide enough range.
That said, my experience this time also reinforced the idea that I am not suited to be a sports photographer lol.
** Side Note:
For anyone looking for short-term camera equipment rentals in Japan, I definitely recommend checking Map Rental out! Their pricing is reasonable and have a very wide selection of equipment to choose from.
A handful of kits also qualify for monthly rental special rates, which could prove to be cheaper than going by daily rates when renting for a more than 2 weeks or so. However, for equipment that do not qualify for the special rates, the daily rates do stack up quite a bit for longer rentals, so other services that offer “monthly rental” or “monthly subscription rental” might prove to be more wallet friendly though!
(I am not affiliated with them in any way, just wanted to share this information from my good experience with them)
Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 VXD for Nikon Z-mount
This was one of the lenses that I had been envious of Sony users for a long time, and when the Z-mount version was announced in September 2023 I was definitely excited and grateful that Tamron had decided on this lens as one of the earlier ports to the Z-mount.
Having this lens would be a great help in solving my problem of having to switch between the 24-120/4S and the 70-200/2.8S during shoots - not that these 2 lens are slouches, and in fact I love using both of the lenses very much, but if I could have one lens that could do the work of both it would make me more efficient and also allow more options for me to include things like prime lenses in my double set-up.
That being said, having had a slightly negative experience being an early adopter (looking at you Z8 strap lugs), I decided to wait a bit for normal user reviews to roll in to see how the lens performs with the Z-mount bodies.
Based on the E-mount version’s reviews and user feedback, the general consensus on the lens has been positive with regards to the sharpness and overall image rendering, and I do not expect much difference between the E-mount and the Z-mount variants regarding the image quality.
Personally the few areas that I had interest or concerns in are:
How fast and accurate is the autofocus in normal modes and subject detection modes for Z bodies?
How fast and accurate is the autofocus in pin-point mode?
How prone is the lens to zoom creeping?
How weather resistant is the lens? (The exposed USB port seem like a weak spot to me)
After renting the lens for a bit to determine if it could properly act as a replacement for my 24-120/4S and 70-200/2.8S pair for assignments, there are some interesting observations that I encountered:
The lens boots up slow - even slower than the 24-120/4S. However, it is even way slower when waking up from sleep, so much so that many times I thought I had forgotten to turn on the Z6II I was using it with.
AF-S, AF-C and subject detection modes on the Z6II were pretty consistent and accurate, so I do not have much issues there with it.
AF-S pinpoint on the other hand is a slightly different story - perhaps the motor is not properly suited for racking contrast autofocus, but it feels sluggish and does miss focus a little more than I would like (I’d say in the range of 5% or so during my time with it)
Field curvature seems pretty strong on this lens, so using focus-and-recompose methods (even if it is a slight recompose) tend to make the initial focal plane soft - best to frame first and move the focus point (or use subject detection AF modes) to the intended subject and focus.
With proper focusing techniques, images are sharp in the focus zone and background blur is generally pleasing. While it lacks the minute detail acuity of the Nikon S-line lenses, the lens resolves detail very well and I think deserves praise for being able to do so given such a wide zoom range.
While I mentioned that background blur is generally pleasing, specular highlights sometimes show strong signs of onion rings within them.
The lens hood does feel and look like it can be scratched really easily.
I still do not like the idea of an exposed USB port.
While I think I might need some time getting used to its quirks (especially the field curvature), I am definitely pleased with the performance of the lens, and can see it being my primary workhorse lens with the 24-120/4S and 70-200/2.8S helping to fill in certain niche use cases.
After returning my rental unit I went on to purchase one copy for myself, and am definitely looking forward to working with the lens and trying out new combinations of set-ups to improve my workflow and quality of work!
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III VXD G2 for Nikon Z-mount Announced
Tamron has just announced their latest Z-mount lens, the wide-aperture standard 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III VXD G2 lens.
Official press release here in English and Japanese.
According to reports and reviews of the E-mount version, this G2 lens has significant performance and handling improvements over the G1 lens that precedes it. And given that the G1 lens acted as the basis of the current Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 lens, I would expect similar improvements of the new lens over the Nikon version.
With increasing lens prices throughout the board, I thought that it was a very refreshing breather to see this new lens being released in Japan at reasonable prices, similar to the current Nikon Z 28-75/2.8, and not that different from the E-mount version of the G2 lens at launch.
To be honest I was quite surprised about this announcement, since this lens was manufactured by Tamron under licensing agreement with Nikon, even though it would be competing directly with the Nikon Z 28-75/2.8, which is still an active model in the lens lineup.
I think there is no doubt that the Nikon Z 28-75/2.8 is based on the G1 version of the Tamron lens, but when it came in Nikon colors, there were many theories floating around the internet about who was the one actually building the lenses, and similarly predictions about the collaboration and agreement between the two companies started to find their way around too.
I do not think any one except for the parties directly involved in the negotiation and manufacturing processes would know exactly how the Nikon Z 28-75/2.8 was built.
So now that we have the 2 lenses in very similar price brackets, and assuming this G2 lens provides improvements over the Nikon Z lens similar to that in the E-mount camp, image quality and AF performance would definitely favor this new G2 lens, making the current Z 28-75/2.8 a tough sell unless serious sales or cashback campaigns are put in place to move them.
If not for pricing difference, I guess the only reasons one could still consider the Z 28-75/2.8 would be:
Preference over the Nikon-styled rings and barrel material, over the Tamron-styled rings and barrel material
Nikon’s SIC lens coating vs Tamron’s BBAR lens coating
Nikon’s weather sealing vs Tamron’s weather sealing
Being able to update the lens directly via camera body (Nikon) vs being able to update the lens directly via USB-C (Tamron)
Nevertheless, the launch of this lens also set an important precedence - it shows like Nikon does allow third party lens manufacturers to license lenses even if they are direct competition to Nikon’s own offerings.
This would mean that until now it has been the lens manufacturers who are unwilling to build things in the Z-mount, rather than being restricted by Nikon.
Anyway, time to go back to my previous post to add a little edit in the available standard zoom lenses for the Z-mount.
Nikon NIKKOR Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR Officially Announced
Nikon has just announced their new superzoom lens for the Z mount, the Nikon NIKKOR Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR.
Official press release statements can be accessed here (in English and in Japanese), as well as the product page here (in English and in Japanese).
Based on the technical specifications released, the new lens weighs in at 725g, is 141.5mm long with 77mm filter threads.
Comparing this with the other Z superzoom already on the market, the Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR, which comes in at 570g, 114mm length and takes 67mm filters, the new lens is no doubt larger and heavier, but provides twice as much reach in the telephoto range.
MTF curves seem reasonable for a superzoom of modest aperture values - the new lens looks to have good contrast in the center of the frame with significant sharpness falloff outside the DX circle, and the telephoto side is a weaker performer than the wide side of the lens. The curves predict that fine detail resolution would deteriorate really fast once out of the center of the image circle, which is typical for most superzooms I think, and we will only know the extent of it after production samples get into the hands on reviewers and consumers I guess.
With this release, Nikon users now have an expansive selection of standard lenses to choose from, depending on one’s needs and budget:
24-50mm f/4-6.3 = smallest sized standard zoom
24-70mm f/4 S = compact standard zoom balancing size and quality very well (collapsible design)
24-70mm f/2.8 S = no-compromise standard zoom focused on image quality and focus speed
24-120mm f/4 S = moderately-sized 5x standard zoom that provides flexibility with very good performance throughout
24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR = 8.3x superzoom in a modestly compact size with good performance throughout
28-75mm f/2.8 = lightweight f/2.8 standard zoom
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2 = improved version of the Nikon 28-75mm f/2.8 with better image quality and AF motors
28-400mm f/4-8 = 14.2x superzoom in a modest size
Having such a wide focal length coverage, I can foresee this lens being a popular lens for travel, or even as a all-in-one backup lens of sorts for working professionals.
One interesting note is its close focusing capabilities - it can focus down to 0.2m at the widest focal length (28mm), at which a magnification ratio of 0.35x is achieved. This would certainly come in handy for anyone using it for travel, since close-up shots of food and what not are possible in tight spaces without the need for a closer focusing lens, cementing its position as a do-it-all lens.
Anyway just for reference, here are the minimum focus distances at the various focal lengths:
28mm = 0.2m
35mm = 0.36m
50mm = 0.5m
70mm = 0.57m
105mm = 0.6m
200mm = 0.8m
300mm = 1.2m
400mm = 1.2m
Images of the lens show that the lens does extend very significantly when zoomed in, which is to be expected as it covers such a wide range of focal lengths. I guess it might be problematic for video users to balance it on a gimbal, so definitely a point to take note when considering this lens.
While the aperture values will not win any prizes for fastest superzoom lens produced (according to reports it slows down to f/8 at the 200mm mark), it seems like a pretty economical and convenient way to get access to the 400mm focal length, if the performance of the lens at that focal length meets one’s needs or demands.
That said, I think it is asking for the impossible to expect this lens to produce images like the S-line primes or S-line zooms, so one has to consider if the convenience of having a large focal length is more important that ultimate image quality at the expense of lugging extra weight and/or changing lenses in the field.
Oh, and did I also mention that the lens comes with a square hood? I actually like the design of the hood a lot lol.
**Edited on 2024/3/28 to include the newly announced Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2 in the list.
Sigma 50mm f/1.2 DG DN Art Officially Announced
Just a couple of hours ago Sigma has officially unveiled and announced their latest lens for mirrorless cameras, the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 DG DN Art, which would be available for L-mount and E-mount at launch.
Here are the links to the official press release (in English and Japanese), and the product information page (in English and Japanese).
Based on the released technical specifications of the lens, it looks like they have managed to keep the entire package pretty compact for a f/1.2 lens, and the MTF charts show a very high performance of the lens’ resolving power. Sample galleries seem to agree with that too, and it looks like Sigma has created a winner in their hands.
I have enjoyed using Sigma products during my DSLR days, and one of my favorite lenses from them is the 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens. And my experience with their customer service was pleasant and positive in the few times whereby I had to reach out to them for maintenance or calibration, so this is one company that I would always have a soft spot for.
It is really nice to see Sigma innovate in their quest to create quality modern optics for mirrorless cameras, by utilizing the advantages of the short flange distance as well as focus-by-wire AF systems to create more complex optics that were not possible in the DSLR era.
While previously, Sigma Art lenses were well-known to be behemoths (I’m looking at you 105mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art), their recent lens releases for mirrorless cameras seem to reflect their growth as an optics manufacturer as they embark on using more sophisticated optical designs and techniques to bring size and weight down.
While it is unfortunate that this lens is not coming to the Z-mount at launch, and to be honest I doubt that a native Z-mount version of this lens would ever happen, I am certainly looking forward to see what other lenses Sigma would create and bring over to the Z-mount.
Detailed List of Nikon Lens Hoods
I would like to share this useful information on older Nikon lens hoods.
A list of Nikon lens hoods, originally compiled by Rick Housh, and further maintained by Ed van de Zilver currently, consists of very in depth information about the lens hoods made specifically for the older Nikon lenses.
The list can be accessed directly on Ed van de Zilver’s website here.
[Update 28/03/2025: The page on Ed van de Zilver’s site seems to have gone down for several months now, and since I had gotten prior permission from him, I have reproduced his list on my page here. If anyone knows how I can contact him again please let me know.]
While it does not cover the more current bayonet hoods (HB- prefix hoods), which anyway is very specific in shape and size to their respective lenses, it is a useful reference to know which lens hoods to get for older manual focus or AF-D lenses.
The list also goes one step further and includes two extra information, which is extremely handy to know - the diameter of the front of the lens hoods, and the depth of the lens hood.
I say this because most of the older lens hoods now are now out of production, and may be hard to find even on the used market.
So if you look for after-market third party generic lens hoods, knowing the original front diameter and depth of the lens hood can give a good estimation on whether a generic lens hood would cause vignetting on your lens.
** Side note: Just in case you are wondering what the prefixes of Nikon lens hoods mean:
HN- : Screw-in Lens Hood (nejikomi)
HS- : Snap-on Lens Hood
HR- : Rubber Lens Hood
HK- : Slip-on Lens Hood (kabuse)
HB- : Bayonet Lens Hood
Creating an Equipment Page
I have been using Obsidian as a tool to manage my equipment inventory and take notes of my observations or experience when using my stuff.
One reason why I am using Obsidian for this is because its back-linking is convenient and efficient to link up notes together, and helps a lot whenever I needed to recall or check on certain issues I had encountered before.
That said, my notes also include things like how certain gear behaves or performs, and over time my thoughts and notes kind of look like a long-term usage reference of sorts, so I thought it may be useful if I uploaded the notes here too (albeit not in the short bullets I use in my notes and in more legible sentences lol) as a form of reference for any one that may be interested.
And acts as a small backup of the notes for me as well.
I did write some opinions that looked like mini reviews and stuff on the scribblings corner too, which just got lost too easily in the sea of other things I write here, so I figured consolidating them into a page might also be easier to digest and navigate.
Unfortunately I only started using Obsidian recently, so most of my “real-time” observation notes are for my more current equipment.
But nevertheless I have decided to also include my older gear in the list - including gear that I had used in the past but already sold off and no longer own anymore, and just write down my thoughts and opinions in retrospect as they might still be a source of reference for someone out there.
There is no native simple back-linking support in Squarespace so I am going to have to resort to the typical manual hyperlinking work, so please do not start flaming me if I forget to hyperlink an item in a post or something.
So yeah, feel free to head over to my equipment list page to have a look. It might take a while before every single item there gets their own page, but definitely keep checking back if you are interested.
Enjoying the Nikon Z 40mm f/2
Back in late June when Nikon announced their cashback campaign, I decided to get the Nikon Z 40mm f/2 muffin-ish lens to couple with my ex-workhorse Z6 to make a compact lightweight set-up.
According to the reviews online, many mentioned that the sharpness of the lens is not exactly awe-inspiring, especially when you are used to the quality of the S-line lenses, so I went in with that expectations in mind.
I paired the lens with a Nikon HN-2 screw-in metal hood (on top of a Nikon NC filter) to be able to put it inside my bag without using a lens cap, and this combination still remains relatively compact and does not introduce any vignetting at all.
After using it for more than a month now, I’m honestly surprised that I’m enjoying the lens way more than I had expected. The lightweight and compact size does make me bring the camera out more often, and somehow using this set reminds me of the days where things were simpler and I just wanted to take shots of things for fun or anything that is of interest to me.
As per most reviews, the sharpness is not exactly the best as compared to the rest of the Z-lineup, and at close distances the resolution and sharpness do take an additional hit in their quality. However, that being said, it is still not in the realm of unusable bad quality - shots do maintain enough detail retention even when shot wide open, particularly in the center of the frame, and sharpness improves for shots done from 2m onwards. Stopping it down to f/2.8 does bring out more resolution and contrast across the frame, so I’m pretty much using it as a f/2.8 lens now that can also open up to f/2 when the situation calls for it.
So some of the things I’ve observed or experience from using this lens so far:
The rendering is not like the typical Z S-line lenses due to the steep sharpness falloff out of the central region, which creates a more “vintage” look typical of the F-mount lenses
At f/2 the sharpness falloff of the out of focus areas coupled with the slight glow from spherical aberrations do actually give images an interesting atmosphere and look
Not the best in strong backlit situations - fringing rears its ugly face and further loss of contrast happens throughout the frame
Using the lens at f/2.8 tames the lens quite a bit and it performs closer to the typical quality known of Z-lenses
The lightweight and compactness is definitely something that one should not overlook - I have the 50mm 1.8 S as well, and while that lens is not a behemoth so to speak, the 40mm f/2 is just so much easier to carry around
Looking forward to creating more with this lens!
Lenses Wishlist
In all honesty, the splendid performance of the high zoom ratio lenses in the Nikon Z system has opened up many possibilities of new lens pairing combinations in my workflow (and of many of my fellow Nikon-shooting acquaintances too)
Since I am in scribbling mood tonight, just want to write about some lenses that I wish would magically appear in the Z-system so I can further optimize my layout.
Compact non-S 90mm f/2.2 or 105mm f/2.5 - While the S-line primes are great (and I love my 50mm 1.8S), I do wish to see more compact lenses in the system. They had done it with series-E lenses before, they can do it again.
85-135mm f/2 S - Make this lens internal focusing and slightly shorter than the 70-200mm f/2.8 S and I am sure many portrait photographers will drool over it.
35-150mm f/2.8 S - Tamron has shown that this is possible - add some Nikon sauce to the optical formula, optimize its sharpness at max aperture, and slap on the S label. Heck it could be a f/4 S and I would still get it.
65mm f/2 S - Internally focusing, more affordable to mere mortals than the 58mm f/0.95. Give it half-macro abilities as a bonus.
New Nikon Z Body on the Horizon?
Earlier today my daily go-to rumor site, NikonRumors, reported that a 67MP image had been uploaded to a social media channel by one of Nikon’s overseas subsidiaries.
This is really exciting news, as it may mean a new body going to be announced soon, or perhaps a new firmware update to allow pixel-shift high resolution shots to be taken.
Anyway, I agree with the report that if this image is to be believed to have come from a new camera body, it would most probably not be a Z8, but rather a Z7III.
Reasons being 1: Z7II was on discount a few months back, 2: 1st-gen Z6/Z7 have been officially discontinued, 3: it makes sense in terms on lineup segregation.
From the way I see it, and with a bit of wishlisty-hope embedded, I kind of think the lineup would turn out in this fashion:
Z5 line - entry level FF with SD card slot(s), cheaper design parts (i.e. lower res LCD), lack of top screen, older design sensor with moderate MP, lower FPS, non-gripped design, uses EN-EL15
Z6 line - all-rounder FF with CFe/XQD + SD slots, top screen, moderate MP non-stacked sensor, high FPS, good noise control, good video, non-gripped design, uses EN-EL15
Z7 line - highest resolution FF with CFe/XQD + SD slots, top screen, high MP non-stacked sensor, moderate FPS, decent noise control, decent video, non-gripped design, uses EN-EL15
Unicorn Z8 line - Mini-flagship FF with CFe/XQD + SD slots, high MP stacked sensor, high FPS, good noise control, good video, non-gripped design, no mechanical shutter, uses EN-EL15, unlimited buffer with restrictions
Z9 line - Flagship with dual CFe/XQD slots, high MP stacked sensor, very high FPS, good noise control, good video, gripped design, no mechanical shutter, uses larger batteries, virtually unlimited buffer
So as of writing, the Z5, Z6II, and Z7II are slated for updates, and this is what I think might happen:
Z5II - upgraded with Expeed 7 CPU, upgraded with Z6’s 24MP BSI sensor, perhaps without an EVF, but cannot happen until Z6II has been phased out
Z6III - upgraded with Expeed 7 CPU, slightly higher MP BSI sensor (33MP?), improved FPS, improved buffer speed for unlimited RAW shots with appropriate CFe card, 6K video
Z7III - upgraded with Expeed 7 CPU, slightly higher MP BSI sensor (67MP?), similar FPS with Z7II, hand-held high resolution stacking
And if you include APS-C, the Z50 is also slated for update, which I believe will really benefit from an Expeed 7 CPU, new AF algorithms, and USB-C port.
And if the chatter about the ZF is to be believed, I think it would most probably be a Z6II in nice clothes powered by Expeed 7.
I personally think that this lineup segregation makes sense, and also coincides with the lens roadmap - the pancake 26mm would pair well with an EVF-less Z5II or a ZF, the non-S 200-600mm would pair well with Z6III’s speed and price range, the S 85mm would pair well with the high resolution Z7III as the ultimate short telephoto prime lens.
Well, just my thoughts on the subject, so don’t flame me if these turn out to be absolutely drunk scribblings and not a single sentence comes out as predicted.
Changing Lens Set-up
Now that I have gotten that little bit of negativity out of my system (refer to previous short and sweet post if you’re interested), it’s time to pen down some thoughts I have recently on how to optimize my lens set-up.
I love using prime lenses, especially when using my cameras in my own personal time, but distance restrictions or movement restrictions for my paid assignments usually force me to dual-wield my 24-70/4 + 70-200/2.8 pair instead.
I’ve been toying with the idea of swapping to the newly released (and very back-ordered) Z 24-120/4, and pairing it with my lovely 105/1.4.
Or perhaps pairing it with the Z 50/1.8 might be interesting too.
But a part of me am quite worried if the lack of the 121-200mm coverage might be detrimental to my framing when physical restrictions are in place.
And also with the Z 24-120/4, I wonder how much action my current Z 24-70/4 would see.
Decisions decisions..
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8E vs Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S
Last year I came across a pretty good trade-in deal at my usual camera store for my 70-200 FL to upgrade to the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S, so without hesitation I sold off the FL to them as I was more than happy to say goodbye to the FTZ adapter.
Not that the FTZ adapter was underperforming, or that the lens was not up to standard - it’s just that the added length and bulk from the FTZ adapter does make the Z6 slightly unwieldly, and also it does require a bit of a nudge to fit into my bag as well.
So yea, with the new Z lens, my set became leaner, fitting into my bag nicely, and handling was much improved as the overall weight balance and length of the set makes handholding much more comfortable.
I had been very happy and satisfied with my 70-200 FL as it does perform as expected, and I had made over 200,000 clicks on that lens. Until the day I parted with it, it was a phenomenal workhorse lens which I had created countless stunning images with; even more so when coupled with a Z body as front/back focusing issues inherent with DSLRs were no longer a concern.
Hearing that the Z lens performs even better than the FL, I was really looking forward to owning it and putting it through its paces.
However one thing that caught my attention when I first got the lens was that how its performance varied with subject distances; at close distances it performs as I had expected it to - sharp with plenty of details and contrast, whereas at medium to long distances, I find that the FL seemed to have better performance, especially for reproducing minute details.
I thought that it might just that I have not grown into the lens and perhaps I need to change my techniques a bit to get used to it, so I put that aside and just concentrated on using it as much as possible to learn more about its strengths, weaknesses and quirks.
But after 100,000 clicks or so on it, I am quite certain that my lens might have an issue with sharpness - it’s either decentered, or the VR unit is causing motion blur, or a mixture of everything.
Sigh, I should have trusted my gut feeling and exchanged it for another unit when the window was still open.
Guess I’m going to have to pay the service center a visit soon.
Uniqueness of AF-S 105mm f/1.4E
I have to admit, I have not been using this lens as often as I should be, but whenever I do, the images produced have a unique look and rendering to it that I cannot quite put into words.
It’s not to say that the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 (or my previous AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E for that matter) are slouches; but the 105mm f/1.4 just have this little magic in it that translates very well into the images produced.
Guess I really ought to push myself to bring it out more often eh..