12/31/2023 0 Comments Big aperture nikon zoom lensSo, if you have the money and you're looking for a reliable zoom to sit on your camera and snap all kinds of shots, this is the lens for you. We essentially love this lens for a wide variety of photos, but it isn't what we'd reach for if we wanted to get specialized. It's weird to throw so much shade at what is, essentially, one of the best Nikon lenses we've handled. We prefer a wider, faster lens for astro, a longer zoom for moon images, and the far cheaper f/4 version of the 24-70mm is just as competent for daytime landscapes.Īt $2000+ it's not cheap, either, and will likely suit those who shoot professionally more than the hobbyists. However, unless you're comparing it to another 24-70mm lens, we wouldn't say it's the absolute best at anything. Should I buy the Nikon Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S lens? As we mentioned earlier, though, we rarely found the need to change it during regular photo sessions as it covers multiple photographic disciplines easily. There's no need for a separate tripod collar/foot with this lens, although you may find it challenges some ball-heads if you're using a glass filter too.Īs with all Z lenses, it's so simple to mount onto the camera body, and it feels very secure once it's there. If you do want to shoot motion and handheld trails, it's a handy lens to have too, as it isn't excessively heavy.Īt 5-inches and 1.7 lbs, you can happily fit the 24-70mm to most tripods (via the camera's tripod connection) and get very little movement or settling, unless you're combining it with a heavy camera body like the Z9. ![]() It gives you the flexibility to adjust your shot to vary the size of your trails, and it has the aperture range to give you the ability to either focus on the trails themselves (or an object) or flatten the photo out completely. We found this lens perfect for light trails. The wider lens gave us more detail while keeping the stars slightly sharper, and it gave us a far 'bigger' sky. When we were out shooting astro with this lens we took the same shot with the 24-70mm as with our trusty 20mm f/1.8 and did see noticeable differences in the same scene. While it's a great lens to have in your bag, it isn't a specialist, so those looking to really up their astro game should be looking at something like the Nikon Nikkor 20mm f/1.8 S lens which has that extra width and lower f-number. We think it's the realistic minimum for photographing stars and that's one potential drawback of the 24-70mm. That wider aperture comes into its own at night, allowing you to capture star details with a short enough shutter speed to avoid trailing. You can get pleasing depth with that f/2.8 width, while inviting some delicious soft light into your photos. Relatively light, although larger than the f/4.And we'd make sure you don't confuse it with the excellent value, but not perfect for night sky shots, f/4 version. If you're a photographer who likes to take a wide variety of shots, we'd 100% start with this, the 24-70mm. ![]() If you wanted to be ready for almost any astro scenario (arguably, the 200mm isn't quite enough for detailed moon images), we'd absolutely recommend all three lenses. Nikon Nikkor Z 24-70mm f/2.8 at Walmart for $2,054.95 (opens in new tab).A trinity that will cost you between $6500-7000 to complete, if you're feeling wealthy, with each lens retailing between $2000-$2500. This is the f/2.8 version, is one of the first lenses launched for the Z-brand Nikon mirrorless system and, when combined with the Nikon Nikkor Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S (opens in new tab) and Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S, completes the Holy Trinity of Nikon's lens ecosystem.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |