Nikon has a ton of midrange zoom options, but if you’re looking for an f/2.8 constant-aperture lens, two of the most obvious choices are the Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and the Z 28-75mm f/2.8. Despite the similar focal lengths, these two lenses sell for very different prices, and only the 24-70mm gets Nikon’s “S” designation. But which lens is actually the better choice for you? This article will help answer that question!
Initial Considerations
The biggest difference at first glance between these two lenses is that the 24-70mm f/2.8 S goes to 24mm on the wide end, while the 28-75mm f/2.8 only goes to 28mm. (Obviously there’s also the 70mm vs 75mm difference on the long end, but that difference really doesn’t matter – each millimeter is a much bigger deal at wide focal lengths.)
I find 24mm to be a nicer starting point, but 28mm is still a reasonable choice, especially if you also have an ultra-wide lens like Nikon’s 14-30mm f/4 or 17-28mm f/2.8 to cover your ultra-wide needs.
Then there’s the question of price. When not on sale, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 costs $2400, and the 28-75mm f/2.8 costs $1200. That’s a massive difference – you don’t need to be a genius to see that you can buy two 28-75mm f/2.8 lenses for the price of one 24-70mm f/2.8! You’ll see later whether that price difference is reflected in performance.
Note that the Nikon 28-75mm f/2.8 is actually based on the optical design of the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, a lens that has existed for Sony mirrorless cameras for years. That’s not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself (for what it’s worth, Tamron has some really great lenses these days), but it does show how Nikon was able to get the price relatively low.
As for build quality and handling, the 24-70mm f/2.8 is definitely more advanced. The main benefit is that you get more controls on the 24-70mm f/2.8, including a function button and an additional control ring. The 28-75mm f/28 is an extremely sparse lens by comparison. I took both lenses out into intense weather conditions without issue, but I would trust the 24-70mm f/2.8 S’s more advanced sealing for years of harsh professional use.
That said, considering the price, it is hard to deny the appeal of the 28-75mm f/2.8. It probably all comes down to image quality, so let’s take a look at that next.
Image Quality
1. Vignetting
Vignetting is reasonable on both lenses, and actually favors the cheaper Z 28-75mm f/2.8 at most focal lengths and aperture by a slight amount!
2. Distortion
Both lenses have some meaningful barrel distortion at the wide end and pincushion distortion at the long end. However, the cheaper Z 28-75mm f/2.8 again beats the expensive 24-70mm f/2.8 S in distortion overall! Not that this is a big deal, considering that distortion is easy to correct in post-processing (and in fact is automatically corrected by default in a lot of software).
3. Lateral Chromatic Aberration
Now we see an area where the high-end Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S has a clear advantage. Chromatic aberration is usually easy to correct, but at high levels, you may see some residual haloing in Lightroom or other post-processing software after corrections. Neither lens has a concerning level of CA, but the Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S has so little that you will almost never need to correct it at all.
4. Sharpness
Here’s the comparison everyone was wondering about! I’ll go focal length by focal length, then explain my conclusions at the end. We’ll start with the widest focal length of each lens, 24mm and 28mm respectively:
Now here’s the performance at 35mm:
Next up is 50mm:
And finally the longest focal length of these two lenses, which is 70mm and 75mm respectively:
What’s my takeaway from all this? Well, the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 puts up an admirable fight, but it’s really no contest. The high-end Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S is the sharper lens almost anywhere you look, especially in the corners of the frame. The 24-70mm f/2.8 S also has none of the major “weak spots” that are found on the 28-75mm f/2.8 at certain areas (like 50mm and 75mm at f/2.8, where the cheaper lens is a pretty iffy performer).
Value and Conclusion
As you can see, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S earns its place as a high-end “S-line” lens. It’s exceptionally sharp at every focal length, even wide open at f/2.8 but especially when stopped down to f/4.
But is it worth twice the price of the Z 28-75mm f/2.8? I think it depends on what type of photography you do. If you care mostly about central sharpness (maybe you’re an event photographer, for example), you can absolutely get away with the 28-75mm lens. On the other hand, if you want corner-to-corner performance – not to mention the utility of the 24mm focal length on the wide end – the 24-70mm f/2.8 S is certainly worth the higher price.
Finally, professional photographers will appreciate the advanced build and handling features of the 24-70mm f/2.8 S, like the custom function button and additional control ring. So, it’s a question of what you’re willing to pay for.
However, the 28-75mm f/2.8 represents a great value alternative to the 24-70mm f/2.8. No, it’s not the better lens – but for half the price, it doesn’t need to be. Most photographers can absolutely get away with the 28-75mm f/2.8 and save $1200 (or more if it’s on sale). If you need the top-end quality of the 24-70mm f/2.8 S, and are willing to pay for it, you probably already know.
You can check the current prices, and support my testing efforts at Photography Life, at the following B&H affiliate links:
- Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S at B&H – Check prices and current sales
- Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 at B&H – Check prices and current sales
Let me know in the comment section if you have any questions about these two lenses! I’ve used them both in the field extensively and would be happy to help.