As previously indicated on the Nikon Z lens roadmap, the ultra-wide angle Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S zoom lens has finally been unveiled today, and it looks pretty incredible. At just 650 grams of weight, it looks like Nikon has been able to make a lens that is both lighter and smaller than its Nikon F counterpart, the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G. On top of that, the MTF charts look absolutely stunning, which is an indication that this lens will surpass its predecessor in every way. The lens will be priced at $2,399 MSRP, and will be available at the end of the year.
Interestingly, the front element of the Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S is not as bulbous as on the F-mount 14-24mm f/2.8G, which is indication that this lens has a completely different optical design. Sporting a total of 16 elements in 11 groups (which includes 4 ED and 3 aspherical lens elements), it is indeed a very different lens, considering that the 14-24mm f/2.8G only had 14 elements in 11 groups. And here is the big news – the lens will be able to use 112mm screw-on filters when the HB-97 lens hood is attached! This makes the new Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S a far more practical choice in the field compared to its predecessor.
As with all the pro-level lenses, Nikon is including the best of its technology in its arsenal. The Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S will feature ARNEO coating, fluorine coating, an information panel, an extra function ring and an L-Fn button on the side of the lens.
Now let’s take a look at its MTF chart:
Now compare the above to the MTF chart of the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G:
Check out my article on how to read MTF charts, if you don’t know what the above graphs mean. As you can see, the new Z-mount 14-24mm f/2.8 is an absolute beast. It is showing that Nikon engineers were able to make this lens sharp from center to corner at 14mm, which is very impressive. The long range at 24mm is not as good in comparison in the corners, but that’s still simply excellent when compared to the 14-24mm f/2.8G. Contrast levels are exceptionally high on both ends – visibly higher than on its predecessor.
Keep in mind that both graphs represent wide-open performance at f/2.8. It is hard to say what the lens is going to look like stopped down, but I suspect it will be amazing throughout the focal length range between f/4 and f/5.6.
This is a very exciting release by Nikon. While the lens is very expensive at $2,400, keep in mind that it is made for professionals who need the best quality optic available for the Z mount.
For more technical information on this lens, check out the Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S page of our lens database.
Official Press Release
Below is part of the official press release for the Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S lens:
NIKKOR Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S: Broaden Your Horizons with the Essential Ultra-Wide Angle Zoom Lens
The much anticipated NIKKOR Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S is the shortest and lightest full-frame zoom lens of its kind, offering unique user benefits and incredible rendering capabilities across the wide zoom range. Joining the previously announced NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S and NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S lenses, this lens completes the trinity of coveted fast aperture Z series zooms. The 14-24mm is a versatile lens that proves the optical superiority of the Nikon Z mount, producing excellent edge-to-edge sharpness, minimal distortion and exceptional photo and video capabilities for creators. The new optical design allows for a significantly shorter lens that is nearly 35 percent lighter than its predecessor, the popular AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8, making this lightweight lens ideal for a trek into the field. Meanwhile, its wide-angle zoom range offers video content creators a new option for capturing tack-sharp establishing shots, interiors or POV angles.
The NIKKOR Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S lens is engineered to deliver unrivaled optical excellence and maximum usability. This thoroughly modernized lens design features a nearly flat front lens element, which allows the attachment of a threaded filter to the included additional lens hood (HB-97). This design provides users the ability to attach a Neutral density (ND) filter, as well as the new Neutral Color NC Filter 112mm or Circular Polarizing Filter II 112mm3, while a rear filter holder also accepts a trimmable filter gel. With the option to easily use multiple filter types, users can capture epic landscapes with greater versatility and flexibility in more lighting conditions than ever before. An excellent choice for photographing stunning night-time views, the 14-24mm lens delivers amazing low-light performance with a constant f/2.8 aperture and stellar point light reproduction capabilities that suppress sagittal coma and flare for tack-sharp stars and city lights.
The NIKKOR Z 14-24mm combines a robust design and reliable performance with custom controls, including a customizable one-touch shortcut button, EL Display panel and custom control ring, making controls and settings convenient and accessible. The optical formula includes four ED lens elements, helping to control chromatic aberrations, and capture fine details, including colors and lines, with consistent accuracy – a true benefit to those shooting interiors and architecture. Additionally, flare, ghosting and coma are suppressed, even with harsh backlight, thanks to the lens’ Nano Crystal Coat (N) and anti-reflective ARNEO Coat, while its robust fluorine coating and extensive weather sealing allow Nikon Z series users to shoot confidently in rugged and unpredictable environments. As an added benefit to videographers, the lens also features an electro-magnetic diaphragm, to help maintain smooth exposures as light changes.
If you would like to support our efforts and pre-order this lens, please use the link below from our trusted partner B&H Photo Video:
I already received the Nikkor Z 14-24 f2.8 and did a quick compare with the Z 14-30 f4 with landscape pictures only @ infinity with several focal lengths and from f2.8 up to f11.
Up to 20mm the new Z 14-24 wins it easy, it’s also much sharper from corner to corner @14mm and f2.8 compared with the 14-30 @f 5.6!
The 14-30 is only close to the 14-24 @24mm and >f6.3.
I also noted that the distortion settings in the Camera (Z7) can now be turned off for teh 14-24, but Lightroom does not recognize it (with import settings to camera setting), but works in ViewNX…
Waiting now for your conclusion.
Yep, you really want to be pinning your hopes on manufacturer’s MTF charts. And more importantly, will this lens, like the 14-30, bake distortion correction into the EXIF data?
I am kinda torn on this lens. I currently have the F-mount version of the 14-24 f/2.8 lens, and while I am sure the newer lens will be optically fantastic, I am not sure if it’s worth spending another $2400 for this. I do like the fact that S line version is lighter and can take screw on filters, but at the same time I still love using the F mount version. What would your recommendation be at this point?
First: you have to wait until it becomes available anyway. No rush.
Second: Rent or borrow one. You’ll know if it suits you or not.
Lightweight and can use filters!?!! Yes! I am totally looking forward to this S lineup when I upgrade my video gear. I have been using a D810 and D850 for a while and now need to find lightweight gear for video with my gimbal setup. The challenge is often the body/lens combo in relation to weight and balance. This will be awesome!
I’m sure this will be a great lens, but I’m disappointed in Nikon for their lack of innovation. Sony just came out with a 12-24/2.8 and Canon has had some nice ultra-wide zooms too. At this point I’m considering switching from Nikon DSLR to Sony mirrorless since I don’t feel like the switch to Nikon mirrorless brings any large benefits. Any thoughts on this?
I don’t give a damn how innovative a company is unless they give me what I want? Do you really want 12mm. Is the performance up to snuff compared to the Nikon? Are you going to base your decision on a system on 2mm at the wide end, which will be a novelty, not a practical benefit, for most.
Yup, go ahead and switch. If 2 mm is what separates you from the big guys, go right ahead.
My pictures will never stack up against the big guys unless I get those extra 2mm! Please help me!
To set a counterpart to the two Nikon addicts with apparently not much experience with the Z-system: Sony has some great native glass, not to mention a wide selection of adapted or native 3rd party glass.
Will this zoom makes it to the market until November? Given the embarassing story of their 70-200 and 24-200, some doubts appear.
And for the rest of the lens selection: Nothing really bad, but also absolutely nothing you can’t get from another manufacturer. And a lot of holes in the roadmap. If you have a bunch of F-glass and like to dip your toe into ML-waters, you can get a used Z 6. And if not, you can still use your DLSR along with a new mirrorless system.
Two years ago I started with the Z line. Today I would recommend any buyer to have a close look at Sony first and Canon second. I still like shooting with Z, but outside of landscape one needs to be ready for sometimes disappointing performance of AF. It got better, but every time I see what a friend’s α7 RIV is capable to track, I just wonder how long Nikon will remain sleeping?
Thanks for that perspective. I’d pretty much consider myself a Nikon addict, but recently I’ve seen Canon and Sony introduce some interesting lenses that are worth looking at.
Same here. And sorry for putting you in the same category as Mr. Shikele.
One thing I forgot to mention: The big mount diameter of the Z is a double disappointment to me: First, there are not much lenses available (2 years after introduction only the Noct) and benefitting. And there constantly is the problem of massive colour blobs you can’t get rid of in post. Only in certain situations: shooting towards strong frontlight and pointy lightsources combined with dark shapes closeby. But then it’s worse then the “flare collector” 14-24/2.8 G ever was.
Joachim, I think we have already exchanged comments on this one, but basically, every mirrorless system suffers from the red dot flare. The primary reason is the flange distance and the reflections that take place between the rear lens element and the microlenses on the sensor. That’s why those blobs appear in a pattern. Happens on my Nikon Z cameras, Fuji X and Fuji GFX. I have also observed it on M43, Canon RF and Sony E as well. I don’t think there is a technical solution to this problem, other than finding ways to incorporate more anti-reflective coating technologies between the AA filter stack and the sensor, as well as the AA filter stack and the rear element.
Nasim, I exchanged some photos with a Sony owner. In situations when I see not only hints, but tons (and huge ones) of this ugly spots, his pictures of similar situations remained clean.
Looking at the rear ends of his Sony, Voigtländer and Tamron lenses I see a lot of efforts to reduce internal reflections. Velvet, light-traps and so on. Looking into my S-lenses I see a couple of shiny surfaces and chamfers pointing towards the sensor – instead away of it. It’s not the coating alone – that won’t help if the geometries are introducing the reflections at first. It’s not the flange distance alone. If the mount ø is big enough and there are a couple of parallel surfaces opposite of the sensors, then it’s like singing towards reflective surfaces, tones are overlapping and become interferences.
Also, when I use the FTZ adapter and DSLR glass, the effect is definitely less dominant.
It’s not as if it is happening constantly, but I know how easy it is to provoke on a Z body and how difficult it is to get out of a Nikon DSLR or a Sony mirrorless. On Canon R I’ve seen the same effect.
And so far I could not find a remedy to get rid of that effect of this design flaw.
Do you take photoes? Do you have a portfolio?
Hahaha, nice try. How about you? Look, if someone replies in such a way like you, it’s pointless to have a debate about lack of innovation (as you “don’t give a damn” anyway). These discussions are predictable and will end with something like “go out and take some photos” – an advice the giver of this is disobeying in the first place.
And if someone wants to switch from one system to another, it is at least useful to look at the current range of alternatives. This also includes how many innovations a manufacturer has delivered so far, because that makes them attractive to buyers. The more buyers, the more secure the investment.
The best example is the predecessor model: a 14-24/2.8 was not yet available anywhere in 2007. So good that even Canon owners have adapted it. Today there is the successor, which is again better, but also two versions of Sigma, which are also better than the original. One of them comes with a native Sony E- or L-mount, the other one has to be adapted.
If you start as late with full format mirrorless as Nikon and Canon, there is a lot to catch up. At the moment Nikon is not very skilled at this.
It is really quite simple. Nasim is a nice guy trying to do a good job. You are a shithead and a jerk. Your treatment of Nasim is appalling, especially given that you are a guest on his site.
You can google me under WestEndFoto. I am sure that everyone else on this has a decent portfolio. This means that they are here for the right reasons. Prove that you are anything other than a measurbator and show us your portfolio.
Nobody has to prove you anything. Your behaviour speaks for itself. Are you running out of targets you can insult over at Nikon rumors?
The Nikon 14-24 weighs 200 grams less, takes screw on filters, is considerably sharper into the corners according to the MTF charts and costs $600 less than the Sony. The 2 extra millimeters on the Sony might considerably outweigh those features for some and be pointless for others, but “lack of innovation” seems to be the opposite of what’s under discussion in comparing those two lenses to one another.
At the mid-to-high end all these manufacturers are putting out such good gear these days that “large” benefits of choosing one over another just don’t appear to be on the table and the task of differentiating between them is instead reduced to parsing differences like 2 millimeters of focal length, or small drops in high frequency data in the extreme corners at max aperture, or 65% vs 73% eye autofocus algorithm hit rates, or tweaks to white balance presets in Lightroom, or hard drive storage requirements. Most of this stuff is better than most photographers.
I’m going to jump into full frame mirrorless in the next 6-9 months and at this point I’m planning to decide which way to go based heavily on ergonomics (which, as dictated by my quirks, is currently pointing me in the direction of Nikon/Panasonic rather than Canon/Sony) since all the other tradeoffs between the brands seem extremely live-able and/or workaround-able to me.
This, of course, is from the perspective of someone who’s not making a living with a camera. In my day job, when considering what live audio mixing console package to spend $150K on, things like reliability in professional production environments, local access to repairs and rental stock, scalability, client technical rider requirements, total cost of ownership calculations, etc, all serve to make some very small distinctions in quality/specs loom very large, and to make some quite large distinctions in workflow/ergonomics nearly irrelevant. (Though if you must know, I’m happy to report that Yamaha is just absolutely crushing it on all fronts these days…😜)
All of which is to say that how important these distinctions are can be pretty sensitive to the specific context in which the decision is being considered…
Thanks for your perspective on the innovation side. This is the sort of info I was hoping for.
It seems you are not a photographer but a keyboard man who can not even read specifics completely.
Yep, you caught me. Time for me to go reevaluate my life.
Matt, Sony’s 12-24mm f/2.8 GM looks good, but are those 2mm of extra focal length worth switching and spending thousands of dollars? The Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G has been the gold standard for UW performance, so this new lens is essentially going to take the crown.
Also, the Sony 12-24mm f/2.8 GM can only take rear filters that are specifically cut for that lens, while the 14-24mm f/2.8 can take front filters when using the hood + rear filters. That’s a pretty distinct advantage in my books.
Lastly, I could never get used to the ergonomics and the terrible menu system on Sony cameras. I always have people in my workshops who jump from Nikon or Canon to Sony…it is not fun to see them struggle with changing camera settings all the time. The Sony cameras take time to get used to, so I suggest you rent a Sony and see how it works out for you. I find that folks with technical minds don’t have issues with the cameras, but those who have developed muscle memory for Nikon / Canon ergonomics struggle for a while.
I think it is expected that Sony is going to maintain the lead in the mirrorless game, given how many lenses and accessories they have already developed. If you are not willing to wait for Nikon, then by all means give Sony a try. I really hated the first iterations of the Sony mirrorless cameras, but things changed a lot since the A7R III – it is now a very stable camera with excellent autofocus performance, and the battery life is excellent. Once again, give it a try and see how things work out for you.
Hope this helps.
Nasim, thanks so much for that perspective. I’ve been a Nikon shooter for years, and I’m not eager to switch. When I see other manufacturers outpacing Nikon in the mirrorless game it gets me thinking if there’s something better out there.
now after some time, can you write us for what system you have decided ??
If you really need the extra 2 mm then by all means switch to Sony. I personally would not get a 12-24 f/2.8 lens even if Nikon were to come out with one because of both weight and high costs. I’m personally fine with 14 mm as being the widest focal length because once you go wider you’ll inevitably run into a lot of distortion. Plus it will weigh like a ton of bricks compared to this lens. Where Nikon needs to be a bit more innovative is with the mirrorless camera bodies. I just hope the Z6S/Z7S offer more than simple bells and whistles.
Sad to see the personal attacks and counter-attacks, but delighted with the substantive parts here and there.
Interesting. I’ve been using the Z mount 14-30mm F4 S for over a year now and love it. A comparison between the two Z mount UWA zoom lenses would be cool. Other than the obvious speed and weight differences I wonder how they stack up optically? Thanks for the info!
Jason, I will definitely be comparing the two lenses as soon as I get my hands on the 14-24mm f/2.8…
I expect the f/2.8 to be much sharper than the 14-30mm and very consistent throughout the focal length range.
I know it is pure speculation at this point, but what would be your guess regarding the distortion performance of this lens? I hope better than the current 14-30mm f/4! Even though its distortion is correctable, the correction levels needed seem excessive to the point of altering aspects of the original composition. It is one of a number of reasons I passed on the 14-30mm f/4.
David, it should be much better – I expect better than the 14-24mm f/2.8G. Keep in mind that the 14-30mm f/4 is a retractable design to make it small and light, so distortion is always going to be heavy on the wide side, especially on uncorrected RAW images. Lightroom takes care of that automatically, but other software doesn’t, which is a problem for some people.
I would expect Capture NX-D to correct automatically as well.
It does. As does View NX-i which I use far more often than NX-D
Nasim, that’s an invalid statement. “Lightroom does, other software doesn’t”. Capture One also reads the manufacturer’s lens profiles and does a good job with lens correction. The correction profiles are apparently saved in the RAW files.
Joachim, I should have said “some third party software”. Yes, Capture One also has lens profiles for many modern lenses. I note this in many of the lens reviews.
What is your expectation of sharpness and practicality compared to the 14-30 f4 for landscape photography?
Dave, this is a much sharper lens in comparison. I love my Z 14-30mm f/4 S, but this beast is on a whole new level. Also, the Z 14-30mm f/4 isn’t really suitable for astrophotography needs, while the Z 14-24mm f/2.8 is kind of made for it…
At the end of the day though, it all depends on how much you really need that extra stop, and all the sharpness. If you are happy with the Z 14-30mm f/4 S, then by all means continue shooting with it – it is still an amazing lens. But if you want the best of the best and budget is not an issue, then the Z 14-24mm f/2.8 S is obviously a better choice.
Thanks for the reply. I am still shooting with a pair of D750s and f-mount lenses: 16-35 and 70-200 f4s and a 35 f1.8 as a basic field kit. I also have the 20 f1.8 for astro, 85 f1.8 when I don’t want to carry the larger zoom, and the 105 macro (VR).
I shoot mostly landscapes and use ND filters fairly frequently. I am getting closer to pulling the trigger on trading one of the D750s up for a Z6 and am trying to get my mind around what I’d want for my Z lens kit. Do I want to stick with f4 lenses and their lesser weight or do I want to spring for f2.8 lenses to, as you say, have the best of the best. I definitely like less weight.
Also, I print, but it would be very unusual for me to print larger than 16 x 20, in fact most prints would be in the 11 x 14 range since I am a traditionalist and mat my prints. There is only so much room on the wall 🤣. I often wonder if my maximum print size of 16 x 20 shouldn’t be a significant consideration in choosing lenses and sensor size?
Do you think we are going to see an important replacement for the Z6 any time in the next year?
Appreciate your comments!
Dave, there will be a replacement for the Nikon Z6 next year, but I have no idea exactly when – it is all rumors at this point. If you want to shoot with the Z6 now, it is certainly good time, since you can get that camera at a bargain price, especially on the used market. I expect the Z6 replacement to be priced higher, since Nikon will most likely add an extra memory card slot and introduce new features…
Thank you Nasim for the excellent review! What do you think would be the right/most practical choice of filter system for the Z-mount line up? I can’t come up with the proper solution for square filters/holder considering all lenses have different diameter from 72mm to 102mm. If you could cover this topic in subsequent articles I am sure many readers would be very grateful.
Sergei, I use standard, screw-on filters of different sizes, but if budget is an issue, I recommend getting one filter that is larger than all other filter threads on your lenses, then use step-up rings. That’s the most economical choice.
Thanks Nasim, my question was more about the square/rectangle filters holders. With my F-Mount 77 mm lenses I use the Lee holder with 100×100 or 100×150 filters. With the Z-Mount we now have 72 mm, 77, 82 and now 102. Is there a one-fit-all holder system for all diameters?
Sergei, I haven’t seen anything larger than 82mm that fits all lenses. I think for lenses like this, the best choice is to get a single filter for the lens specifically. Otherwise, you will need to wait for custom third-party options. Keep in mind that 14mm is pretty wide – any sort of light leak or gap between the lens and the filter is going to potentially introduce problems, including vignetting.
Go on Amazon, there are 112 mm polarizers from B&W for the “small amount” of 530€. Gelatine holder at the lens’ rear element is also built-in, but to change the gels you need to unmount the lens – not a bright idea to do in rainy, snowy or sandy conditions.
Given the price of 1 one screw in filter (and not much step-Up rings to use them on smaller lenses) I’d opt for a filter holder.
It’s a 112mm filter.
Nikon states on their web page for this lens that “it’s equipped with a filter slot at the rear element that lets you slide in trimmable filter sheets and gels.” I didn’t see any more detail on that.
The Irix 11/4 also has such a “holder”. Although I guess, one cannot design a lens with a more cumbersome system, you never know… But no matter how good the installation of filter gels works: First you need to dettach the lens to change the filter, then mount it again. There are a lot of situations I simply don’t want to bother with this.