Last year, I made the transition from Canon DSLR to Nikon mirrorless. I have a more than adequate suite of Z lenses now. In order of frequency, I most often shoot wildlife, landscape, event, product, street and macro. I'm not trying to fill a gap in my lens lineup; it would be simply an indulgence that would offer something I cannot get in the Z mount.
What would be your choice for a nice-to-have F mount lens?
I have no idea what happened, but most manufacturers simply abandoned the 28mm focal length during the mirrorless transition. They have 28mm lenses in their portfolio, but they're on the budget side, and Nikon is not an exception. If you want premium primes, the standard lineup now is 24-35-50-85 with all major brands. But I have always preferred the 28-50-85 triplet.
Therefore, I second the 28/1.4E advice.
Also, depending on your perferences, if you have a thing for manual focusing like some of us, Milvus and Otus SLR lenses from Zeiss are all fantastic. And by the way, the 28mm Otus, according to many 28mm focal length aficionados, is the best 28mm lens ever made. They're heavy though.
Eco-Scott wrote:
What would be your choice for a nice-to-have F mount lens?
AF or MF?
If you're looking for AF lenses, those who preceded me have already given excellent suggestions.
If you're looking for MF lenses, consider the AI/AI-S 105/2.5, the AI-S 28/2.8 (minimum focus at 0.2 m). There are no Z fisheye lenses. The AI 16/3.5 was great. As already mentioned, most Zeiss ZF.2 lenses are excellent. I prefer the look of the early "Classic" series to the Milvus. Otus lenses are wonderful, but too large/heavy for my taste.
Ripolini wrote:
AF or MF?
If you're looking for AF lenses, those who preceded me have already given excellent suggestions.
If you're looking for MF lenses, consider the AI/AI-S 105/2.5, the AI-S 28/2.8 (minimum focus at 0.2 m). There are no Z fisheye lenses. The AI 16/3.5 was great. As already mentioned, most Zeiss ZF.2 lenses are excellent. I prefer the look of the early "Classic" series to the Milvus. Otus lenses are wonderful, but too large/heavy for my taste.
I don't think I'd opt for the Ai-S 28/2.8 when the Color Skopar is so good and is chipped.
I would say either the 105/1.4 or 500PF, because they’re my most-used (favorite?) F lenses. But there are rough Z equivalents to both.
So, in this hypothetical, I’d say the 58/1.4. It has no equivalent in Z mount. The closest you could come is adapting something from another mount, like the Minolta 58/1.2 or Canon 85/1.2.
RoamingScott wrote:
I don't think I'd opt for the Ai-S 28/2.8 when the Color Skopar is so good and is chipped.
The Color Skopar is the lens you sold right?
I'd prefer the Nikkor for CRC (which guarantees better close-up performance), less vignetting and probably more even performance across the frame. I use a couple of unchipped MF F-mount lenses (Nikkor AI 50/1.4 & ZEISS ZF 100/2 Makro Planar) with no issue on both Z6 and D780.
The 28/1.4, 58/1.4 and 105/1.4 are enough reasons to shoot Nikon. Love these lenses for their character and rendering.
If you can handle the weight and cost, add a 200 f/2
I go for 58/1.4 since its rendering is rather unique among af-s lens.
105/1.4e was a very nice lens during dslr day but both 85/1.2s and Plena
are better. I know neither are 105mm. I have not touched my 105 in a long time.
Still keep it just in case I ever want to take out my Df for a spin.
300pf is surprising small and light weight and if you use that focal length a lot, it is
Worthwhile having it.
Hands down the 28mm 1.4E. Been shooting with a borrowed copy for a few days and I gotta get one of my own. If Nikon makes a fast 28mm for Z mount with similar DNA I’ll sell my soul to buy one!
