Nikon Announces 14-24 f2.8Z and 50 f1.2Z

Nikon joins Sony, Zeiss (Otus) and Sigma (ART) in the quest for ultra-corrected prime lenses the size and weight of paving bricks. My nerdish part rejoices in this endeavor, but my practical part is inclined toward highly corrected but smaller versions, with more durable construction than found in so-called "kit" lenses. In two years since entering the pro-mirrorless market, Nikon now has only eight native lenses of commensurate quality. That's where the "not invented here" corporate culture gets you.

Kudos on the new 12-24/2.8, which offers high quality in a fairly lightweight package. It has a focal length range with interesting potential. The weight is important in a lens likely to be carried much and used little. I can count on one hand situations where I've needed a 16 mm lens (my present limit) in the last five years (distinguishing "used" from "needed").

Kudos on the new 12-24/2.8, which offers high quality in a fairly lightweight package. It has a focal length range with interesting potential. The weight is important in a lens likely to be carried much and used little.

Sony also has the 12-24/4G - naturally its lighter and more compact than the f/2.8 version. In the "likely carried much and used little" I can't imagine that f/2.8-use is prevalent (except maybe for astro). Similarly, one would have to choose between the Nikon 14-24/2.8 and the 14-30/4 - for my needs, that choice is clear.

The "split personality" thing is true of a lot of fast primes.

I had a closer look at the Voigtlander 40/1.2 - and will take a pass. Apparently wide open (and close to it), everything is surrounded by a halo of violet color; thanks but no thanks.

Kudos on the new 12-24/2.8, which offers high quality in a fairly lightweight package. It has a focal length range with interesting potential. The weight is important in a lens likely to be carried much and used little.

Sony also has the 12-24/4G - naturally its lighter and more compact than the f/2.8 version. In the "likely carried much and used little" I can't imagine that f/2.8-use is prevalent (except maybe for astro). Similarly, one would have to choose between the Nikon 14-24/2.8 and the 14-30/4 - for my needs, that choice is clear.

In two years since entering the pro-mirrorless market, Nikon now has only eight native lenses of commensurate quality.

How do you arrive at that figure? There's now 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 (IIRC, Sony took its sweet time to get those three lenses (or equivalent) to market) and there are 20/24/35/50/85 f/1.8 primes. Why would the 24-70/4 and 14-30/4 not count? Or the 50/1.2 and 58/0.95?

my primes for the Z system will likely be 20/1.8, 35/1.8 and 85/1.8.

That's what I have now and also the new 24-200mm zoom. Love them all. Used the 20mm f/1.8 exclusively last night in Moab nightsky; could do 15 seconds with f/1.8 @Iso 6400. Hwvr I did also try f/2.8 @30 seconds. Will be comparing the results shortly. I used the 24-200mm to shoot out of the airplane window and it worked very well.