Better than the Z 70-200mm f/2.8? NIKKOR Z 70-180mm f/2.8 Review

[@just_A_Hack]

Well done my friend. I found this to be a great video on this lens and I appreciate your delivery. Hope you have a great week

[@MatthewRaifman]

Thanks! You too!

[@robertl.4675]

Excellent review! Love the more “human” approach to your review instead of just the same ol’ techno mumbo-jumbo that is prevalent on KZbin. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

[@JanKats1963]

Great review. I also use the Z8 in combination with the 400/4.5 with the 1.4 TC. I came to the same conclusion and I just want to add the compatibility with Nikon's Z-system TC's. If you take this lens with you together with the 2.0x TC, you also have a 360mm f/5.6 tele in you bag. And that, together with the great macro-capabilities of this lens, makes it a great and lightweight travel companion.

[@MatthewRaifman]

Thanks! Appreciate you watching. I’ve tried with the 1.4x but don’t have the 2x TC yet.

[@L.LGodwill]

Thanks , That was amazing , the photos pop-up like 3D . And the color is smooth and natural at the same time

[@MatthewRaifman]

Thanks so much! Appreciate the comment

[@PMFILMS]

I choose between 105 Z and 70-180 Z. I had a macro-hundred Tokina 100mm 2.8 Pro Nikon F, it is great portrait and macro lense

[@RadAlzyoud]

Thanks for the review/overview All good points. Very helpful.

[@MatthewRaifman]

Right on. Thanks for the comment!

[@jeffhowe2892]

Nice review, thanks. I have a 70-180 and I love it. I have owned F mount 70-200 F/2.8 lenses and wow I love the 70-180 weight and image quality. Stay safe :0)

[@Ben_Stewart]

Great value for the money. I hope you have your pennies saved up for the 800PF! Can't wait to see more content.

[@MatthewRaifman]

I’m working on it! Debating the 600 vs the 800 pf…so hard to choose. Already have the 1.4x and seems like the 600 with the 1.4x is almost as sharp as the 800 albeit at f/9 vs f/6.3

[@Ben_Stewart]

Definitely save up for that 800. Plus it's $400 off now. If you always want that extra reach it's time to go longer. @@MatthewRaifman

[@rogerdaigle6777]

Great video! I just purchased this lens and its fantastic! Before switching to a mirrorless system, I had the Nikon 70-200 2.8G VRII...superb lens however it so big and heavy that I hardly used it. This 70-180 2.8 ticks all the boxes for me!

[@MatthewRaifman]

Same trajectory for me too. It’s so much lighter and more fun to use than the f mount 70-200!

[@MTBD80]

I think the 70-180 is a really great option but having the Z 70-200/2.8 I wouldn't swap for it. For one the VR in it is truly amazing for stills and especially video, it's been a critical part and has enabled a lot of shots with slow shutter. Nikon has some magic stuff going on with Z VR lenses and you can even see it on non IBIS DX bodies. Secondly the 70-200 takes both TC's a lot better. I had rented and bought the 1.4x before, was curious about the 2x compared to my F Tamron 100-400. The Tamron 100-400 may just very slightly eek out in center sharpness, but across the whole frame it's the Z70-200/2.8 w/ the 2X TC that's superior (even on a DX body) so now that's my go to until I get a 180-600. Then it's the ruggedness and Internal zoom. Having used the Z 70-200/2.8 for a couple of years now I've come to realize what a true piece of beauty this lens really is. It's the way it renders a full frame image, the smoothness of it across the whole frame, how smooth the transitions are, it's just beautiful. It has that "pro" look and feel to it, even with the 2x on it (by comparison the Tamron 100-400 renders a bit uglier, especially in the OoF areas). Key points in the Z70-200 are if you want to use TC's (they both work great), VR, internal zoom, and ruggedness. The VR is a big deal once you understand how well it works, especially for video. The Tamron 100-400's VR doesn't even compare and is mostly unusable for video (works best in Mode 2 though). Yes I've been comparing a Native F mount 100-400 to the Z70-200/2.8 w/ 2.0X TC lol. But yeah I would love to have the 70-180 in the line up in addition as a small lightweight option for the street. I think it's a great lens!

[@MatthewRaifman]

I believe it. I find the VR on the 400mm f/4.5 is amazing with the Z8 ibis too. I bet the 70-200 performs similarly. For me, it’s the size and weight. It’s the difference between handholding for an event all day and grabbing the monopod. I’m on board with your points about the 1.4x. I used it recently and it was a bit lacking for sure. I want them all!

[@YoBroz-ix5rq]

I owned the the Z 70-200mm and would say built in VR is mandatory with this lens since it is much heavier than the Z 70-180mm.

[@mylucksmiles]

I love my 70-200 z . And I use the .z 180-600 in England the light is never really great for fhe z180-600 . Other wise the180-600 z is a good choice for some. The 70- 200z is great work horse. I think we should mention recording with those lenses . Photography is part of an older model film is the more modern version a bit like black and white gives way to colour.

[@lukakoprivica]

It's not an odd focal length! ;) Are you aware of the old and phenomenal Nikkor 70-180 macro? Also 1:2... The best product-photo lens ever.

[@MatthewRaifman]

Sure, but 70-180 is much less common for a tele zoom than 70-200. That’s all my point was.

[@damianslow7080]

I am thinking to buy that lens for a wedding photography and it loos like it is good enough to give it a try! Thank you for the video it really helps!

[@MatthewRaifman]

@@damianslow7080 absolutely. Thanks for the comment. I think it’ll be great for wedding as it’s very handholdable all day and night and f/2.8.

[@arunakalu]

So I am in your position. I am a nature wildlife photographer. I have the Z8, Z6 and 24-120 f/4, 400 f/4.5, 70-180 f/2.8 and also 100-400. I want to get ride of one of the 400s, and just thinking if doing the way you would fit me. I like the lenses being lightweight and having a few lenses.

[@tomlew55]

Nice informative video. I learned how to shoot in the late 60's well before image stabilization was even a dream. Ever wonder how we got sharp photos back then? Proper use of film and shutter speed, stabilizing oneself and even holding your breath at the right moment. We couldn't spray and pray back then unless you had a lot of money to waste on film and processing. I can only speak for myself, but photography was much more cerebral pre-digital. Good memories but I wouldn't want to go back compared to what we have today.

[@MatthewRaifman]

Absolutely. I get that. I actually learned that way too in the early 2000s. It was the only thing I took from one summer where I did some rifle range training. Breathing is everything! Thanks for the comment.

[@YoBroz-ix5rq]

Yes , I remember well. And we also had to screw lenses to attached them ;-). My first camera was a Pentax Spotmatic F. The Nikon FM2 which followed was so much more modern.

[@tomlew55]

@@YoBroz-ix5rq First cameras in high school during the 60's were a kodak instamatic and a Polaroid, first 35mm was a Ricoh 35ZF rangefinder, and my first SLR was a Minolta SRT200. Last film camera was a Nikon N65. Since digital I have a number of different ones. The first was a 2001 Sony FDMavica FD97 It is huge with a 2.1mp processor which is laughable today but very cool back then. Nikon DSLRs starting with a D40x up to a D750. I also use Lumix and Olympus MFTs. My #1 is now a Z7 but being a camera junkie it won't be long until I upgrade again. I still have most of those cameras (more than 20) on a display shelf, my own little museum with the highlight being a pair of old Kodak bellows. Addicted to camera and gun collecting is better than drinking and drugs.

[@RECOCHARD]

For wildlife photography, I like using in one hand the z 70-180 + Z tc14 and the Z 400 f/4,5 in the other hand. Also I can switch the lenses and have a z70-180 and a 560 f/6,3 ; best combo/weight ;-)

[@MatthewRaifman]

Seller combo. Shooting another marathon with the 70-180 tomorrow. :-)

[@rvpcqp]

Awesome setup, looking at something very similar myself. What do you think about the B&W rendering and weather sealing for this lens? Love the specs on paper (1/2 macro) but returned its sibling the 28-75 after a few days because the B&W images looked a bit flat and I wouldn’t trust it outdoors in anything more than a light summer breeze…

[@MatthewRaifman]

I’m thinking of how to test BNW rendering vs color. Any ideas besides just sharing examples? I’m please with the lens. Surprisingly so.

[@rvpcqp]

@@MatthewRaifman No idea. Not even sure that sharing examples would carry over through KZbin… but I could see the difference vs my B&W images from the Fuji. Even the 40mm f2 had a better look although not as sharp. I have seen other reviews claim the 28-75 is the least impressive of the 3 “Tamikons” and I’ve seen really nice images online from the 70-180. Hoping Tamron release the g2 version on Z mount following the announcement of the 28-75 g2

[@heartflame503]

@@rvpcqp Me too holding out for the 70-180 G2 TamronZ .. although the 35-150 TamronZ is really nice.. I almost got it a few times !!

[@patmercier3578]

Thanks for making this video, great feed back on this lens!

[@MatthewRaifman]

Thanks!

[@kennyadvocat]

Wish they made this in f mount DX lens with vr iii

[@Jessehermansonphotography]

I think I’m gonna go this route

[@MGriff-q1i]

Thanks for outlining your experience with the 70-180 F2.8. I am very tempted to add it for exactly the same reasons you describe. I use a Z9 and Z6ii. I have the 24-70 which came with my Z6ii. I am looking for a lens for part of a travel kit. The main lens for wildlife I use now is the 180-600. That is a great lightweight wildlife zoom especially compared to my F-mount wildlife lens. I need to keep weight down. I sold my F mount G series 70-200 F2.8. I had stopped using it really. It is heavy for the focal range. This rebadged 70-180 F2.8 looks like it outperforms that lens in every way. I like the Z mount zooms for their flexibility. The only F mount lens I still own is a 500 F4 which works very well with the Z9 and takes a TC very nicely. It is however not as easy to travel with as the 180-600. I do like to take a monopod with me as I got used to using one with the 500 F mount. I do have the 85 F1.8 S as a studio portrait lens. However for travel and for most on location shooting the flexibility of a zoom lens is better to use for spontaneous action.

[@nataliamarreiros4951]

Very helpful. Thank you

[@stoufenatz3728]

thanks Matthiew :)

[@antonoat]

I've subscribed! Thanks for this review, it's got me thinking!

[@MatthewRaifman]

Awesome! Thanks for the note

[@heartflame503]

Nice video.. I am looking into this Nikon lens.. the 70-180 for my ZF.. however I already have a a few lenses that cover this range. The old f-mount 70-200 F4, the 24-200 Z and my fav old sigma 150 f2.8 macro That is actually the lens(functionality) I want to "upgrade" . The reviews of the Tamron 70-180 G2 is great. Tamron just released the 28-75 G2 for the Nikon Z so its likely ( hopeful ) that it will release the Tamron 70-180 G2 with VC for the NikonZ mount too.. The other Lens in the running is the Tamron 35-150 Z mount. Its practically the same size as my old Sigma 150. sigh .. I have too many lenses .. ;-)

[@MatthewRaifman]

Haha, we are indeed spoiled with choice! I think the G2 is worth waiting for if you need VR. Otherwise, I don’t think the AF or IQ improvements will be noticeable between the G1 and G2 at least based on the Sony versions. I’ve wanted the 35-150 forever but it’s the weight that puts me iff

[@beverleyhoward2644]

I'm considering the Z 70-180 to use with a teleconverter occasionally on my Z50. How would this work. I have the Tamron 100-400 f lens to use with the FTZ, but I'm starting to find it heavy for carrying around

[@danieltomanovic1940]

Do you know maybe if build quality is the same like Tamron G1 because I hear that AF of Nikon 70 180 is better than Tamron G1 (different af motor)...optically is the same lens but phisically maybe Nikon better.

[@MatthewRaifman]

I’m not totally sure. Nikon definitely put their own spice into the mix on these remakes, including lens coatings. Wouldnt surprise me but I don’t know.

[@stevenj2380]

For your use, how about Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD? Oh, wow no knowledge of pro- coverage use. I have older F mount version and back when it cost so much less than this new 'improved' one for Z./ I can afford to add the 70-180. Just got Z 28-75 f/2.8 which is not compact but still pairs well with Zf.

[@MatthewRaifman]

I think it’ll pair great with the zf. I do want the 35-150 but I typically shoot primes in that range.

[@comment_below]

great vid! ... lemme ask -would would you get if you couldnt get the 70-180mm and you at least need like 135mm (120mm might be fine)??? preferably 2.8 or less

[@MatthewRaifman]

It’s tricky. I have a 135mm f/1.8 Samyang on Sony e mount and it’s amazing for under $600 but not available on z mount (you’d need to adapt from Sony to Z).

[@DanelleFCG]

How do you feel the quality of this Z mount 70-180 compares to an F mount with adapter 70-200 on the Z8?

[@MatthewRaifman]

@@DanelleFCG I’d love to comment but I haven’t shot the 70-200 on the z8. I did have the 70-200 f/2.8 on F Mount with the d850 and this lens is comparable but much lighter.

[@b34k97]

The SmallRig L bracket for the Z8 is dirt cheap. Why not just get that instead of trying to deal with collars on a lens that isn't built for it?

[@MatthewRaifman]

It’s not a bad solution and similar to what I went with: tripod mount that can go vertical. But particularly for sport, I find I need to go quickly between portrait and landscape sometimes and switching back and forth without a collar is too slow in the field sometimes. I suspect there’s an aftermarket collar that will work. Just haven’t found it yet

[@b34k97]

@@MatthewRaifman Makes sense, thanks for the reply!

[@michaelmalodrums9674]

great video, I was waiting for why it was better than ? lol

[@angelogarciajr5356]

What Canon gear are you selling?

[@MatthewRaifman]

Haha, I’ve got an ef 500mm f/4 is ii for sale. It’s wonderful. Also have the RF to EF adapter. Everything else sold

[@angelogarciajr5356]

It is kind of sad. I enjoyed your work and photos, now as a Canon guy, I probably wont watch any more since I cant relate to Nikon stuff. I was hoping you still had the ef 300mm f2.8 or maybe it was someone else. I cant use that 500 plus it is out of my price range for sure. Take care and good luck in your new direction.@@MatthewRaifman

[@MatthewRaifman]

@@angelogarciajr5356hey man! Stick around! It’s not just about the gear, it’s the photography experiences too! But I get it. Best of luck to you on your photography journey!

[@livejames9374]

@@angelogarciajr5356relate to what you enjoyed… the work, photos, and content presented not the gear. At the end of the day lenses and cameras are just tools to create photographic works.

[@nata6aerokhina]

Thanks,

[@NetvoTV]

If I will get Sony Xperia 1 VI to be always with me for its 16mm, 24mm, 48mm, and 2X macro plus it's 85-170mm uses, should I get 70-180mm with 2X tele converter or 28-400mm for the Zf as the only lens on it for a long time for abstract kind of photography, not a bokeh guy but one project might need or benefit from having it, can the 28-400mm have some blur background with a full person subject in the frame because if it able to then it might be more useful with that range, I might get a manual lens for fun and bokeh in the future like Voigtländer 40f1.2/50f1/65f2mm and also a 14-30mm f4 for everyday closer stuffs

[@MatthewRaifman]

You’ve got some interesting options there. I love the 70-180 but it’s not the most versatile lens out there and if you don’t want that background blur/bokeh look, then it’s probably not the best choice. I think the 28-400 is a great idea for a do everything lens. Yes, at a very long distance, you could get a full frame with blur I think but recognize that you’ll be so far away you probably will have to scream to direct your subject! The 24-120 f/4 is another option. It is very sharp and gives you a bit more versatility for macro shots as it has a max mag of 0.39x but it doesn’t take a TC (I don’t think, check me on that). For that 400mm range, you just have a few options including the 180-600, 400 f/4.5, 100-400, and 70-180 or 70-200 with the 2x. They are all quite different lenses with very different sharpness, aperture, and weight, and cost, so need to rank your priorities. I absolutely think a manual compact prime is a great idea in the zf. I found the lack of a grip to make larger lenses challenging with the way I handle a camera so lighter and shorter is my advice. The 40mm f/2 is also a nice option and look for a refurbished one on the cheap.

[@NetvoTV]

@@MatthewRaifman thanks for the suggestions Yes I have these lens in mind and reasons why they might not in consider: 35-150mm: too heavy 24-200mm: 24mm but might not enough reach and close enough 70-180mm with 2X TC: good overall and even closer but not versatile but then my phone already cover the wide end 28-400mm: good enough and just I not sure if I can get the full person with bokeh when I want to in street photography (hence no shouting needed for your considerate wonder) Yeah I know smaller prime will be more easy to handle but not a priority for now, think the 70-180 and 28-400 are light enough!

[@NetvoTV]

@@MatthewRaifman by the way, maybe you can do a comparison of these 2 since they cover the nearly the same reach with the 2X TC, but if you unable to, maybe it will be nice if you can show me if something nearly as the 400mm f8 can achieve full person with background blur

[@johnpeterson7264]

Congratulations to your sister on her thesis defense !