Nikon Z 17-28mm f/2.8 By Spencer Cox 41 CommentsPublished On February 14, 2023«1. Specifications & Build Quality2. Optical Features3. Sharpness Comparisons4. Verdict5. Reader Comments»Table of ContentsSpecifications & Build QualityOptical FeaturesSharpness ComparisonsVerdictReader Comments
@spencercox, how does the 28mm end of the Z 17-28 compare to the Z 28 2.8? Thank you.
I like Tamron and got a few of those, but I would never ever pay Nikon money for a Tamron lens.
That’s just dumb.
“I recommend updating your Nikon Z camera’s firmware to allow linear manual focus” Is that available on my z6? I researched online for a while but could only find a few lenses like the 70-200mm z and 400mm 2.8 tc z that supported it and only on the z9 and the mark ii models. Does every z lens support that on those cameras?
Unfortunately not, it applies to the Z6 II, Z7 II, and Z9 so far. It’s not the end of the world – I still use my Z6 and Z7 all the time for Milky Way photography, you just need to take a bit more time to nail focus on the stars.
Spencer, will you guys be reviewing the new Nikon 85mm f/1.2? Thanks for this review!
Yes we will! My plan is to prioritize reviewing all of the Z lenses. At this point, we’ve reviewed most of them, but there are still a few left to go.
How long do we have to wait for a 50 1.2 review? :)
I need to get a bunch of portrait samples with it first! I don’t want to just show my usual landscapes, no one buys a 50mm f/1.2 to photograph mountains.
That was quick: In the UK, this lens is already £120 off.
Nice! It seems like the type of lens that will go on sale pretty often.
I am hanging on to my d850 for now and decide this year what i do:
It will be a Z8 if it has the right specs; or maybe i go to Sony 7rV. I have not bought any Z-lens yet so can still choose. What i dislike about Nikon is the almost complete lack of third party lenses. I like sigma lenses for one. Also i would like to see improvement on multishot in a Z8.
Sony has implemented it almost in a good way i read. Nikon can do better i hope.
Reviews are nice but i want to test (rent) these camera’s and lenses myself to find out the good/bad i am personally interested in. Till then i manage with my D850 that already works for 5 years and shot 400.00 images…
A real shutter has advantages; I spoke to the Nikon repair and they had already some Z9’s with burned-in sensors… try a timelapse with a sun in the frame!
New is not always better ; My Sigma f-bajonet primes are heavy but also hard to beat even by S-standards.
a good lens stays forever; this Tamron just is not it.
Real shutter will not help with mirrorless agains Sun burned sensors. I assume that having a Sun in the photo means that the actual shot will take a split second but framing the photo may take minutes, while all the time the Sun is shining at the sensor. On every mirrorless camera.
You hinted at the AF-S 18-35 G
But left me hanging. That lens
I own and use often on D800.
Please more about your experience.
Nasim has a full review of that lens! Although, he measured it on the D810, so the exact Imatest numbers aren’t comparable to the ones in this 17-28mm review. In any case, you’ll get a great sense of our experience with that lens if you read his review in full: photographylife.com/revie…-f3-5-4-5g
Together with a 24-200, this would make for a very competent, very lightweight, compact, and not overly pricy hiking kit. “Unfortunately” (well…) I already have the 14-24/2.8 Z, so it is very hard to justify any other wide angle acquisitions.
Well, the 14-24mm f/2.8 S is arguably the best wide-angle lens ever made, so I wouldn’t sweat it too much :)
Sometimes the thought of a shiny new toy makes it difficult to be reasonable. ;)
Spencer, I enjoyed reading your review of the Nikon Z 17-28mm; its performance looks to be very solid and demonstrates that Tamron can produce credibly good lenses for Nikon. The lens is however not for me, as it is too short at the long end. While I own the Z 14-30mm, I find it also a bit too short at the long end. Ideally as a landscape and city-scape shooter I’d like a 16/17-35mm in Z mount, to pair up with my 24-120. A lot of my city-scape stuff requires focal lengths ranging from less than 20mm to 35mm. Walking around town with the 14-30mm, more often than not forces a lens change to the 24-120 to capture that missing range between 30 and 35mm. I could resort to my F-mount Tamron 17-35mm, but I’m not loving the gen1 FTZ adapter. I’m thinking of possibly adapting Sony’s 16-35m f4, but that can bring bits own problems…
That makes sense, you could keep the lens changes to a minimum with a wide-angle that reaches 35mm. However, if you don’t like the FTZ adapter, I suspect you won’t be any happier with a Sony-to-Nikon adapter, even one of the good ones. Not sure what the right answer is in your case…
I don’t know if this could be a solution for you, but on my Z7 I assigned a button to switch to DX mode, so if I feel like I’m a little short I can do 20mp shots at 45mm.
It’s a much more interesting lens than I expected–I was expecting performance worse than the 14-30mm f/4, but it’s trading blows despite being a stop brighter!
It’s a bit too narrow for my own needs, plus I already have the 14-24mm f/2.8, but it’s still an intriguing option for those that are willing to trade some focal length for a 1 stop brighter lens compared to the 14-30mm f/4.
Meanwhile I’m waiting for Nikon to come out with a 14mm f/1.8 for Milky Way photography. The 20mm f/1.8 looks great, but 20mm is a tad narrow compared to 14mm.
I felt the same way, this lens was better than I expected.
A Nikon Z 14mm f/1.8 would be a hit among Milky Way photographers, and it would pair well with a lot of their existing lenses (including this one, the 20mm f/1.8, the 14-30mm, etc.)