You all are amazing. You've helped me learn so much in a week starting at a very low, beginner level

[FRVRandAFTR]

I want to express my deep gratitude for everyone helping me a couple of weeks ago when I was jumping into photography for the first time after debating it for years and picking up a few hints and tips here and there. I took my first session over the holiday weekend and it was amazing. I had so much fun. I love the hobby.

One thing I do feel stupid about still is the Nikon differences in lenses, I have spent hours researching charts, reading articles and blogs, and I cannot figure out the advantages and disadvantages of most of them. I know the Z is for the mirrorless new ones. I am so confused on the other options. I planned on buying only the Z Mount Series (Z 5), but I don't know if I know enough about it yet to make that decision.

Could someone please break this down for me and the differences, the advantages the disadvantages everything I would need to know is if I were a four year old?

Thank you all so much, comma you are a huge encouragement.

 

[mollyc]

What are you having trouble with in particular? 🙂

The Z5 is a full frame camera, so you will want to stick with full frame lenses; these are sometimes denoted as FX, but truthfully the vast majority of Nikon's lenses are full frame; their crop sensor offerings aren't very vast. You will want to stay away from any lens marked as DX - these are for the crop bodies (any Z body that has 2 digits for the name, like Z30, Z50, etc.), and while a DX lens will mount to your camera, you will get very bad vignetting that will force you to crop out a considerable amount of the frame to get a usuable image, thus decreasing the resolution dramatically.

The lenses that are marked as S Line are the highest quality lenses Nikon offers, and they will be a bit more expensive, but they will have outstandig performance. Whether or not you personally notice the difference may or may not justify the price difference over a non S Line lens. For instance, the S Line Z 24-70 f/2.8 is $2,100, but the very similar non-S Line 28-75 f/2.8 is only $900 (both of these lenses are currently shown at a sale price of $300 off their typical price).

To spell it out to a 4-year old, avoid any lens marked as DX and then choose according to price, as all of them are very good optically. If you want the best, buy the S Line where available.

Here is a list of all the Z lenses that Nikon currently offers. It is quite a vast selection.

Nikon | Shop & Explore Cameras, Lenses, and Accessories

Shop the latest mirrorless & DSLR cameras and NIKKOR lenses from the official Nikon eCommerce site. Explore our innovations and photo equipment!

www.nikonusa.com

 

[Apple fanboy]

Molly has given some good advice above. The other factor with lenses is the f number.
So Nikon sell a 24-70mm that is f2.8 and a 24-70mm that is f4.
An F2.8 lens has a larger maximum aperture so will let in more light. Also shooting at f2.8 will provide a narrow depth of field (so the background from your subject is more blurry and separated).
Of course you always can shoot with an f2.8 lens at f4 but not the other way round!

The trade off for the better lens is weight (better quality lenses weigh more) and price.

Weather sealing is also another factor to consider, but depends on where you plan to shoot etc.

If you have a particular lens or lenses you are considering feel free to ask specifically. Plenty of Nikon shooters on here.

Oh and lastly, don’t be afraid to buy second hand. I’d rather have an older pro lens than a newer entry level one.
I bought most in my signature that way.

 

[FRVRandAFTR]

Thank you for the explanation! I meant to write only S Series is what I plan on purchasing.

Are there advantages to the S Link that the older lens adapter can be added to for equal/almost equal quality?

Are there ANY features or functions the older lenses will never be capable of even with any such hypothetical adapter?

Thanks again!

 

[deep diver]

Thank you for the explanation! I meant to write only S Series is what I plan on purchasing.

Are there advantages to the S Link that the older lens adapter can be added to for equal/almost equal quality?

Are there ANY features or functions the older lenses will never be capable of even with any such hypothetical adapter?

Thanks again!

You may be overthinking this. Which lenses work best are more about your needs than the lens itself. Yes, there are lenses that are built to higher specs and are theoretically better, but, as Molly said, you might or might not see the difference. As long as you stay away from the kit lenses, whatever you get will be high quality. You should buy based on your needs and interests. A lot of people here know I am a big fan of zoom lenses. They just suit my needs better, even if I have to sacrifice some speed. (Zooms generally have somewhat smaller maximum apertures.) My suggestion is to get a used mid-range zoom and figure out what will be best for you. Because you are still in that early learning stage, you might want to pay less for something not in the S line. Once you know more about your needs then you can go down the rabbit hole of spending your life savings on glass.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Thank you for the explanation! I meant to write only S Series is what I plan on purchasing.

Are there advantages to the S Link that the older lens adapter can be added to for equal/almost equal quality?

Are there ANY features or functions the older lenses will never be capable of even with any such hypothetical adapter?

Thanks again!

You can use most f mount lenses on a z body using an f to z adaptor that Nikon sell. However buying that might make it cheaper just to stick to z lenses.

 

[Apple fanboy]

You may be overthinking this. Which lenses work best are more about your needs than the lens itself. Yes, there are lenses that are built to higher specs and are theoretically better, but, as Molly said, you might or might not see the difference. As long as you stay away from the kit lenses, whatever you get will be high quality. You should buy based on your needs and interests. A lot of people here know I am a big fan of zoom lenses. They just suit my needs better, even if I have to sacrifice some speed. (Zooms generally have somewhat smaller maximum apertures.) My suggestion is to get a used mid-range zoom and figure out what will be best for you. Because you are still in that early learning stage, you might want to pay less for something not in the S line. Once you know more about your needs then you can go down the rabbit hole of spending your life savings on glass.

I’m a zoom shooter as well. It’s just easier to have options in one lens.

 

[r.harris1]

Lenses are very funny things (and not always "ha, ha!") and what you want to purchase can depend on things you may not have an opinion on yet. It's a conundrum . You'll sometimes hear the word "clinical" in descriptions and that can refer to things like edge-edge sharpness, minimal light fall-off in the corners (vignetting) and so forth. These tend towards what people might refer to as "optical perfection". While not always true, they tend to be fairly expensive (or VERY expensive).

You may also hear that a lens "has character", which can refer to whatever the reviewer wants it to but is often things like quality out-of-focus rendering (creamy vs "nervous" out-of-focus background, for example), how it handles distortion (these are optical instruments, after all), color channel character (lenses focus red, green and blue channels in specific ways), and a whole host of things. These tend to be more variably priced, from pretty cheap to very expensive (character is "a thing" and can command a premium).

Opinions of what you want will likely change over time. It's best, to me, to start with a good mid-range lens and get experience with it. Enough to form an opinion. If you're doing the Z5 and you're used to the iPhone field-of-view, you wouldn't go wrong with a 24-70 f4 s-line, second hand, if you can find one. They're about a grand (US) new but that's 1/2 roughly of the 2.8 max aperture version. There are sales usually a few times per year so keep an eye out out for those.

If you want your background blurred out, the wider aperture lenses like the 2.8 versions will be better and can offer more flexibility with subject-to-background distance, but be more expensive. Faster than 2.8 can be MUCH more expensive, so you really have to want those blur characteristics or you really want to shoot in low light. The f4 is a good compromise, I feel. You can still get nice background separation if that's your thing.

In short, faster apertures (lower f-number) can give more subject-background separation (more background blur), but there's an attendant cost increase. Lower f-numbers will cost less but can have less background blur. If you shoot landscapes all the time, f 5.6 or f 8 won't be a problem, but you still want a quality rendering at those f-stops, and increased quality (like edge-edge sharpness, minimal light fall-off, color rendering) can still cost a pretty penny regardless of f-number.

I feel I've rambled a lot. That's usual with me, I think . But you may want to forego a really wide aperture at this point to save on money and weight but if you can swing an f4 lens, that'd be a good sweet spot. A lot of it does depend on budget, of course.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

I'm a fan of middle-of-the-road zooms and fast primes. Gets a lot of your bases covered without breaking the bank or your back.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Another tip is lens rental. If you rent a lens and shoot with it you can really evaluate which things you like about it and which you don’t.
Or if you only occasionally need a certain focal length, then renting can save you a ton of money.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

There are a lot of ways to start off, but I prefer to suggest one lens. A zoom in the 24-70 range sounds as good as any. As suggested earlier time and experience will let you know where you want to go frome there and what you need to further progress.

I would also suggest converting every shot you do to B&W. Not being distracted by pretty colors will tell you in a hurry if a photo is strong or weak. You don't need to save a B&W version but taking the time to view images that way will help immensely with self-critique.

 

[Clix Pix]

24-70mm is a good, classic range taking the shooter from somewhat wide to on the edge of heading into telephoto territory. There are lots of opportunities available, subjects to find, when one has a 24-70mm lens in hand. Most brands' 24-70 lenses are also reasonably close-focusing so that this gives you the chance to experiment with that type of shooting as well. Not quite macro but close to it. Back in my Nikon days the 24-70mm was one of my favorite lenses.

Some people who shoot primarily with zoom lenses (in most brands) like to purchase and use what is often referred to as "the Holy Trinity": 12 (or 14)-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm. This covers a generous span of shooting situations and opportunities. Takes the shooter from wide angle to telephoto.

At this point, since you are just starting out, don't complicate matters by worrying about buying older (legacy) lenses and putting them on the new Z mirrorless camera body via an adapter. Stick with the native lenses Nikon is providing for its Z system. Learn the system, learn your new tools and as time goes on you'll get a sense of what you enjoy shooting and why you enjoy shooting it. As you try new subjects and scenes if the lens(es) you already have aren't quite what is needed, you'll realize that and know what you'll need and want next.

Happy shooting!

 

[bunnspecial]

I'm actually a big fan of f/4 zooms, even though I have the f/2.8 versions for my F mount kit.

An f/4 zoom can be optically excellent while also being smaller and lighter than its f/2.8 counterpart. With modern high ISO capabilities of most cameras and excellent VR, the lost stop of light is less significant. It does become a big deal if you're stopping action or going for shallow depth of field, although with resolution where it is now fast lenses can also show any sloppiness in focusing technique(or if you use single shot AF, can show subject/camera motion after the camera has locked focus-one reason why I rarely use single shot these days).

The 24-70 f/4 was one of the first lenses Nikon released in the Z mount, and by most accounts it is superb. Back in 2018, I kept hoping that they'd release a similar lens in F mount, but should have known better than to think it would happen. Unfortunately some of Nikon's other f/4 F mount lenses, like the 24-120 AF-S f/4G VR(giving the full alphabet soup since there's an older version of the lens also), are okay but not great and still heavy. I've been using my new-to-me Fuji X-T5 lately almost exclusively with the 16-80mm f/4, which gives the same FOV range as a 24-120 on full frame, and have been really happy with the performance. Fuji makes a full line of X-mount f/2.8 zooms, but they also sort of defeat the purpose of buy the X-T5 in the first place for me.

 

[deep diver]

Another thought (that I think was also made in your thread about what body to get)…………

It is very important to remember that the camera and lens are tools. The tools do not make a good photographer. A good photographer knows how to get the most out of the tools. (Just the same as my saws and hammers don’t make me a builder, but the builder knows how to get the most out of those tools.) For right now, concentrate on becoming a skilled photographer.

 

[mollyc]

I'm actually a big fan of f/4 zooms, even though I have the f/2.8 versions for my F mount kit.

An f/4 zoom can be optically excellent while also being smaller and lighter than its f/2.8 counterpart. With modern high ISO capabilities of most cameras and excellent VR, the lost stop of light is less significant. It does become a big deal if you're stopping action or going for shallow depth of field, although with resolution where it is now fast lenses can also show any sloppiness in focusing technique(or if you use single shot AF, can show subject/camera motion after the camera has locked focus-one reason why I rarely use single shot these days).

The 24-70 f/4 was one of the first lenses Nikon released in the Z mount, and by most accounts it is superb. Back in 2018, I kept hoping that they'd release a similar lens in F mount, but should have known better than to think it would happen. Unfortunately some of Nikon's other f/4 F mount lenses, like the 24-120 AF-S f/4G VR(giving the full alphabet soup since there's an older version of the lens also), are okay but not great and still heavy. I've been using my new-to-me Fuji X-T5 lately almost exclusively with the 16-80mm f/4, which gives the same FOV range as a 24-120 on full frame, and have been really happy with the performance. Fuji makes a full line of X-mount f/2.8 zooms, but they also sort of defeat the purpose of buy the X-T5 in the first place for me.

I have the 28-70 f/4 and returned the 2.8 version my husband bought me as a surprise gift once because the Z6/ii has such good ISO that I preferred the smaller lens size for travel. Only rarely have I wished for the 2.8 for better depth of field, but for that I have primes when I need them.

 

[bunnspecial]

I have the 28-70 f/4 and returned the 2.8 version my husband bought me as a surprise gift once because the Z6/ii has such good ISO that I preferred the smaller lens size for travel. Only rarely have I wished for the 2.8 for better depth of field, but for that I have primes when I need them.

This has sort of been how I've looked at the X-T5 also. The beautiful little primes serve me well when I need really fast lenses, and the f/4 zoom does great most of the time. Of course too I COULD use my f/2.8 Nikons on it with the Fringer adapter, plus have a cheap "dumb" adapter that's good for manual focus, but the primes for it are excellent.

I'm not surprised that you've been very happy with the 24-70 f/4. IIRC, when the Z6 and Z7 were released, they were typically sold kitted with that lens and from what I remember there were only a few very basic primes available. I don't think Nikon would have staked the future of the system on the early adopters getting a lens that was anything less than superb.

 

[FRVRandAFTR]

Just wanted to share a random shot from the 4th, my first real time using it. Learned a lot on the fly that day which was helpful. I definitely made some mistakes though, this was meant to be a RAW shot and edited in Lightroom, but neither happened so this is just a plain, untouched JPEG. Also, the lens I used was not ideal for the length between me and the fireworks, and overall it could definitely use some professionalism that comes with experience. I can't wait to practice more.

 

[mollyc]

Just wanted to share a random shot from the 4th, my first real time using it. Learned a lot on the fly that day which was helpful. I definitely made some mistakes though, this was meant to be a RAW shot and edited in Lightroom, but neither happened so this is just a plain, untouched JPEG. Also, the lens I used was not ideal for the length between me and the fireworks, and overall it could definitely use some professionalism that comes with experience. I can't wait to practice more.

this is nice! what lens did you use?

 

[Clix Pix]

Fireworks can be tricky to shoot! Keep getting out there with your gear, shoot as much as possible and in as many different kinds of situations as possible.....that's one way we learn. Shoot indoors, outdoors, at various times of day, notice what the light is doing and how that affects your shots.....

 

[FRVRandAFTR]

this is nice! what lens did you use?

Thank you! A Nikkor 85mm 1.8 S

 

[FRVRandAFTR]

I can’t thank you all enough for the advice, I have come along way, and I can’t wait to share the product of what I’ve learned over the last few weeks and it just blows my mind that you guys were so helpful and this sleeping knowledge in such a short period of time!

 

[Jumpthesnark]

A number of people here have recommended that you start with something in the 24-70mm range to get your feet wet. My only suggestion for a lens after that is to spend some time looking at the photos you take. Are you shooting a lot at around the 24mm range? Or are you mostly shooting longer, on the 70mm side? Take note of that, it can point you in the direction of what your next lens should be - something wider than 24-70, or something more telephoto.

Good luck!