Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Would love a comparison against the Nikon 18-35mm 3.5-4.5G lens. Seems like the resolution on the 18-35G is higher within the overlapping focal length.


The best comment I read was the Z14-30 is 85-90% of the Z14-24 for about 50% of the price. As this focal range is more of a “nice to have” than my bread and butter focal range, I am happy to make the compromise in terms of optical quality for the cost benefit (the new Z14-24 is not sooo much heavier or bigger than the little brother that I consider this a huge factor. Not so compared to the f-mount or third party alternatives which easily crack the 1kg mark…)

David Lake

Surprised you did not mention the unbelievably sharp (notably sharper than any other UWA I have ever used), well built and basically flawless performing Sigma 12-24 F4 lens. I shoot real estate and commercial photography everyday on a pair of D750s. This lens outperforms my Nikon 14-24 by a mile, and the extra 2mm on the wide end makes it the most useful lens for my needs. Granted it doesn’t go to F2.8 but since I’m shooting architectural interiors, rarely use F2.8.

I’m looking to transfer to mirrorless at some point in the future and will probably keep the Sigma with FTZ adapter. It’s cheaper than 14-30 F4 Z Nikon and I suspect sharper since it is much sharper than the 14-24 F2.8 compared here. All that being said, I would probably instantly switch if there was a Z series that went as wide as 12 mm. The additional weight of these older style lenses is no joke after a day of shooting.


I had my newly aquired Z7II and 14-30mm out for the first time yesterday. Corner sharpness seems acceptable but the vignetting and distortion are fairly pronounced. The distortion is what it is. It’s the vignetting that has me more concerned. I was shooting with my Kase polorizer attached at the time–though it is not supposed to cause vignetting at 14mm, I wonder if that was an issue. Also I had the in camera vignette correction turned off.


How does the 14-30 compare to the Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G? It looks like the Optical Performance score is higher for the 18-35mm lens. Could you add the 18-35 to the comparison in this article? I am curious which of them is sharper and whether it makes sense to upgrade. 18-35 is worth nearly nothing used, while 14-30 is over 1000 EURO on sale.

Ashkan Forouzani

Thanks for the amazing review and generally for the great website. I always check here first before buying any gear.

So I’m planning to go FF and I have sold my D7500 to get a Z5.

I mostly do street photography and portraits with a bit of architecture and flower photography.

This is my question:
What lens should I first get?

I want a light setup and I don’t want to buy many lenses. So I was considering to get a 35mm f1.8 first and then a 85mm f1.8 both from the S Line.
But another alternative for me is to get a 50mm f1.8 and then a 85 and then this 14-30mm f4.

So which setup do you think is better for me?

I have used the 35mm f1.8G, 50mm f1.8G and the 10-20mm VR DX. I loved them all, even though I used the ultra-wide one a lot less.

Very eager to know your thoughts.
Many thanks in advance.

JR Arsenault

Bought the 14-30mm a couple months ago. Fabulous travel lens for scenics and interiors, extremely sharp corner to corner and consistent at all FL’s. The Z7 cleans up most of it, you can do a lot SOOC with little post required. Happy camper, sold the F mount zoom glass … but still keeping 20mm f3.5 AiS because I still love its’ capture qualities.


How stiff is the zoom ring on the 14-30 f4 compared to the 24-70 f4 ? I own both and my 14-30 zoom ring feels way looser than my 24-70… Wondering if that’s normal since my unit was shelf unit (last available).

Robert Lutz

Hi Spencer & PL team,
Thanks for the wonderful review (I love PL and have been an avid reader for 6 years now). I just switched to the Z system and acquired the 14-30 f4 to replace my 14-24 f2.8 G. Now I am faced with the question of what constitutes a good copy…

I have taken some test shots at infinity. Would you be so kind as to take a look at my image samples? I have uploaded the raw files as well as screenshots of the corners (previews in FastRawViewer) to Google Drive:…sp=sharing.

The bottom right corner is not up to par with the rest; but, given that no lens is perfect, I am wondering whether you would consider this level of blur an acceptable fault. I DO see a bit of blurring in real-life shooting in the right corner at f8; but, of, course, the details in the real-life corners where just a few meters away and not at infinity.

Would love to hear from you!

All the best,

Robert Lutz

P.S.: Forgot to mention that the shots were at 14mm. I also checked the lens’s performance at 20mm and 30mm, and things are more even there.

Robert Lutz

Update: I exchanged the copy for a new one. It’s less sharp in all corners, but seems more balanced overall. Now, the top right corner is the least sharp by a significant margin. I’m quite frustrated by this, but I can live with a screwed up top corner (since it’ll mostly be sky area in my photos). I’m considering giving the lens to Nikon to work on it under warranty; however, based on prior experience, they will most likely tell me that it’s in spec and I’d have to keep insisting until someone ACTUALLY takes a real look at the problem. The other Z lenses I bought are all incredible, so this is quite the letdown.


Credo che non esistano copie così disallineate quest’obbiettivo ha la particolarità che se non si sa usare allora si dice che la copia è disallineata ma il discorso è più complicato quest’ottica è buona ma non eccellente.Gli angoli non saranno mai nitidi come il centro a14mm.punto.Salute a tutti.