Nikon Z 70-200 2.8S vs Nikon 2.8E FL ED VR: Nikon Z Mirrorless Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review (2024)

6

I was holding back from buying FL lens for a while already anticipating new release for Z-mount. Honestly a bit shocked by its size. Have to wait to get more information from CP+ next days but it seems that S lens will be at least as big (if not bigger than F-mount version). Did Nikon "integrated FTZ" and used here FL optical formula or was new lens fully re-designed from scratch for Z mount? New lens uses the same 77 mm filter. No info (images) if there is VR switch or not.

Hoped to see the new lens with reversed zoom ring (closer to body) where FL got so much critics in past. Zoom ring is wider now but still palm will be occasionally resting on focus ring. If focus by wire implemented likely there is an option to disengage focus ring in contrast to FL lens.

Can one expect further optical performance boost form S lens when compared to already excellent FL version or unlikely?

3

Those are good questions you pose- I sure don't have the answers though....just from the pictures alone, it is impossible to know.

I have a 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII - I know it gets talked about because of its focus breathing, but it is sharp and acquires focus fast enough for me. I won't be buying the S version- mainly because I can't afford it.

1

Volodja wrote:

I was holding back from buying FL lens for a while already anticipating new release for Z-mount. Honestly a bit shocked by its size. Have to wait to get more information from CP+ next days but it seems that S lens will be at least as big (if not bigger than F-mount version). Did Nikon "integrated FTZ" and used here FL optical formula or was new lens fully re-designed from scratch for Z mount? New lens uses the same 77 mm filter. No info (images) if there is VR switch or not.

Hoped to see the new lens with reversed zoom ring (closer to body) where FL got so much critics in past. Zoom ring is wider now but still palm will be occasionally resting on focus ring. If focus by wire implemented likely there is an option to disengage focus ring in contrast to FL lens.

Can one expect further optical performance boost form S lens when compared to already excellent FL version or unlikely?

From the outside, it looks like the same lens--reuse of optical formula + "integrated FTZ."

But we have no idea what's on the inside.

That's also not necessarily a bad thing--the existing lens is very good. Might see a future revision specific for the Z, if this is a re-use. Nikon probably just needs to get some core lenses moving...

...though I'd go with the F if this is the case. Because I would see no benefits to the Z version, other than the customizable control ring.

I'd guess they did redo something inside though. Maybe a new optical formula with multiple-element focusing or something.

5

beatboxa wrote:

Volodja wrote:

I was holding back from buying FL lens for a while already anticipating new release for Z-mount. Honestly a bit shocked by its size. Have to wait to get more information from CP+ next days but it seems that S lens will be at least as big (if not bigger than F-mount version). Did Nikon "integrated FTZ" and used here FL optical formula or was new lens fully re-designed from scratch for Z mount? New lens uses the same 77 mm filter. No info (images) if there is VR switch or not.

Hoped to see the new lens with reversed zoom ring (closer to body) where FL got so much critics in past. Zoom ring is wider now but still palm will be occasionally resting on focus ring. If focus by wire implemented likely there is an option to disengage focus ring in contrast to FL lens.

Can one expect further optical performance boost form S lens when compared to already excellent FL version or unlikely?

From the outside, it looks like the same lens--reuse of optical formula + "integrated FTZ."

But we have no idea what's on the inside.

That's also not necessarily a bad thing--the existing lens is very good. Might see a future revision specific for the Z, if this is a re-use. Nikon probably just needs to get some core lenses moving...

...though I'd go with the F if this is the case. Because I would see no benefits to the Z version, other than the customizable control ring.

I decided to buy the F version upgrading from a Tamron because I have both the Z6 and D850. I anticipate using it on the D850 more but the new lens is lighter than the old versions and may handle pretty well on the Z6 too.

I'd guess they did redo something inside though. Maybe a new optical formula with multiple-element focusing or something.

2

If the new S lens is 'only' as good as the F-mount f/2.8E, that is fine with me, as that current lens is simply stunning, truly prime quality throughout the zoom range.

1

Laslo Varadi wrote:

I decided to buy the F version upgrading from a Tamron because I have both the Z6 and D850. I anticipate using it on the D850 more but the new lens is lighter than the old versions and may handle pretty well on the Z6 too.

I still hope that Nikon will release D760 one day. That would be perfect companion until then to my D750 that I still plan to keep as backup for Z6. S lens is restricted to Z body only.

And, honestly speaking, I like old FL design much more. Rubberized zoom and focus rings, those offer by far better tactile feeling and grip in contrast to metal rings on new Z mount lenses. And that golden ring and prints ...

2

Good lens MK 2 - if punters dump some good FL (70-200 MK 2) for good price on ebay and I can get a good price on MK 2 may upgrade to MK3, would like to use / am using the 70-200 on both Nikon F cameras and Nikon Z6.

2

Nikon 70-200 E FL is the sharpest 70-200 in the market, for bokeh some people prefer VRII.

At CP 2019 Sony loaded A9 with new firmware (release end of this month for a9, next month for a7) + 70-200 GM 2.8 to show off their new AF capability. Then I decided against it with D850+70-200 E FL. I though a9 would win out:

I slipped away before Sony guys started approaching me...

1

I think the new "Pro" S lenses (I mean the 2.8 zooms and 1.4 primes) will all be rather expensive and large. And optically excellent surpassing their F mount peers.

Why?

Because Nikon doesn't really have any other option. Initially, pros using Z will all work dual system, both Z and F mount. You can mount an F mount lens to Z, but not the other way round. So, Nikon has to provide a good reason to pros to buy a Z-only lens. And this must be optical quality. Esp. if a 80-100 MP Z body emerges further down the road ...

Yeah, this size thing. That lens looks absolutely ginormous. I was really hoping that with the new mount opening up more options to the designers they could have achieved something that was simultaneously better than the existing 24-70/2.8 lineup while also being at least a little smaller and lighter. Doesn't look that way.

Not being truly pro and actually needing glass like this, when viewed from a hobbyist's perspective, the new 24-70/2.8 S lens looks small enough compared to the 24-70/4 S to be something I'd be willing to lug around if I were just looking for ways to spend more money. That 70-200/2.8 S, though, I just couldn't see myself lugging that thing around unless someone was paying me to do it. I currently have in my possession a borrowed 70-200/2.8 VR f-mount lens (probably 1st generation, it's pretty old) attached to my FTZ adaptor. I almost never use it. For one, my subjects are such that I just don't usually need that range, and because I don't know I'll be needing it, I just can't be motivated to carry it around with me on a just-in-case basis. For those really occasional times when I've wished I had it, I've just cropped aggressively from whatever I shot at 70mm. Thanks, 46 megapixels!

What'll probably entice me to part with some cash in this focal length range is when they come out with a 70-200mm f/4 S that's much smaller than this f2.8, thus much handier.

beatboxa wrote:

From the outside, it looks like the same lens--reuse of optical formula + "integrated FTZ."

But we have no idea what's on the inside.

That's also not necessarily a bad thing--the existing lens is very good. Might see a future revision specific for the Z, if this is a re-use. Nikon probably just needs to get some core lenses moving...

...though I'd go with the F if this is the case. Because I would see no benefits to the Z version, other than the customizable control ring.

I'd guess they did redo something inside though. Maybe a new optical formula with multiple-element focusing or something.

I wouldn't be surprised if your correct and its reusing the optical formula from the latest F-mount lens which maybe explains why its the first tele zoom on the system? Nikon feel that they did the same "holy trinity" for professional users quickly?

Personally I wonder whether Canon is really aiming at the big market with its 70-200mm F/2.8 being collapsible. I could well see Nikon working on making a more compact 70-200mm F/4 lens in the future instead following the 14-30mm and 24-70mm ones, I think that's more a lens that the size/weight conscious photographer is likely to be interested in.

I remembered the Z 70-200 S /2.8 supposed to be the size of F mount 24-70/2.8, yes I read about that somewhere. But what Nikon showed at CP+ seemed totally different. I suspected Nikon might just modified the existing lens formula to match the bigger mount size, taking care of resolution and flange distance as well. It is a speedy approach that cost less yet. Though it contradicted what they advertised for the Z: smaller in size. It looked like Canon did their homework better.

70-200 is a workhorse lens for portrait photographer, I guess. I did not use them often until recently, especially when I stared shooting people. I acquired Canon 70-200/4L first in 2006, then the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 D ED in 2008. Nearly a decade I did not realize the true value of that focal length, because I was in love with ultra wide angle at that time, Until I moved to Tokyo from New England, the subjects changed. There is no such landscape here. I used to drive for days chasing the foliage in Vermont, New Hampshire, Mass... At that time I hated the lens was not wide enough!:-D Now I am in a concrete city with narrow streets and millions of people...

I did adapt long lenses on Z and Sony a7iii. After a day's walking around, I preferred the f4 zoom indeed. With the support of tripod without a grip is ok.

MoreorLess wrote:

beatboxa wrote:

From the outside, it looks like the same lens--reuse of optical formula + "integrated FTZ."

But we have no idea what's on the inside.

That's also not necessarily a bad thing--the existing lens is very good. Might see a future revision specific for the Z, if this is a re-use. Nikon probably just needs to get some core lenses moving...

...though I'd go with the F if this is the case. Because I would see no benefits to the Z version, other than the customizable control ring.

I'd guess they did redo something inside though. Maybe a new optical formula with multiple-element focusing or something.

I wouldn't be surprised if your correct and its reusing the optical formula from the latest F-mount lens which maybe explains why its the first tele zoom on the system? Nikon feel that they did the same "holy trinity" for professional users quickly?

Personally I wonder whether Canon is really aiming at the big market with its 70-200mm F/2.8 being collapsible. I could well see Nikon working on making a more compact 70-200mm F/4 lens in the future instead following the 14-30mm and 24-70mm ones, I think that's more a lens that the size/weight conscious photographer is likely to be interested in.

It will have been prudent of Nikon to minimize the changes to the already excellent 70-200 f2.8E FL: frees up time and resources to do other Z-Nikkors.... Besides differences between their respective bayonets, a telephoto really only needs the longer chassis to fit the Z as well as the F-mount. This is clear to see in the photos above. The current 70-200 ain't broken... it is in fact world class but some clients will want the Z only fast zoom with AFP but no VR (presumably).

Compared to this new S model, shooting my 70-200 f2.8E FL + Z7 in poor light will maintain the advantage of at least 2 extra stops of VR, Yes?

The recurring argument goes that benefits of the Z-mount geometry to optical design falls away, as focal lengths increases far beyond that of ultra-wides. So it will be interesting to see what, if ever, Nikon engineers put out in the optical design of a fast 180mm or even longer prime IF they ever do telephotos primes optimized for the Z-mount... as i posted in a parallel thread a dinky 180 f2.8S on the Z system should be a great little medium telephoto.

The more Z Nikkors the better IMHO, and it will be great if , Nikon perpetuates the Classic dynasties in their optical heritage. With 35 and 50, we will soon get 20, 24, 58, 85... so we await the Z-mount primes in 105, 135, 180

A 105 f1.8S? now this will be something!?!

2

New 'S' lens is about 7% less $$$ than the FX mount.

As for size? A few grams here or there and a couple MM? It's a wash.

What I am hearing is better resolution out to the edges.

And the closer focusing distance @70mm (a lot) and marginally closer at 200mm.

I am thinking that at closets focus and 200mm the lens really is closer to 170mm than 200.

I'm waiting for the DxO measured data. Which should be pretty good, considering the glimpse I've had of the MTF data.

the F4 is what I was hoping for, too. But I'm not gonna hold my breath! Not on roadmap, any of 'em.

The FX version at F4 is in No Way inferior to the 2.8, but costs a Fraction.

But OH! The Ultimate Weapon that the 'S' mount 2.8 promises to be!!!

3

leons

I'm waiting for the DxO measured data. Which should be pretty good, considering the glimpse I've had of the MTF data.

According to the MTF data this may be the best zoom lens ever designed, are least excluding the super tele zooms costing 4 times more.

cheers,

Bernard

leonski wrote:

the F4 is what I was hoping for, too. But I'm not gonna hold my breath! Not on roadmap, any of 'em.

The FX version at F4 is in No Way inferior to the 2.8, but costs a Fraction.

But OH! The Ultimate Weapon that the 'S' mount 2.8 promises to be!!!

I had f4 and FL at the same time. There was a visible difference between them without pixel peeping.

Did you have an especially GOOD or bad example of either?

DxO put them within 1 point overall with the F4 right next to the uber $$$ 2.8 in all other measureables.

the Lens Rental people measure 10 samples of everything they post as a test.

Based on the DxO result, I would not be ashamed to show up anywhere with the F4 version.

Now? I'm holding my breath waiting for results from any objective tests of the NEW 2.8 in 'Zee' mount.

The newest version of Panasonic's Micro Four Thirds video-oriented flagship camera has arrived, and it includes features like internal ProRes RAW recording, 32-bit Float audio capture, phase-detect autofocus, and compatibility with Panasonic's Real-Time LUT system and Lumix Lab app.

The Lumix S9 is Panasonic's newest full-frame mirrorless camera. It allows users to create their own custom looks for out-of-camera colors and is the first full-frame Lumix camera aimed squarely at social media content creators.

The Sony a9 III is the world's first full-frame mirrorless camera to feature a global electronic shutter with simultaneous readout. After extensive testing of this 120 fps sports camera, to see what you gain (and, perhaps, lose).

Fujifilm has announced the X-T50, a mid-range 40MP APS-C mirrorless camera that gains image stabilization, subject recognition AF and a host of high-res video features.

The Fujifilm X100VI is the sixth iteration of Fujifilm's classically-styled large sensor compact. A 40MP X-Trans sensor, in-body stabilization and 6.2K video are the major updates, but do they make the camera better?

What’s the best camera for around $2000? This price point gives you access to some of the most all-round capable cameras available. Excellent image quality, powerful autofocus and great looking video are the least you can expect. We've picked the models that really stand out.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best.

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

'What's the best mirrorless camera?' We're glad you asked.

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.