Hi Nasim, I have read many of your reviews and I have learned a lot that I should probably already know. I have a Nikon z6 and a 24-70mm 2.8 S (805g)lens. I am looking for something lighter, especially good for night sky photography that I would want to take backpacking and also for traveling. I am thinking either the 20mm 1.8 s (505g) or the 35mm 1.8s (370g)— I am wondering if I am making best conclusions regarding the worth of weight differences, or if you have another recommendation. Thank you Babette
Michael
March 11, 2022 4:42 am
Dear Nasim,
thanks to your review I decided to buy the lens for my Z6 / Z50 combo. In my opinion its super and very versatile. Great landscapes, good color and contrast, nice hyperfocal distances. Also nightscape photography is fantastic and in my opinion coma is totally fine even wide open or just slightly stopped down. In particular on the Z50 I like it for “macro” on flowers and plants etc. even though one does not have IBIS or VR available. On a 20 mm lens this is certainly no issue when using the correct shutter speeds.
No strange motor sounds on my version. Hardly noticeable “noise”. Regarding lo CA. Of course it depends on the picture and the light situation (you can always push it), but even when shooting in high contrast situations towards the sun the overall result is really remarkable on the Z6. It might be that we do have some sample to sample variations.
Since I am belonging to the “hiking” fraction – definitely a lens that I would carry along on a 20 km hike.
Please keep on reviewing. All the best Michael
serp
December 8, 2021 1:09 am
I purchased the brand new 20mm 1.8s lens and am experiencing noticeable sound from working motors while the lens is autofocusing, it can be clearly heard while making pictures as well as over a video recording. This noise is almost absent on my Z 24-70 2.8S, the F mount 20mm 1.8G is also very silent in this regard. I wonder if you also experience this or I’ve got a bad copy of the Z 20mm 1.8S.
Scott Segler
November 12, 2021 12:54 pm
Thanks so much for another thoughtful and well done review, Nasim. One small note regarding the old Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D in your table, it has seven “straight” blades, not rounded–yielding crisp sunstars even at smaller apertures (and without the sensor blob artifacts of all of the brands’ mirrorless). The G lens has rounded blades that become more straight as stopped down. Judging by your picture of the sun, the S appears round even at f/11. Great for bokeh but not so much for stars. Again, thank you. Great review!
Robert Camfield
July 12, 2021 8:07 pm
Mr. Mansurov,
Thank you for this review…I know of no other 20mm lens that quite matches the performance of the new 20mm S lens (for Z Nikons). I note that, for this new Nikkor S, reviewers at CameraLabs cite the presence of annoying longitudinal chromatic aberrations — all too common to wide angle lenses generally speaking. Would you have any comments with respect to these findings?
Thank you for your lens reviews, which are much appreciated by many.
I have the Z 20mm 1.8 and it has massive colour fringing. Worst colour fringing of any lens I have ever used. Why is only Camera labs speaking out about this inherent, debilitating flaw?
Steve Horne
January 12, 2021 9:32 am
Hi Spencer. Would you mind sharing the locations where the example photos were taken? Nice images.
I took them throughout Utah, many in the slot canyons of Escalante, others near Canyonlands and Dead Horse Point. That whole area is a playground for photographers!
Clark
November 8, 2020 9:59 am
Hi Folks: In case it is useful, I compared the 20mm S lens (rented) to the 18 mm Zeiss Milvus f/2.8 that I have owned for some time (used on D810 and Z7), and, at least for the lenses I tried, the Milvus @ f/2.8 is stronger in the DX circle and extreme FX corners than the Nikon 20mm @ f/2.8. The differences disappear by f/5.6. I cannot comment on details of astrophotography with the 20mm, since I have not tried it, but I have done a lot of astrophotography with the Milvus and for me, it is quite good. The Milvus+FTZ combination is of course heavier, manual focus, and not f/1.8. But for my purposes, I decided to keep the Milvus. It will be interesting to compare with the 14-24 S lens some day.
Alex
November 6, 2020 10:10 pm
Very looking forward to seeing the comparison with 14-24 2.8S
Alex
September 7, 2020 3:12 am
Nasim thank you for this excellent review. What if you have the choice between this Z 20mm and the Zeiss Milvus 18/2.8? Which one does find the way into your bag to join the Z6 and/or Z7?
Alex, the Z 20mm, of course. First, it is a native lens – no adapter, no 2 points of connection / centering issues to worry about. Second, it auto focuses, while Zeiss doesn’t and it has very precise AF that’s useful for any kind of shooting – even Astro, since you can focus on the moon and get very sharp results. Third, it is 216 grams lighter – a significant difference when carrying a lot of gear. And lastly, it is significantly sharper in comparison.
Nasim, I did so, sold the Zeiss and bought the Z 20mm, it will arrive tomorrow. Happy like a child…. Cheers Alex
JD750
August 25, 2020 1:11 pm
In section 1: “focus accuracy with Nikon F lenses and FTZ adapter isn’t on the same level, as Nikon wanted AF performance of F-mount lenses to be very similar to DSLR cameras (this is why the Nikon Z cameras still have the AF Fine-Tune menu). In comparison, Nikon Z lenses do not have to be adjusted for focus accuracy, since focusing takes place on the sensor plane vs a separate phase-detection system.“
I am I understanding correctly? The Z7 does not use the focus points on the sensors when the F2Z adaptor is in use?
Well, the focus fine adjustments are a bit weird and so far I haven’t got a satisfying explanation in either the manual or from Nikon support. It has to do with the different motors used to drive the focusing units. While mirrorless lenses use stepping motors which will stop precisely at the maximum sharpness, the DSLR lenses are different and use ring motors, ultrasonic motors and whatever names the marketing department developed. These motors drive higher masses of glass and they might stop after the maximum sharpness.
The MFA gives them an earlier breaking point, so that the focus unit lands on max. sharpness although the motor has stopped a fraction of a second earlier.
But: that’s my guesswork. It appears logical to me. It’s like moving your finger from the switch of an electric drill and it tales a while until the spindle comes to an halt.
Hi Nasim, I have read many of your reviews and I have learned a lot that I should probably already know. I have a Nikon z6 and a 24-70mm 2.8 S (805g)lens. I am looking for something lighter, especially good for night sky photography that I would want to take backpacking and also for traveling. I am thinking either the 20mm 1.8 s (505g) or the 35mm 1.8s (370g)— I am wondering if I am making best conclusions regarding the worth of weight differences, or if you have another recommendation. Thank you
Babette
Dear Nasim,
thanks to your review I decided to buy the lens for my Z6 / Z50 combo. In my opinion its super and very versatile. Great landscapes, good color and contrast, nice hyperfocal distances. Also nightscape photography is fantastic and in my opinion coma is totally fine even wide open or just slightly stopped down. In particular on the Z50 I like it for “macro” on flowers and plants etc. even though one does not have IBIS or VR available. On a 20 mm lens this is certainly no issue when using the correct shutter speeds.
No strange motor sounds on my version. Hardly noticeable “noise”. Regarding lo CA. Of course it depends on the picture and the light situation (you can always push it), but even when shooting in high contrast situations towards the sun the overall result is really remarkable on the Z6. It might be that we do have some sample to sample variations.
Since I am belonging to the “hiking” fraction – definitely a lens that I would carry along on a 20 km hike.
Please keep on reviewing.
All the best Michael
I purchased the brand new 20mm 1.8s lens and am experiencing noticeable sound from working motors while the lens is autofocusing, it can be clearly heard while making pictures as well as over a video recording. This noise is almost absent on my Z 24-70 2.8S, the F mount 20mm 1.8G is also very silent in this regard.
I wonder if you also experience this or I’ve got a bad copy of the Z 20mm 1.8S.
Thanks so much for another thoughtful and well done review, Nasim. One small note regarding the old Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D in your table, it has seven “straight” blades, not rounded–yielding crisp sunstars even at smaller apertures (and without the sensor blob artifacts of all of the brands’ mirrorless). The G lens has rounded blades that become more straight as stopped down. Judging by your picture of the sun, the S appears round even at f/11. Great for bokeh but not so much for stars. Again, thank you. Great review!
Mr. Mansurov,
Thank you for this review…I know of no other 20mm lens that quite matches the performance of the new 20mm S lens (for Z Nikons). I note that, for this new Nikkor S, reviewers at CameraLabs cite the presence of annoying longitudinal chromatic aberrations — all too common to wide angle lenses generally speaking. Would you have any comments with respect to these findings?
Thank you for your lens reviews, which are much appreciated by many.
Regards, Robert Camfield
I have the Z 20mm 1.8 and it has massive colour fringing. Worst colour fringing of any lens I have ever used. Why is only Camera labs speaking out about this inherent, debilitating flaw?
Hi Spencer. Would you mind sharing the locations where the example photos were taken? Nice images.
I took them throughout Utah, many in the slot canyons of Escalante, others near Canyonlands and Dead Horse Point. That whole area is a playground for photographers!
Hi Folks: In case it is useful, I compared the 20mm S lens (rented) to the 18 mm Zeiss Milvus f/2.8 that I have owned for some time (used on D810 and Z7), and, at least for the lenses I tried, the Milvus @ f/2.8 is stronger in the DX circle and extreme FX corners than the Nikon 20mm @ f/2.8. The differences disappear by f/5.6. I cannot comment on details of astrophotography with the 20mm, since I have not tried it, but I have done a lot of astrophotography with the Milvus and for me, it is quite good. The Milvus+FTZ combination is of course heavier, manual focus, and not f/1.8. But for my purposes, I decided to keep the Milvus. It will be interesting to compare with the 14-24 S lens some day.
Very looking forward to seeing the comparison with 14-24 2.8S
Nasim thank you for this excellent review. What if you have the choice between this Z 20mm and the Zeiss Milvus 18/2.8? Which one does find the way into your bag to join the Z6 and/or Z7?
Alex, the Z 20mm, of course. First, it is a native lens – no adapter, no 2 points of connection / centering issues to worry about. Second, it auto focuses, while Zeiss doesn’t and it has very precise AF that’s useful for any kind of shooting – even Astro, since you can focus on the moon and get very sharp results. Third, it is 216 grams lighter – a significant difference when carrying a lot of gear. And lastly, it is significantly sharper in comparison.
Nasim, I did so, sold the Zeiss and bought the Z 20mm, it will arrive tomorrow. Happy like a child…. Cheers Alex
In section 1: “focus accuracy with Nikon F lenses and FTZ adapter isn’t on the same level, as Nikon wanted AF performance of F-mount lenses to be very similar to DSLR cameras (this is why the Nikon Z cameras still have the AF Fine-Tune menu). In comparison, Nikon Z lenses do not have to be adjusted for focus accuracy, since focusing takes place on the sensor plane vs a separate phase-detection system.“
I am I understanding correctly? The Z7 does not use the focus points on the sensors when the F2Z adaptor is in use?
Well, the focus fine adjustments are a bit weird and so far I haven’t got a satisfying explanation in either the manual or from Nikon support. It has to do with the different motors used to drive the focusing units. While mirrorless lenses use stepping motors which will stop precisely at the maximum sharpness, the DSLR lenses are different and use ring motors, ultrasonic motors and whatever names the marketing department developed. These motors drive higher masses of glass and they might stop after the maximum sharpness.
The MFA gives them an earlier breaking point, so that the focus unit lands on max. sharpness although the motor has stopped a fraction of a second earlier.
But: that’s my guesswork. It appears logical to me. It’s like moving your finger from the switch of an electric drill and it tales a while until the spindle comes to an halt.