We just uploaded our first-ever video review to YouTube, covering the Nikon Z 20mm f/1.8 S! Check it out below if you’re interested:
Of course, we will also publish our usual review of this lens on Photography Life when possible, so keep an eye out. But the video above is similarly comprehensive as our written reviews, so if there’s anything about the Z 20mm f/1.8 that you were wondering, this should answer all your questions.
Not to spoil anything, but if sharpness is what you’re after, this lens could be an excellent choice for you!
I’d like to do more comprehensive reviews like this on our YouTube channel before long, if there’s enough interest in it. If you enjoyed this video, feel free to leave a comment (either here or on YouTube) and click the “like” button as well.
And if you would like to be notified when we release our next videos, you can subscribe to our channel here. I recommend clicking the “bell” icon under any video if you want to make sure you receive notifications; otherwise, YouTube sends them out sporadically or not at all.
Very nice review. Although written reviews are faster to get through, your video presentation is absolutely excellent and has a personal aspect that I find enjoyable. I so appreciate the fine work that you have done in the past.
Very glad you thought so, thank you, Peter!
Excellent review Spencer. I still love my 20mm f/1.8G but now that I have a Z7, the 20mm f/1.8 S just climbed to the top of my list. It just simplifies my kit and really does look like a serious winner for milky way astrophotography!
Thanks, David! If you do a lot of Milky Way photography, it’s pretty hard to beat. Still looking forward to the 14-24mm f/2.8 S for that purpose as well.
The 14-24mm f/2.8 S is probably the lens I’m most looking forward to for the Z series. It should really be impressive with that lens flange.
Regarding night photography and focus by wire, how much of a frustration has this been for you without having a focus scale or indicator? How good is the indicator on the f/2.8 zooms like the 24-70mm f/2.8 S? This is one of a couple things that has kept me from seriously considering a Z7 over my D850 as I do a lot of focus stacking for gigapans and manual focusing for night photography. Sometimes when someone hits my camera with a headlamp, or a car drives by, I just turn off the camera on a long exposure to cancel and just start over with another long foreground exposure. Obviously that wouldn’t work if the focus resets to infinity each time. I didn’t know that little detail until your video, thanks for that tip!
A great review, I really enjoyed it! I do have the lens and I really like it, especially in low light it is much better than 14-30. Although I prefer written reviews, the video has clear advantages too, especially when showing real pictures, zooming in, etc. It is also nice to see the person who did it. Keep going, I am waiting for the next one.
Thanks, Niko. Glad you found the video format enjoyable! I think each method has its advantages, and wouldn’t mind doing both if future reviews warrant it.
I usually don’t watch video reviews as I want to get the summary information in about 2 minutes, but that was a really well done video, well worth watching. Kuedos for the ‘completeness’ of the review, it is very practical and of course calling out the potential variance between short range test chart performance and long range landscape performance. Good stuff, really the ony way it could be any better would be with another few copies which is usually impractical (possibly something the test charts could run more easily and if theres a +/- 15% difference as opposed to +/- 2% then call it out).
Much appreciated! Agreed, testing multiple copies is always ideal. We’re able to do so on certain reviews, but usually only if one of us or our friends purchase the lens for our personal use. That hasn’t yet happened with this lens. (I was close, but went with the 14-30mm f/4 instead.)
Great video revise, Spencer. I really like the fast pace because you cover lots of ground. And including your opinion like you have is always appreciated.
Much appreciated! I knew it was going to be pretty long and wanted to increase my pace this time around, glad you thought it worked.
+1 for written reviews. (much easier to jump from here to there also)
About the quality of lenses; yes that has been improved a lot during the last years.
I noticed the flare resistance of the S-line lenses is very good.
Some lenses like the 24mm 1.8 S lens and the 35mm 1.8S lens are not that special.
But in general there are few bad lenses made nowadays.
Corner sharpness (wide open) is something to be desired sometimes- only few wide angle lenses are good at that. Also coma is often a problem.
In this case i see very different results in the tests of Lenstip.com and the milky way photos here. Lenstip found coma not good- maybe there is a different result with coma at different distances.
www.lenstip.com/587.7…bokeh.html
Thanks Pieter. I saw that result on Lenstip, and I’m as baffled as you. It shows that the new lens has as much coma as – possibly more than – the F-Mount 20mm f/1.8. That’s simply not true, as I think our review makes clear.
There’s no easy way for human error to play a role here either (at least on our end), as the results I got in practice were far better than that review suggests they could be. If I had to guess, you’re right about the reason – Lenstip’s coma testing setup appears to be at a closer focusing distance than infinity, hence the possibility that the Z 20mm’s coma performance simply gets worse as one focuses more closely. Either that, or perhaps they had a worse sample of the lens.
My first 20mm f1.8 was a Sigma; the first 20mm 1.8 on the market, about 20 years ago.
I liked it very much although optically there was much to be desired.
If you compare this old lens with the new 20mm 1.8 lenses: there is no comparison!
This new lens is wide open much better than the old Sigma at f8.
Have to add Sigma made a 180 degrees ART-turn and now produces some of the best lenses on the market.
+
i forgot to add : Thanks for the review. Your reviews are always filled with valuable knowledge. You speak so fast and still it takes 22 minutes…
Is the idea of a video because of more revenue? IOW-Do you earn more for a review in video style and on YouTube than a written one on the P-lifewebsite? In that case i can understand. we all need to earn some money.
However, a written one is so much more comfortable. I need 4K display to see the graphics.
cheers PK
We earn almost no revenue from YouTube reviews, or our YouTube videos in general, but that’s because we haven’t enabled ads on most videos so far, nor begun selling any products there yet. I’m hopeful that will change soon. The number of people looking for photography content on YouTube is huge and only growing, so it doesn’t make sense for us to miss out on trying to reach them.
Awesome review Spencer – I really appreciated how in-depth it was, with realistic test scenarios. I’ve used my F-mount 20mm 1.8 for a while for Milky Way shots and general landscapes, and this was super helpful in evaluating the new lens. I think that given how impressive Nikon’s Z-mount zooms have been, I will wait a while longer to see how good the 14-24 2.8 is and see if it obsoletes the 20mm for my uses!
Just a small request – I think in the video when you compare the weights of Z vs F-mount lenses, it would be helpful to also include the weight of the FTZ adapter, since that’s how Z-users would be using the F-mount lenses.
Keep up the great work – Photography Life consistently is one of my go-to photo websites!
Hi Spencer,
I noticed in your video that twice you were standing at the edge of a cliff (which really distracted me from what you were saying, not to mention was a bit nervewracking about your safety). It made me wonder about focusing. It seems like double the distance would not work in that circumstance, since you are overlooking a void and assuming that you want to shoot what’s on the other side. How then would you focus?
Good question – there are two different cases. The first is when there is no foreground, at which point it’s easy to focus simply at infinity.
The harder case is when there is a foreground, but the “double the distance” spot is in the void, so to speak, and there’s nothing to autofocus on. At that point, you can either guesstimate the distance with manual focus, or use a slightly more specialized technique: set your lens to the widest aperture, and manually focus until the foreground blur and background blur are equal. Then, stop down to your desired aperture. This method perfectly mimics the “double the distance” technique, and results in focus at the same spot, but takes longer, so I usually don’t write about it.
Oh, and I forgot to mention – the spots where I was standing weren’t as harrowing as the video may make them appear. I’m pretty iffy about heights and wouldn’t be willing to stand within tripping distance of the edge of a cliff!
Spencer greetings from Australia. Good work another unbiased review full of information. I particularly find it helpful that you compare the lens with the alternatives on offer and provide examples taken in the real world. I changed to the Z system in March and have never been happier. I kept reading how good the Z lenses were and they are.
Much appreciated! The Z lenses are in another league, it’s been awesome to see.
Your video was really useful when seeing your comparisons of images with DSLR and Z versions of the same lens. I don’t use my DSLR 20 f/1.8 frequently, so I’ll stick with that and purchase the 14-30. The main advantage a written review has is that it can quickly be referred to in the future, i.e. much more accessible that a long video. I’d rather see written reviews continued, augmented by video when you think the extra effort is worth it.
Glad you enjoyed it! Written reviews will absolutely continue – it’s really the video reviews that are more up in the air.
I did the same as you, buying the 14-30mm instead. When I’m shooting astrophotography with it, I’ve begun doing image blending to maximize image quality, and it’s a system I’m really happy with.