Approaching The Scene 318: Testing Nikon Z Wide Angle Lenses from $160 - $2500

[@santafabio28]

This was one of the best reviews I've seen on wide angle lenses in a while! Thank you for making a decision easier on my next purchase.

[@Multirolo2010]

Yet another great review Hudson which has once again proved extremely useful, great work and thanks.

[@kais.6113]

Thank you Henry for the excelent comparison. Your samples are very helpful. Greetings from Germany.

[@Ben_Stewart]

The 20mm f1.8 S never lets me down. A very nice lens and great colour in the Milky Way core. The only one I haven't pulled the trigger on is the 24 f1.8. I really miss that bright 24 prime I had for F- mount. I think I will hold off until I see maybe the 24mm f1.4.

[@davidroberts6766]

In the evening, I often grab my Z7II and, rather than my 24-120mm f4, I will grab a set of four f1.8 S primes, including the 20mm f1.8….such beautiful lenses! Just back from a brief holiday in NYC, and I took the 14-30mm f4….man, I forgot how great that lenses captures the world! Thanks for this, as I am considering some of the lighter, less expensive lenses for my Zfc kit…

[@JasonLorette]

I want the 20mm 1.8...but that 16mm viltrox is very intriguing for the price point!

[@campbell510]

Somehow I ended up with both the Viltrox lenses and agree with your opinion on them. I’ll use the 20mm for travel or on the off chance I’ll need to go wide, but the 16mm will be in the bag instead for anything more serious. Managed to get a shot of the Aurora Australis a couple of weeks ago with the 16 and my Zf that makes me happy. Paid for itself maybe 🤔

[@kentkochheiser911]

Very interesting, thank you Hudson! I just bought the Voigtlander Z 15mm f/4.5 and have been very impressed with it for landscape and cityscapes where the relatively slow aperture and manual focus are non-issues for me. Great size for travel and the usual superb build quality.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

I didn't love that lens when I tested it, but it is gorgeous for sure.

[@cameraprepper7938]

I can very highly recommend the excellent Voigtlander APO-LANTHAR 35mm 2.0 Aspherical Lens which have outstanding optical image quality, second to none !

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

I enjoyed playing with that lens too. I prefer the 50 1.0, but that's different beast. The 35 is clinical perfection. The 50 1.0 has fabulous character.

[@cameraprepper7938]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto I can add "character" in post ☺ So why did you send it back !?

[@jennypersson8466]

Useful! I bought the Viltrox,very happy with it so far, especially that I can change aperature on the lens and turn the click on and off, very useful when shooting video.

[@R.Hogarth]

Thanks Hudson as always, great video. I have the Z14-30 f/4 S and I have been waiting for this video to help me make up my mind between the Nikon Z20mm f/1.8 S and the Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 for a Milky Way lens. This video confirmed my suspicions that the Nikon is better optically, but the Viltrox is at a much lower price point (about $500 Canadian difference). I had been leaning toward the Viltrox, but based on this video, I am now thinking "You can't go wrong with an "S Series" Nikon lens." and I will probably spend the extra and get the Nikon 20mm f/1.8. I am also thinking about the Laowa 10mm lens, and I can think of two places where it would come in handy and possibly excel. Given the sunstars it produces and how wide it is, it would be a great lens at the Mesa Arch as well as on a trip to the Florida Space Coast for the long exposure "Trajectory arc" shot of a rocket launch. Thank you for this comparison.

[@patrickmolloy6994]

great round up Hudson. I'll be using my z14-24 f2.8 at an air show in 10 days or so. yes, air show, but very specific to one aircraft that we'll be climbing over an inside of.

[@veener79]

Thank you. I just went over to Nikon with a 7II and I have been debating about the 14-24mm S F2.8 and 14-30mm F/4. Now debating on the 20mm S 1.8. Seeing how much light those 2.8 and 1.8 bring in I am loving the look. I want a lens for night and lower light with being out with my kid. I have not done milky-way yet but something I want to do. I have only done moon with using my telescope.

[@kenjordan5750]

There's a Nikkor Z 17-28 f2.8, as well.

[@oc2phish07]

A very timely video, Hudson, as I am just looking to add a wide-angle to use with my pair of Zfs.

[@jennypersson8466]

I use the Viltrox on my Zf, bought it after comparing a great number of wide angle lenses. 72 mm filter, f-stops on the lens and good performance/feeling were the strongest selling points. I have no idea why Nikon won't add the ability of changing f-stops on the lens, especially for the Zf

[@heartflame503]

Nice .. I have been considering the Viltrox 16mm vs the nikon 17-28.. I was hoping that you had that to compare .. Still a very nice review ! Thanks !

[@vitalisvasylius7390]

Nikon 17-28mm really better!

[@ScutuRC]

Tthanks for sharing this video. Quite interesting comparison - but hard to follow which lens has witch picture, so it will be great to put the name of the lens in a corner when looking at the photos to make it easy. Thanks!

[@Tolvelski898]

Hello, new subscriber, loving your videos. I watched your Zf review and just went through your Zf settings video, which was extremely helpful, so thanks for that. I wanted to get your opinion on two wide angle lenses. Yesterday I ordered the Voightlander 15mm f/4.5 after debating on whether to buy that lens, or the Viltrox 16mm you showed in this video. Both lenses were going for the same price, so I was struggling to decided. If you have had a chance to try the Voightlander 15mm, I was wondering how it compared to the Viltrox 16mm. If not, all good, I was just curious while I'm waiting for my new lens to arrive.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

It is a beautifully machined work of art as all the new Z Voigtlanders are, but it really dissapointed me with image quality. I sent it right back.

[@Tolvelski898]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto After receiving it and giving it a try, I decided to exchange it for the Viltrox. Luckily they're the same price on B&H, I just have to pay shipping. Thanks for the reply, keep up the good work!

[@amankushwaha8927]

I have a low budget and I ordered Viltrox 20 mm f2.8 lens. Cost me around $140.

[@richcower]

Good job. Been curious what your thoughts are regarding the Q3 43? Are you going to pick one up?

[@JimVajda82]

The Laowa 15mm f2 Zero-D is very good too, especially for astrophotography. Very bright with low coma, just doesn’t have the wide open sharpness of the venerable Nikon Z 20mm f1.8. Still acceptable though.

[@MikeR_PH0T0]

Thanks for the comparison and info. I’m primarily a hobbyist wildlife photographer but I’ve been wanting to dabble in cityscape and maybe astrophotography. I’ve watched so many videos and I still can’t decide if I should just buy the 14-24mm f2.8 or if I’d be happy with the 20mm f1.8. It doesn’t help that they are both great options.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@MikeR_PH0T0 for astro the 20mm and a move shoot move nomad tracker. I never use anything else except to test if something can compete. It never does.

[@albedo0point39]

The Viltrox 20 f2.8 is a fantastic pairing with the z30 for a really lightweight and fun carry setup. 30mm equivalent works better for me than the DX 24.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@albedo0point39 the other epic Z30 lens is the Nikon 24 1.7 Fully 90% of ATS videos are shot on that combo.

[@SpaklesDr]

What a wonderful lens the 20mm looks to be. Do you ever print the nightscape photos? If what do you print on and how do you like the results?

[@nexderm5606]

strictly for landscape, do you recommend the 14-30 over the 20?

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

Only if you need the range. The 20 actually is better than the 14-24 at 20. It's just not as versatile. The 20 S is a marvel of a lens.

[@drwho353]

Hey Hudson! Great video - What about the little manual NISI sunstar lens you mentioned long ago? It was the 15mm f/4. Curious where you think it might fit in the middle of these. I don't recall the timing of this lens in comparison with the 20mm 1.8S - but I'm assuming it was another sunstar lens that kind of moved it out of view. :) Thanks - Chris PS - I'm so thankful for your recommendations of the 14-24 and the 20 1.8 - those lenses have been incredible for me!

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@drwho353 my sunstar lens is the 24-120 S. It's great and rocks in so many other ways too. Of all my nikon lenses, I use it the most. The Nisi didn't have a purppse after that lens arrived. Like the old f mount 20 1.8, it was great for sunstars, but not a good overall lens otherwise.

[@antontaranenko8824]

Nikon's 20mm f1.8 both - old F g lens and modern Z s lens are legends... If you own FTZ adapter nikkor 20mm f1.8g can save you some money, and still will give a beautiful results...😊

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

The old version's nowhere near as sharp as the new one, particularly at the edges and the coma for night work is horrific until you stop down past f4. I did LOVE the stopped down sunstar from it though. I used to carry it for that and nothing else. The new version is near perfect wide open corner to corner with virutally no coma for night work. A wonder really. The old one can't compare in any way at all except for it's near perfect sunstars. The new sunstar lens for me is the 24-120 which throws a great one at F16.

[@antontaranenko8824]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto Well, as more rounded aperture blades there are, than less sunstar effect there will be... It will be - or more rounded bokeh when stopped down, or sunstars but polygonal bokeh .. Which I think for the 20mm lens - rounded bokeh is not a priority one, so they could sacrifice it in order to get good sunstars🤔😉 As for astrophotography old G version can not compete at f1.8 with new Z lens, however it was one of the best at it's time and most often choice for many astrophotographers back than... And even now it can deliver very good usable results even at f1.8, unless billboard sized print is needed...🤔😉👍

[@peterm.2501]

Interesting comparison. Where would the Nikkor 14-30 f4 S lens rank compared to the others? I know you like the 14-24 f2.8 better, but how does it compare to the Nikkor Z20 mm?

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@peterm.2501 the 20 1.8 outperforms the 14-24 at 20. It's just not a zoom and doesn't get nearly as wide. The 14-30 would be the 3rd best on this list, but not for night work. It'd be 4th behind the 16 viltrox in my book. F4 is just too slow. You're dealing with 5 minute exposures to match 90s exposures with the 1.8 at 500iso on a tracker. That's 10 minutes vs 3 minutes with LENR active to eliminate hot pixels.

[@SGR47]

What missed is a Viltrox DX AF 13/1.4, one of the best wide angle lenses for Nikon crop sensor cameras.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@SGR47 maybe the sample I got was bad, but that's one I did not find preformed well at all. Those earlier viltrox lenses I mentored included that one. The 16 is vastly superior.

[@SGR47]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto You should share your sad experience with your subscribers. After all, this lens fits your selection of Z mount wide angle lens lens between $160 - 2500.

[@mgman6000]

Do you have focus peaking on your camera? It shouldn't be a problem focusing the TT Artisans to just dismiss it because you had a problem isn't giving the lens a fair chance you can always focus at infinity during the day

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

I just personally abhore focus peaking. It sort of ruins the framing experience for me. I just don't enjoy looking at my scene that way.

[@mgman6000]

@HudsonHenryPhoto I frame first, then focus second using focus peaking maybe you could retest the TT Artisan 10mm using the tools available to you yours is the only negative review I have seen on that lens

[@poche660]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto Me too.

[@poche660]

I'm curious about your commenting on having difficulty focusing on stars using the TTartisan. Wouldn't setting it at infinity get you as close as the lens can get? Or backing off slightly, maybe?

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

Sadly very few lenses are accurately marked on the lens barrel. This is not one of them...

[@poche660]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto Since my comment I think for landscapes leave it at infinity and just forget it. I have seen some nice astral results but I assume they heavily post process to get there. Thanks, Hudson.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@poche660 stopped down to f11 that's fine. Wide open for astro, sadly not... When you see the astro results zoomed to 100% you'll see it likely break way down. :(

[@vitalisvasylius7390]

The Nikon Z14-24mm and Z20mmS are excellent lenses. However, I received the Viltrox 16mm and returned it. When the aperture is wide open, the corners are very weak, so I can't recommend it for astro. Also, the weight matches the Nikon Z14-24mm zoom. Viltrox lists the wrong weight on their website.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

Hmmm, maybe there is smaple variation. The corners on mine are shockingly good. I hear the same from a number of other owners I know. The Laowa certainly falls short there.

[@cmichaelhaugh8517]

Interesting comparison. It stimulates the meaningless, but funny, idea that you could buy the TTArtisan or the Laowa for the sales tax that you’d pay on the Nikon 24-24

[@garyswergold4096]

I own the 14-30 f4 and the 20mm f1.8. Both are stellar. When I’m traveling it is always a trade off of speed, versatility, and size and weight. I want an every day carry (usually the 24-120mm f4), longer lenses for animals and birds (if it is that kind of trip) and something wide for landscapes. Also, I want something fast for evening, maybe 35mm or 50mm, perhaps a Nikon f1.8 or Voigtlander F2 (smaller and a bit lighter). So the problem is always space and weight. Although the 14-24 f2.8 is wonderful and not too big or heavy, it is substantially bigger and heavier than either the 14-30 or the 20mm f1.8.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@garyswergold4096 yeah, for me the 14-24 is a must carry for wide angle landscape and the 20 goes in for star tracker night work. They frequently both come alongside the 24-120 and 100-400. All of them fit in my NYA-EVO medium RCI alongside the Z9. I loved the 14-30 too, but testing the 14-24 S against it was a costly move for me. I adore that lens.

[@t.k.1448]

Pretty much the same here. Travel kit is 14-30, 24-120, 100-400, and 35 1.8 if street photography is an option. That said, if I ever have two grand burning a hole in my pocket, upgrading the 14-30 to 14-24 f2.8 is one of the few areas I would considering "upgrading" my Z lens kit especially given the size/weight trade-off is not sooo bad. There is just something about that lens...

[@kalhana_photography]

I ended up getting the Z 14-30mm f4 over the Z 14-24 f2.8 for landscape (due to filter size mainly). I also use the Z 20mm f1.8 for night sky. Got some good aurora images with the 20mm recently as well as milkyway images. That lens is awesome.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@kalhana_photography it is. The 112 Kase system on the 14-24 hood is amazing though. 95s are better on the 14-30. I carry those mainly for 14-30 users.

[@kalhana_photography]

@@HudsonHenryPhoto I will check it out, thanks. Maybe one day I will upgrade to that lens. After using the 14-30mm for about a week, I’m very impressed with its performance and I feel like it’s more than sufficient for my hobby level photography at the moment.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@kalhana_photography no I loved it too and would have been happy, but for the trying the 14-24 😂 the Kase ultra thin, magnetic 95s will let you stack at will without vignetting. A single 82mm thin filter vignettes a little at 14. Two of them vignette a lot.

[@VQ30TLJ]

The Nikkor 17-28/2.8 is conspicuously absent from your review. I've been very happy with this lens.

[@HudsonHenryPhoto]

@@VQ30TLJ oh yeah that's one Of the lenses Nikon converted To Z Mount from the Tamron designs they collaborated on for F Mount. They're a great budget option that was smart for Nikon to build, but can't really compete with the more modern S-glass designed to take advantage of the wider Z mount and shorter flange distance.