Must Have "Z" Lens Recommendations

[RAZKY]

I completely agree. Which is why, in my post, I said the kinds of things I would and would not be using my Z6 for. Specifically, I said I'd be using it mostly for macro, some travel (thus probably landscapes and "street photography") and I specifically excluded all long zooms. And I also said I'd be using my D500 for sports and wildlife photography.

The least you could have done is have the decency to say what travel and macro photography subjects you're interested in.

 

[JoeW]

"Decency"? I'm sorry your feelings got hurt. In my initial post, I said what I'd be using the Z6 for. You missed that and said I didn't mention what I'd be using it for. Then I pointed out I said macro photography and travel where I was restricted in what I could bring (and the travel would focus on landscapes and some street photography). And you claim I lacked "decency" because I didn't say specifically what travel and what macro subjects?

Thanks to everyone who took the time to post suggestions or advice specific to my question--I found it very helpful.

 

[RAZKY]

"Decency"? I'm sorry your feelings got hurt. In my initial post, I said what I'd be using the Z6 for. You missed that and said I didn't mention what I'd be using it for. Then I pointed out I said macro photography and travel where I was restricted in what I could bring (and the travel would focus on landscapes and some street photography). And you claim I lacked "decency" because I didn't say specifically what travel and what macro subjects?

Thanks to everyone who took the time to post suggestions or advice specific to my question--I found it very helpful.

Indeed, saying you lacked "decency" was a poor choice of words on my part - my bad. Should have realized you already knew it all.

 

[santino]

The advantage of sharper images because the lens is closer to the sensor refers to wide angle lenses (difference between retrofocus and non-retrofocus designs). If I were you, I‘d get a wide angle prime (can‘t comment on Z lenses because I don‘t own one) and for the rest I‘d use your Nikon dslr glass.

 

[snowbear]

Play nice or the thread will be locked.

 

[greybeard]

I have numerous Nikon DSLR bodies. I recently bit the bullet and got a Z6 Mirrorless. Yes, I already have the FTZ adaptor. But part of the advantage of mirrorless is better, sharper images because the lens is closer to the sensor. And the FTZ adaptor eliminates that advantage.

My go to camera right now is a D500. I use it for sports, wildlife. I intend to use the Z6 for Macro, for some travel (where I'm limited in the amount of equipment I can bring, ie: not 2 bodies and 5 lens and a tripod with 2 speed lights).

So my question is this (to you Nikon mirrorless users): what would be one or maybe two Z lens that you'd say are "must haves"? Exclude the long zooms--I'd use my D500 to shoot Eagles with my Tamron 600mm. What are 1 or 2 Z lens that you think fit what I'm likely to use my Z6 for and you think are pretty good lens?

Since you are wanting to use it for macro,

NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S​

 

[ndcisiv]

Personally I love having the flexibility of my 24-70mm, however it is bigger than I like. I haven't used the 24-120mm yet, but I've been looking at it for awhile from others reviews as a smaller walk-around solution. For your explanations of need I would hands down recommend getting the 105mm macro as it is a phenomenal lens. Then for your street photography it depends on the type of it you are doing. For me, depending on the situation, I'll typically have my 35mm prime on my Z7 or if it is a large event I'll stick on my 70-200mm to give me a little more control over the scene and what's included in it. Both the 35mm and the 50mm Z lenses are impressive, but I lean more towards the 35mm personally. Now throwing landscape into the mix it again depends on what you are shooting and your type of landscape shots you want. I can shoot landscapes anywhere from 14mm to 500mm, just depends on what I want to focus on. That being said, price wise I went the route of getting a few primes for a fraction of the price of one of the f2.8 zooms available. Every need is different, and every situation calls for something else. Before I purchase a new lens (or new focal length), I tend to look at my catalog and filter by focal length to see where I've been spending my time recently and go for that if I don't already have it handled or look to fill that gap in if I'm missing it. I have yet to find a Z lens that I hated, so any choice will be good.

Now, as for the FTZ adapter... I still do use it and some older lenses. I've seen no compromise on quality, perhaps a very minor change in focus speed... the drawback mainly is just the size addition. Good luck!

 

[nerwin]

I can also attest to the MC 105 2.8 VR S - I believe it's one of the best Z lenses Nikon has made. Its priced right too. It's a steller lens no question about it. Its one of the first macro lenses I've used that doesn't feel like a macro lens, its weird I know. But its really light weight for its size and when you are shooting normal distances its super fast focusing and the background blur is wonderful.

For the money 24-70 f/4 S is incredible as well. I don't like the twist to unlock to use so I can understand other folks preferring the 24-120 f/4 S, 24-70 2.8 S, 28-75 2.8 and the 24-200 as neither of those have the twist to unlock. Is it a big deal? Nah not really. But I have missed a few photo opportunities due to that. Its suppose to collapse for compact storage...it doesn't collapse THAT much lol - I would have wish the lens was just a tiny bit longer. However, if going on a hike or walking long distances with the lens is set to 24mm I noticed it does creep a little but it could be more that it's just rubbing against my clothing causing it to zoom. So it is nice to lock it closed. But other than that...out of all the Z lenses I have owned I still believe its the most fastest and quietest focusing lens. The images are incredibly sharp..wide open corner to corner at all apertures. I seen these lenses sell for $350 on ebay...its a frigging steal!!!!

When it comes to primes...you can't go wrong with either the 35 1.8 S or the 50 1.8 S - But overall the 50 1.8 S I find is a better performing lens as it feels more refined and the price is a lot cheaper too. The 35 1.8 S has excellent image quality, contrast and character. Its insanely sharp but I don't like the way it focuses. It tends to hunt a bit, its a noiser lens and has a weird grinding like noise which I guess is normal whereas the 50mm doesn't and much more pleasing to shoot with. However, the 35mm is noticeably lighter. What would make it better is the price...the 35mm is way overpriced to me. If you were to get one, find one used or wait for a good sale/rebate.

At the end of the day I recommend all Nikon Z lenses - they are all "must haves" because Nikon truly hasn't made a bad Z lens yet. Its just the matter of getting one that you need.