I use this lens together with the Z 50-250 on a Z50. The wide angle range is not important for me (ca. 36mm FX-equivalent at the wide end of this combo is enough, at least for me). This combo is really light and small and sometimes I fetch the 50mm/f2 mc additionally.
I’m looking to get into real estate photography. Will this be a cheap solution until I get more paid jobs and can afford a better lens?
Keaton Rose
August 11, 2021 5:38 pm
I found it interesting that the review was a bit less than enthusiastic about the lens, and yet the sample images throughout were by and large outstanding. I got this lens to have a small and light setup for hiking and street attempts, and I plan to add the 28 and 40mm compacts when they’re available to have something of a compact system to use on occasions when I don’t want to lug bigger and heavier alternatives around. I can see going out and about or on a trip with just the 24-50 and, say, the 40 f/2.8 and getting what I need out of that setup. We’ll see. In the meantime, the 24-50 has served me well for what… Read more »
Michael
July 25, 2021 9:52 pm
Is the Imatest score comparable across cameras?
This lens scored similarly to the 16-50 DX. Does that mean sharpness between a Z50 with its kit lens and a full frame Z with this lens will be equal? If so picture quality advantage goes to this lens over the DX lens because its FF.
What would be the better pick between a Z50 with 16-50 and a Z6 with the 24-50?
We test every Nikon Z lens, including DX, on the Nikon Z7 for Imatest. So, the central sharpness figures are comparable between the two. The 16-50mm’s “corner” numbers are measured in the same spot as the 24-50mm’s “midframe” numbers but are otherwise comparable. The difference is that you don’t need to enlarge the image from a Z6 sensor as much for a given print size. Even though the two sensors have similar resolution, and the lenses may be comparably sharp, this difference in enlargement is enough to make the Z6 photos look a bit more detailed at a given print size. For maximum image quality, the better pick would be the Z6 with the 24-50mm, but not by much. (Plus… Read more »
Last edited 29 days ago by Spencer Cox
Mario
July 23, 2021 2:53 am
I think this lens‘ strength will come out when a lightweight telezoom will be available. Other than that, I found the 24-50 zoom range more usable than I had anticipated. I often take this lens if otherwise I would have taken only my phone. Maybe that’s a comparison that could be added to the list. Not because we don’t know how it would come out, but because it’s the way some might use this lens.
It would definitely pair well with a lightweight telephoto zoom. Hopefully Nikon makes one soon. I’m surprised they haven’t yet.
bg5931
July 22, 2021 3:38 pm
Whether this lens is or is not useful very strongly depends on one’s aims. As a general all-purpose lens, it’s probably a failure. Crappy zoom range, dark aperture, not so sharp. But if the purpose is to shoot 45 MP stopped down in the backcountry, this lens may have its place. I do agree that small primes would be even better though – I am hoping for a 20/2.8 (or even f/4, I don’t mind) that’s sharp and flare resistant. That on a Z7 would be a fantastic minimal landscape combo.
Steven Horne
July 22, 2021 11:08 am
How can you call Lightroom’s failure a shortcoming of this lens? Nikon has nothing to do with Adobe. Other software programs such as Dx0 Photolab have no problem turning the lens profile on and off.
It may not be Nikon’s fault, but it’s still a drawback when using this lens. We’ve added a similar “con” to most Nikon Z lens reviews so far – I’m not just targeting the 24-50. That said, some Z lenses (the primes and f/2.8 zooms) don’t have that same drawback if you’re using the Z6 II or Z7 II.
Last edited 1 month ago by Spencer Cox
Chuck Steenburgh
July 22, 2021 8:58 am
You hit the nail on the head: I got this lens precisely because it is light and short. On my Z5, it makes a perfect hiking rig. Landscapes and especially waterfalls don’t require a larger aperture in most cases, and even the limited zoom range, to my mind, is an advantage over the as-yet vaporware pancake lenses for the Z system.
As an aside, I have never understood the appeal of a tiny mirrorless body coupled to an enormous mirrorless lens. With further advances in materials and optics, hopefully we’ll see smaller mirrorless lenses become available.
Glad you’ve found it to be such a good lens for your hiking setup! Until the 28mm and 40mm eventually ship, it’s the lightest FX lens in Nikon’s Z lineup. I wish Nikon had prioritized the primes instead, but anyone who needs maximum compactness in the meantime should at least consider the 24-50mm.
John Sanders
July 22, 2021 7:50 am
Humor: I found it’s best use is to stick it on the camera when I’m sitting in my recliner and working through the menu settings. Because it’s so light! I agree with you that a release of a small 2.8 prime would have been a better choice for my preferences. And I really don’t like collapsing lenses. While keeping my Z6ll and 24-200, 14-30, and primes I’ve returned to Fuji TX4 for a smaller travel kit (although the weight is only slightly less due to Fuji’s excellent metal construction).
The biggest issue with the 24-50mm f/4-6.3 for my photography isn’t the image quality or even the zoom range, but instead the narrow maximum aperture. Half the reason why I’d want to use such a light lens is so that I could handhold it all day – but this lens can’t be handheld in dark conditions without raising the ISO too high. Hence why I wish Nikon released the compact primes first instead.
I did it the other way round and moved from Fuji to Nikon because the 24-200 lens is sooo good and perfect for hiking :) Now I can walk with only one lens.
Gene
July 22, 2021 7:46 am
It was love at first touch when I picked up a Z5 with this lens attached. I knew I finally found my entry to FF shooting. The overall size and price of the kit was critical. The trade-offs vs larger lenses pale in comparison to the still-great IQ (almost breathtaking when displayed on a good 55″ screen) and enhanced portability. Contrary to most, I actually appreciate the collapsible feature of the lens and thank Nikon for this every time I pull the camera out of a very small bag and open it up while flipping the power on. And, the 52mm front threading allows me to use all filters I have for my F-mount lenses (another money-saver). The best camera… Read more »
Very happy to hear it, Gene. With what you’re saying about size and price, are you considering getting either of the compact prime lenses when they ship later this year? I’m thinking about getting the 40mm f/2 for basically the same reasons as why you like the 24-50mm.
I use this lens together with the Z 50-250 on a Z50. The wide angle range is not important for me (ca. 36mm FX-equivalent at the wide end of this combo is enough, at least for me).
This combo is really light and small and sometimes I fetch the 50mm/f2 mc additionally.
50mm/f2.8, sorry
I’m looking to get into real estate photography. Will this be a cheap solution until I get more paid jobs and can afford a better lens?
I found it interesting that the review was a bit less than enthusiastic about the lens, and yet the sample images throughout were by and large outstanding. I got this lens to have a small and light setup for hiking and street attempts, and I plan to add the 28 and 40mm compacts when they’re available to have something of a compact system to use on occasions when I don’t want to lug bigger and heavier alternatives around. I can see going out and about or on a trip with just the 24-50 and, say, the 40 f/2.8 and getting what I need out of that setup. We’ll see. In the meantime, the 24-50 has served me well for what… Read more »
Is the Imatest score comparable across cameras?
This lens scored similarly to the 16-50 DX. Does that mean sharpness between a Z50 with its kit lens and a full frame Z with this lens will be equal? If so picture quality advantage goes to this lens over the DX lens because its FF.
What would be the better pick between a Z50 with 16-50 and a Z6 with the 24-50?
We test every Nikon Z lens, including DX, on the Nikon Z7 for Imatest. So, the central sharpness figures are comparable between the two. The 16-50mm’s “corner” numbers are measured in the same spot as the 24-50mm’s “midframe” numbers but are otherwise comparable. The difference is that you don’t need to enlarge the image from a Z6 sensor as much for a given print size. Even though the two sensors have similar resolution, and the lenses may be comparably sharp, this difference in enlargement is enough to make the Z6 photos look a bit more detailed at a given print size. For maximum image quality, the better pick would be the Z6 with the 24-50mm, but not by much. (Plus… Read more »
I think this lens‘ strength will come out when a lightweight telezoom will be available.
Other than that, I found the 24-50 zoom range more usable than I had anticipated.
I often take this lens if otherwise I would have taken only my phone.
Maybe that’s a comparison that could be added to the list. Not because we don’t know how it would come out, but because it’s the way some might use this lens.
It would definitely pair well with a lightweight telephoto zoom. Hopefully Nikon makes one soon. I’m surprised they haven’t yet.
Whether this lens is or is not useful very strongly depends on one’s aims. As a general all-purpose lens, it’s probably a failure. Crappy zoom range, dark aperture, not so sharp. But if the purpose is to shoot 45 MP stopped down in the backcountry, this lens may have its place. I do agree that small primes would be even better though – I am hoping for a 20/2.8 (or even f/4, I don’t mind) that’s sharp and flare resistant. That on a Z7 would be a fantastic minimal landscape combo.
How can you call Lightroom’s failure a shortcoming of this lens? Nikon has nothing to do with Adobe. Other software programs such as Dx0 Photolab have no problem turning the lens profile on and off.
It may not be Nikon’s fault, but it’s still a drawback when using this lens. We’ve added a similar “con” to most Nikon Z lens reviews so far – I’m not just targeting the 24-50. That said, some Z lenses (the primes and f/2.8 zooms) don’t have that same drawback if you’re using the Z6 II or Z7 II.
You hit the nail on the head: I got this lens precisely because it is light and short. On my Z5, it makes a perfect hiking rig. Landscapes and especially waterfalls don’t require a larger aperture in most cases, and even the limited zoom range, to my mind, is an advantage over the as-yet vaporware pancake lenses for the Z system.
As an aside, I have never understood the appeal of a tiny mirrorless body coupled to an enormous mirrorless lens. With further advances in materials and optics, hopefully we’ll see smaller mirrorless lenses become available.
Glad you’ve found it to be such a good lens for your hiking setup! Until the 28mm and 40mm eventually ship, it’s the lightest FX lens in Nikon’s Z lineup. I wish Nikon had prioritized the primes instead, but anyone who needs maximum compactness in the meantime should at least consider the 24-50mm.
Humor: I found it’s best use is to stick it on the camera when I’m sitting in my recliner and working through the menu settings. Because it’s so light! I agree with you that a release of a small 2.8 prime would have been a better choice for my preferences. And I really don’t like collapsing lenses. While keeping my Z6ll and 24-200, 14-30, and primes I’ve returned to Fuji TX4 for a smaller travel kit (although the weight is only slightly less due to Fuji’s excellent metal construction).
The biggest issue with the 24-50mm f/4-6.3 for my photography isn’t the image quality or even the zoom range, but instead the narrow maximum aperture. Half the reason why I’d want to use such a light lens is so that I could handhold it all day – but this lens can’t be handheld in dark conditions without raising the ISO too high. Hence why I wish Nikon released the compact primes first instead.
I did it the other way round and moved from Fuji to Nikon because the 24-200 lens is sooo good and perfect for hiking :)
Now I can walk with only one lens.
It was love at first touch when I picked up a Z5 with this lens attached. I knew I finally found my entry to FF shooting. The overall size and price of the kit was critical. The trade-offs vs larger lenses pale in comparison to the still-great IQ (almost breathtaking when displayed on a good 55″ screen) and enhanced portability. Contrary to most, I actually appreciate the collapsible feature of the lens and thank Nikon for this every time I pull the camera out of a very small bag and open it up while flipping the power on. And, the 52mm front threading allows me to use all filters I have for my F-mount lenses (another money-saver). The best camera… Read more »
Very happy to hear it, Gene. With what you’re saying about size and price, are you considering getting either of the compact prime lenses when they ship later this year? I’m thinking about getting the 40mm f/2 for basically the same reasons as why you like the 24-50mm.