There are a lot of midrange / normal zoom options as a Nikon Z shooter. And while the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 isn’t the one with the highest performance, it definitely holds its own. Here are the lenses I’ve compared against the Z 28-75mm f/2.8 side-by-side:
Versus the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S
Unsurprisingly, the $2400 professional Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S is a better lens in most regards compared to the Z 28-75mm f/2.8. However, the cheaper lens holds its own in terms of central sharpness, vignetting, and distortion – even beating the S-line lens at times. The real advantage of the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S is corner-to-corner sharpness. At the longer focal lengths in particular, the 28-75mm f/2.8 is pretty weak in the corners, while the 24-70mm f/2.8 S is sharp throughout the zoom range. Still, for something like event photography (or anything where central sharpness is your main priority), the Z 28-75mm f/2.8 represents a great value over the Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S.
To keep the length of this review manageable, I’ve compiled my full lab test results between these two lenses on the following page:
Versus the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S
This comparison is a little more fair, because at least the two lenses are about the same price! The Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S retails for $1000 (although most photographers will get their copy cheaper than this, since it’s a kit lens that often sells at a discount).
In terms of performance, the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S has a slight edge in sharpness – especially corner sharpness – but the 28-75mm f/2.8 is a notch better in vignetting and distortion. That’s kind of the theme of the 28-75mm f/2.8! Its strengths are distortion and vignetting, while its weakness is corner sharpness.
My complete head-to-head comparison of sharpness data and other test results can be found here:
Versus the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S
Another popular midrange zoom for the Nikon Z system is the Z 24-120mm f/4 S. Even though the focal length and maximum aperture of this lens are rather different from the 28-75mm f/2.8, the prices are about the same ($1100 MSRP for the 24-120mm f/4 S, and $1200 MSRP for the 28-75mm f/2.8).
The basic story is similar, too – the 24-120mm f/4 S has better corner-to-corner sharpness, but the Z 28-75mm f/2.8 matches it in central sharpness. Vignetting and especially distortion again favor the 28-75mm f/2.8. Frankly, you should pick between these two lenses based on their focal lengths and maximum aperture values, not so much optical performance. But if you’re totally on the fence, I would give the nod to the 24-120mm f/4 S optically.
As before, you can see my full lab testing results and detailed comparisons on the following page:
Versus the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR
I’ve also compared the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8 against Nikon’s famous superzoom, the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR. It’s a bit of a “just for fun” comparison since the types of photographers who need an f/2.8 constant-aperture zoom are usually quite different from the ones who need a huge 24-200mm focal length range regardless of maximum aperture.
In terms of things like price and build quality, the two lenses are really similar. Performance favors the 28-75mm f/2.8 (especially distortion, chromatic aberration, and vignetting), but the 24-200mm f/4-6.3 is a perfectly fine lens. If sharpness is all you care about, it’s a very close comparison, with the 28-75mm f/2.8 being a bit better in the center, and the 24-200mm being a bit better in the corners. Though, it definitely depends on focal length – to see the full comparisons, you can check out the link below:
Next, I’ll sum everything up and give my final opinion on whether or not you should get the Nikon Z 28-75mm f/2.8. So, click below to go to the next page of this review, “Verdict”:
Table of Contents