My Next Nikon Wide Angle Lens - Twice the Price, Twice as Good?

[@davidellinsworth3299]

It's actually quite refreshing listening to a gear review from someone who isn't really a gearhead. The comparisons you give are more real-world, whereas the reviews of others tend to bore me sh*tless because they get so hung up on stuff that just isn't going to matter outside of a lab. I can't afford either of these lenses 😂 but it was an interesting watch nonetheless. Cheers Tom

[@prachigauriar]

Two (kind of conflicting) things: 1. I like that you usually don’t talk about gear. It’s great watching a photography channel about photography! 2. Because you don’t usually talk about gear, when you do talk about gear, it’s much more interesting to me. Your perspective isn’t one of chasing gadgets, but rather finding the right tools to achieve your vision. You’re also very practical, both in deciding between the 24-70mm lenses and these. Plus, who doesn’t like talking about gear a little. Anyway, I’m looking forward to seeing your next big trip!

[@peterorr999]

Thomas, I get a lot out of watching your videos but your analysis of the use of a Kase circular filter with the 14-30 f/2.8 needs a bit of discussion. 14-30 users should try using the Nikon HB-97 lens hood designed to fit not only the 14-30 f/2.8 but the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/4.5-5.6! The hood has a magnetic ring so any Kase Wolverine 112 m filter works in the same way with all three lenses. This universal system takes you all the way from 14mm to 400mm (with x2 converter) with the same hood and filters. Works for me!

[@alveus_]

Due to the excellent ISO performance of the Z6II, I had no issues shooting the northern lights in Iceland with my 14-30 multiple times already. I also accidentally dunked the camera + extended lens into a glacial river on one of my trips. Even though, the combo was fully submerged for multiple seconds, I couldn't detect any moisture inside afterwards.

[@ravinchandra]

Hope you see this comment. I'm torn between the 14-30 f/4 and the 14-24 f/2.8. I don't shoot much of astro, but I do enjoy it doing of late. I currently use the 28 mm f/2.8 with the Z6 II. Do you feel the f/4 would be sufficient for capturing milky-way shots? I also use a D7200 with Tokina 11-16 f/2.8.

[@alveus_]

@@ravinchandra Uh, that's a tough one. I've shot the milky way before using the 14-30 and the results are decent especially when you start stacking multiple exposures to compensate for noise. Coma and sharpness at f4 are good. Would a 2.8 or 1.8 lens be better? Definitely. But for my use case (hiking and 99% daylight photography) the 14-30 is more than sufficient, not to mention smaller, lighter and cheaper than the 14-24. From what I've seen, there are quite a few videos and reddit/forum posts about this topic including sample images, maybe you can find a clearer answer there?

[@stevethompson8154]

I went with the 14-24 2.8 because I do a good amount of astro. When you have the 14-30 you could afford the 20mm F 1.8 and carry it when you need it for the occasional astro session.

[@michaeljohannsen4872]

That’s a very good point!

[@kirillKKD]

I also once faced a choice between these two lenses for my Z6. As a result, I counted the number of photos that I took with filters, it turned out that there were not very many of them. I always wanted to shoot quality astro. As a result, I bought a 14-24 and did not regret it, I shot several impressive night landscapes with it, it is well suited for landscape and astro and will be lighter in weight than 2 lenses 14-30 and 20 1.8. If you don't need to shoot astro then 14-30 would be the best choice.

[@MarkHoudePhotography]

I own both lenses and I have to say, the 14-30 has impressed me time and again. I just returned from a Pacific Northwest trip and for the first time, I left the 14-24 f/2.8 home. The 14-30’s weight, size, and performance, convinced me to make it my full-time ultra-wide “travel lens” and my back thanked me for it lol.

[@MichaelGarbarinoPhotography]

I hope you enjoyed your time up here in the PNW. It's been great weather for photography lately.

[@MarkHoudePhotography]

@@MichaelGarbarinoPhotography Yes indeed!!! It was absolutely amazing and long overdue. I’ll be creating a series on my channel as we travel from the south to the north coast ending at Canon beach. Unfortunately, we didn’t make it to Astoria. I live on the northeast coast and I couldn’t believe just how different the west coast looks. The sea stacks, caves, and hidden beaches, oh my…

[@MichaelGarbarinoPhotography]

@@MarkHoudePhotography I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'll keep an eye out for your video.

[@MarkHoudePhotography]

@@MichaelGarbarinoPhotography many thanks and happy shooting out there! 👍🏼

[@Liam1.1.1]

Hello everyone, I'm an amateur, but I love photography, I don't know what to buy from a camera (budget is not a problem), can anyone recommend? Canon?

[@matpez65]

Bought the 14-30 last week, early days but I’m blown away by it so far, and finally not having to spend hundreds on a special filter system just to use a CPL filter is a godsend

[@davidrushworth658]

Another great video Tom, thank you! I bought my 14-30mm f4 when I bought my Z6ii and have used it for astro ......fabulous. Now I've upgraded to the Z8, and the 14-30mm is just as impressive 😁

[@SwanSycorax]

Several times I tried to convince myself I needed the 14-24 f2.8 - after all, I already had the 24-70 and 70 -200 Z lenses. However, I bought the 14-30 f/4 and love it - especially as I can swap the NISI filter system I use between the 14-30 and the 24-70 without making any changes. A brilliant lens and really great value.

[@raynerp]

exaclty my case, something is saying "complete the f/2.8 trinity" but the 14-30 is so good that I won't

[@John_Davis]

I have shot astro on the 14-30. Its ok but the conditions need to be perfect to get acceptable results. With the money you saved, just picj up a 2nd hand z 20mm f1.8. This is what I shoot all my astro on. Its fantastic.

[@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas]

You have a really great real world comparison and practice-relevant gear videos. That's what makes your gear reviews a lot more interesting than simple gear head videos from others. Also your comparisons are very well done. As far as i know the Z-Mount 14-24 mm f/2.8 does also have the possibility to use small "drop-in" filters at the back of the lens. Don't know how it's exactly called.

[@greenmedic88]

The rear mount accommodates drop in gel filters. Rear and clip in sensor filters are available, but if you use a CPL, you still need a 112mm CPL filter, the filter hood and filter cap, which make the system larger and heavier. 82mm filters, on the other hand, are what many already have. But if all you need are ND filters, when using sensor or rear filters, the 14-24mm only weighs 650g and fits into the same lens compartment as any of the longer primes. It's not a big lens without the filter hood/cap as shown in the video.

[@jbairdexp]

Thanks for making this video. I've been using the 14-30 f/4 since I switched to the Z system many years ago. I always wondered if I was missing out not have the 14-24 f/2.8. It appears not. 🙂

[@dah7772]

A little late as you already went with the 24-70 f4 lens but the 14-30 and 24-70 f/2.8 lens are both 82 mm. I have both and use Kase filters. I just have ring on both lens to easily add to either. An added bonus that the step up ring for 100-400 (77-82) allows you to still use 100-400 stock lens hood. Just need to purchase a 82mm lens cap if you want to keep step up ring attached to it. That way you can use three lens with same filter system and never have to add or remove ring to use them. Very handy.

[@akoskiss7320]

Good point, but the 24-70/4 can also take a 72-82mm step up ring and a spare LC-82 cap (i prefer that over the LC-82B). That's my current setup. Takes no hood though, of course.

[@dah7772]

@@akoskiss7320 Yes of course any lens can take a step up ring. Point I was making was that all three lens wouldn’t loose any accessory functionality.

[@larrymitchell3502]

Thank you for your investment in time and effort to compare the two lenses. Shooting turning into work when one is testing hardware as opposed to finding inspiration is too familiar... 😝 It's like practicing a musical piece compared to playing expressively. The reward is being one with your gear, fluid and in control when you're *compelled* to shoot by the subject in front of you. Like the New York City cabbie when a musician hurrying down the street yelled out "Sir, how do I get to Carnegie Hall?" The cabbie yelled back "Practice, man, PRACTICE!" Watched your Svalbard video last evening after running across your channel. Outstanding! It truely felt like being there with you and your images , for me at least, captured the place wonderfully - though I would be equally pleased to return. Thanks again from Texas, where one could fry eggs on the sidewalk at present...

[@dr.d723]

I know I am bring up your past, but thank you for your comments regarding the 14-30. I had purchased it a few years ago for my Z50, knowing at sometime I would be upgrading to a Z7ii or more. On my Z50, the lens is outstanding! I finally purchased a Z7ii and have yet to give it a full test, but there is no doubt in my mind that it will suit all of my needs. And also, based on your comparison of the 24-70 f2.8, and 24-70 f4, I purchased the 24-70 f4. I am an amateur landscape photographer, so I don't want to spend a fortune on Z equipment, especially since I have spent a fortune in the past for my previous D810, D7100 combo and lens. Due to age and having both shoulders rebuilt, I needed to scale down the weight, hence the Z50 first. So thank you for confirming my choice of wide angle lens!

[@sarfaraz.hosseini]

Great to see some Nikon love after the past few years pre-Z9.

[@carlmcneill1139]

You may not like making videos like this but I enjoy them. I went with the 14-30mm for the same reasons you mentioned. I'm just a hobbyist. I didn't want to pay extra for the 14-24mm and have to get another set of filters. The filters alone could be another $500 or more. I already have an 82mm ring for my filters. Hudson Henry has a good video comparing those 2 lenses and the old 14-24mm f mount lens. The 14-30mm sits right in the middle in terms of sharpness. F/2.8 does come in handy for event or astro photography but these new cameras perform well enough in low light that having a slower lens isn't that big of a deal. I have actually taken a milky way photo with my 14-30mm at f/4. I take about 15 images and stack them to reduce noise so it wasn't that bad. It's just not as good as it 20mm f/1.8 lens.

[@KyleClements]

My vote is the 14-30/4, but I'm a bit biased as that's one of the two lenses that got me into the Z system. It's light weight and small size is hard to beat for backpacking, and 82mm screw-in filters are a lot easier to find. It's also a great performer in infrared. The 105mm /2.8 macro is about as big as I'm willing to go on a lens. Any bigger than that and it just stays at home too often.

[@seantomlinson3320]

14-30 good in IR? Thank you I did not know that. Which wavelength are you shooting?

[@timryan894]

100%- I opted for the 14-30 and the 24-120 lenses as my travel lens duo. May get a 100-400, but still trying to determine if I really need it. cheers

[@martinsarre]

Glad you are now fixed up. You have made wise decisions in my opinion. I doubt you will use the 14-30 very much , but it’s handy to keep in the bag. I’ve always got mine with me , just in case.

[@Rburg00]

I’ve been watching Thomas for years now and have seen the thought and process he uses in making real world decision on gear and absolutely value his opinion especially now that he’s using some Nikon gear. Thank you!

[@pascalhibon7928]

For astro work you could use the 20mm f1.8 lens which is a stellar lens as well. And it is lightweight and small too. As for filters in the 14-40 lens, I believe you could stack filters if you use the Kase 92mm filters. They are a bit larger than the 85mm but give you the option of stacking on a wide angle lens. Hudson Henri has some good videos about it.

[@atooch213]

Thats what I would say to do. You could get the 20mm and the 14-30 for a comparable cost to just getting the 14-24. That way you have a lighter weight kit most of the time as well as wider aperture for when you do want to do astro. Also if astro really isnt something you do much at all, you can always rent the lens for just one trip

[@PASquared]

This is exactly what I did. I don't shoot enough ultrawide to justify the cost or size of the 14-24, let alone its enormous filters, so I got the 14-30, then I got the 20 1.8 specifically for astro work.

[@tallaganda83]

I don’t even like 14mm Astro shots anymore, I much prefer to use focal lengths between 20-135mm odd with a tracker. Can get a lot more nebulae detail which looks really cool.

[@andysuzierawlins5462]

I do love your videos Thomas, you're just so honest, I don't mind what videos you put out, adventure ones are my faves, but you make me smile anyway with how honest you are

[@gotzie100]

Thank you Thomas. I have been struggling with this choice for months. The timing of this video was perfect for me. I’m buying the 14-30 f/4!

[@christianbreinbjergfotokunst]

The first Z lense I bought was the 14-30 mm f/4 to replace the 16-35 f/4 from my D800. With the lower weight, lower price and smaller size it was a no-brainer for me. Not once have I been disappointed so far.

[@MarkHoudePhotography]

I feel exactly the same and I own both the 14-24 and 14-30. You really can’t beat the 14-30 for travel, a small compromise all things considered.

[@SpaklesDr]

I went with the 2.8...I did so for night landscape photography. I sometimes wish I had the 14-30 but ultimately the lens ain't THAT big and the quality is a touch better. Also i grabbed the Kase filters that can be used on all the 2.8s with the same lens hood. Very useful. Very easy.

[@timryan894]

I also shoot primarily night time architectural photography. I went with the 14-30 because I rarely ever shoot below f/5.6 due to DOF advantage, so the 2.8 was an unnecessary expense because I would be shooting it at F/7.1 or F/9 anyway. My shutter speeds are a few seconds in full dark, but who cares. My subjects aren't moving. You need a 2.8 when you need to capture moving subjects in low light.

[@jharrelphoto]

Which filter setup is that. I definitely am looking at going that route for sure.

[@yophotodude7693]

The 13-30/4 paired with the 20/1.8 actually give you more light gathering than the 14-24/2.8. The money is about the same and the two lenses will be a little heavier in the bag. But if you’re not planning on nightscapes, then you don’t have to pack the 20mm. If you’re going to photograph the night sky, leave the 14-30 in the bag.

[@raf2681]

Actually much cheaper laowa 15mm solves all issues. Can be taken occasionally when needed. 14-30 is the best

[@yophotodude7693]

@@raf2681 I believe that’s an f/2.8 lens, so the 20mm f/1.8 still gathers more light.

[@VTPyzon]

You're good at this because you are insanely practical. Thank you for your honesty

[@AcaciaFikeNelson]

Thank you for the comparison video! This literally has been the conversation I have had with myself for the better part of a year! As someone who does lots of hiking photography adventures, I keep leaning towards the 14-30 f/4 (size, weight, filters), but then there is the part of me that would like to do more astrophotography...but I really like my sleep and I am often in bed by 9pm, so there is that!😴

[@Rwdphotos]

One of my key considerations is flare/glare with light sources in frame, including the sun. There have been quite a few cheaper wide angle zooms that perform excellently until they have a light source in frame, then it all goes way downhill.

[@rogeriopeccioli1616]

Thanks Heaton. I had the Nikkor F 14-24mm f/2.8 for many years using it with the Nikon D750 and D850. A fantastic lens, but very heavy (1kg). Today I use the Nikon Z6II with Nikkor Z 20mm f/1.8 for landscape and astrophrography... but I'm looking for a wide angle zoom and the Nikkor Z 14-30mm f/4 is a very interesting option.

[@jimwlouavl]

Thanks for sharing your thought process. Sometimes, we have to spend time selecting our gear. So, no apology necessary.

[@cliftonwhittaker260]

I went through this same super wide selection angst a few years ago. In testing the Nikon lenses I was considering I found that the most usual wide angle focal length I used was 17 to 18 mm. One of the lenses I tried was obsolete but really sharp although it had a bit of light fall off at the edges and didn't have lens stabilization. I was also considering the 16-35 and the 14-24. The 14-24 lost out because of the size and price and the anticipated infrequent use. The 16-35 lost out because I could easily see the difference in lens image quality with it. It just didn't cut it. My favorite was the obsolete 17-34 and the light falloff at the edges didn't matter because when I'm making that type of shot I usually stop down to the point where there is no vignetting. Or, I just won't shoot at the shortest focal length. Plus, I usually crop in from the edges just a bit anyway. Image stabilizer didn't matter because I mostly use a tripod for "serious" landscape work. For handheld work I just shoot at a high enough shutter speed and adjust the ISO. I'm not worried about noise these days. Your video is interesting because I see you going through the same equipment selection process that the rest of us have to at times. And, I intend to continue watching your weekly posts so I'll get to see how your selection works out in the long run. Just keep on keeping on, Thomas, we're with you.

[@karlnacreon]

Hello from France, Thomas ! Thank you for this video. I sold my Z 14-30 for the Z 14-24 f2.8. I bought the magnetic kit filter (Nd8, 16, 1000 + polariser) from Kase (Wolverine 112mm) It is an very handy solution for my landscapes. I can stack and let all my filters on the NiSi Lens Hood For Nikon Z 14-24mm F/2.8 S that I bought separately I can adapt the lens hood with the filters on it on my Z 24-70 f2.8 and Z 70-200 f2.8. It is a very very handy system. Cheers.

[@prometheuslg]

Coming from the f mount 14-24mm the new version is nearly 400g lighter, so my perspective was a bit different . I do interior, architecture,landscape and I have a house in the middle of nowhere in Burgundy with very little light pollution. Moonless nights are glorious. So the f2.8 comes handy quite often. Filter wise I use the magnetic filters (one 10 stop nd and one cpl) from kase. I have tried once the 14-30 and was really impressed by the quality. At f8 it is sharper and actually brighter than the old Fmount 14-24. Nikon really did a good job on these f4 lenses.

[@timryan894]

I also am primarily an architectural and urban landscape photographer. How does the 2.8 help you for interior work? I usually need DOF values in the f/7.1 to f/9 range to capture most of the scene depth. 2.8 would limit my DOF too much unless constantly focus stacking (no thanks). Your subjects aren't moving, so why not just drag out your shutter speed a bit longer to compensate for f/stop? I've found the 14-30 to be the perfect lens for architecture (if only Nikon would create a version of it in a PC mount)

[@prometheuslg]

@@timryan894 Because I design the interiors that I shoot. Quite often I need to shoot the space before the construction begins in near darkness to have a reminder of the whole room and to do a before and after. Having the whole space completely sharp is not a priority then.

[@akleinese]

A great, practice oriented and refreshing review. I love your style. 🤩I know, you don't like shooting videos, but it would be a pitty to not see more of yours. I got your Kindle book and am looking forward to learn from your expierences.

[@boostedmaniac]

I was really considering the 2.8 but after seeing how big it is next to the F4, I might reconsider.

[@neilcousineau4956]

Hey Thomas, thanks for the comparison. I am a MFT shooter (lower size, cost and the quality works for me). I bought the Zuiko 12-45 F4.0 over the 12-40 F2.8 and I love it. When shooting in darker or night scenes I like to use a higher F stop anyway to get a start burst from nearby lights. For low light I use a prime. Cheers from southern Georgian Bay, Ontario, Canada.

[@jobanski]

I don’t mind the camera gear discussion. This IS your journey and we’re just here for the ride!

[@randyschwager2515]

Good info! I just got my Z8 and will be using my F mount lenses for a while…except I’ve ordered their 180-600. I will replace my landscape lenses over time! Thanks for taking me along!

[@gregmosher4287]

My very first Z lens I picked up was that 14-30 having shot a lot of other wide angle lenses on my older DSLR bodies it absolutely smashes them out of the park. MAYBE that 14-24 is a little bit better but that added size/weight would have me leaving it home most of the time. If someone is aiming for a brilliant real estate lens that 14-30 is practically un beatable at its price.

[@-OzSteve]

The price and ability to use multiple 100mm filters with my nisi filter holder did it for me. Very happy with the results from the 14-30.

[@Narsuitus]

Thanks for the comparison video. When I purchsed my Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom, I needed a wide-angle to be the third lens in my zoom kit which consisted of the following Nikkor zooms: 80-200mm f/2.8 28-70mm f/2.8 I did not mind the large size and the limited filter feature of the 14-24mm lens. However, it was a G lens and I needed a lens with an aperture ring for use on my older Nikon film cameras.

[@ottersphotography304]

Thank you for this information, it is really helpful. I have decided it is time to go from my D-850 to the Z-8. I need a lens in this range and it is always good to see someone objectively and realistically weigh the performance of each. I will be purchasing the 14-24mm f2.8. Again thank you for all the content you create.

[@MrFL08]

Nice one Tom. The reason I sold my GFX a few years back was to buy the Z7 with 14-30 and 24-70 F4. Just about to get a cup of tea and watch your Svalbard video

[@michaelbottari6398]

I have the 14-30 mm too. It is a great lens light, good and sharp. I love it. Good decision.

[@terrynewmanphotography]

I’ve had the 14-30 since it came out and love this lens, superb. The lightweight build and filter options alongside great performance make it excellent.

[@Bloggerky]

Size is a considerable factor if one has to hike with an ultra wide. I'm headed for a backcountry Greenland shoot and we will helicopter to our camp then hike a lot. The 14-30 has a distinct advantage for those circumstances. A useful video; thanks!

[@jonfletcher147]

Absolutely love the 14-30 f4! I hired the 14-24 and with similar results as yourself, I actually appreciate the extra 6mm at the end of the 14-30. Got mine mint from Park cameras for £849!

[@Zanagash]

Dude I LOVE this video. I’ve been dead set on one day getting the 14-25 f2.8 and now seeing that a pro like you leans more towards the f4 I might save $1,000+ !

[@laurelb8372]

Interesting choice. I bought 14-30 early on in Z world, works very well for landscapes, doesn’t weigh me down and suits my Nisi filters.

[@barclayjb]

Hey Thomas, I like your videos. I like it when you talk tech. Please don't think that takes away from your reputation as a photographer. I enjoy 3 things about photography: 1) Being in the field and taking the picture. 2) Playing with the cameras and tools and such. 3) Sharing the photos and getting feedback from real people. Can you talk about how you share your photos with real people? (Not KZbin or printed books. I mean your wife, friends, critiques from other photographers).

[@jasoneldridgephotography]

I have the Nikon Z 12-24 f2.8. I share your issues as I have to carry two sets of filters. The lens is superb but with that said if I had it all to do over I might have just gone with the 14-30.

[@randygerber1565]

Same

[@yonishperling1531]

It is interesting! many people can't offer or get their hands on the gear before actually buying it. Thank you.

[@seanmolincreative]

If you don't use 112mm screw-in filters, you don't need that giant hood. There's a smaller hood, and you often don't even need *that* because flare resistance is so good. The 14-24 also has a slot in the back for drop-in gel filters, which may be enough if you're doing ND work. As others have mentioned there are several ways to use filter systems among other popular Z lenses like the magnetic ring ones. I think it would have been fair to mention the size difference doesn't *have* to be nearly as dramatic for most users, at least most of the time. I used the original G version from 2009 until 2024, and the new S version is practically a pancake lens in comparison - almost half the weight when factoring the FTZ adapter, and nearly 50% less volume with length and width reduction, all while being blisteringly sharp corner to corner wide open. And maybe it's just me, but I think the 14-24 is quite noticeably sharper in the extreme corners than the 14-30 (which is indeed still a plenty good lens) until about 5.6. You're absolutely right though that at common landscape apertures there's very little difference. It matters for me as an event photographer that shoots wide open in lower light. Also, I kind of hate that the 14-30 does telescope when in use.

[@kribomon]

Although you don't like doing gear/comparison videos, your insight is valuable! Thank you!

[@nb7524]

Hey Thomas, the Nikon Z8 was a great choice for you. The time you took to decide makes sense. Investing into a new camera systems is an expensive endeavor.

[@TimvanderLeeuw]

I do enjoy astro photography, but would rather get a good, fast prime lens for that. They're either faster, or smaller & lighter, or both! For the Case filters, to stack the filters without vignetting, it might help to get a wider set of filters and adapter ring?

[@brianpickering1259]

Tough choice. I admire your ability to be pragmatic about the choices you make. Well done. To the filter question, I am very fortunate to own some of the 2.8 zooms and I love the kase 112 mm magnetic filters. In my workflow, I simply clip the 12-24 mm lens hood with magnetic insert on to any of the 2.8 lenses I have and away I go.

[@timbliss8777]

14-24 2.8 is an incredible lens. I shoot astro so its a no brainer for me. For filters....Maven. They use the universal lens hood that works on the full trinity of 2.8 lenses, plus the 100-400 and a few others. And you can stack w no vignetting.

[@robertlavers1121]

I recently sold my Lee Filters SW150 filter set because of the room it took in the bag, plus for other lenses than my 15-30 f2.8 I needed bulky adapters or a separate filter system. For the square polariser I found just hand holding it just in front of the lens works just fine and saves time , I don’t use grad filters any more so all I miss out on are the ND filters. However changing systems means an f4 wide angle lens is available which is a huge weight and space saver.

[@mikebreazeale2563]

Actually you can use the 97 lens hood with several of Nikons lens. I have the filter set of Kase filters at 112mm and it fits in the 97 lens hood and fits five or six of my lenses. Before you decide I'd check that out. You can also use set up or down rings with them and put them on all your other lenses. NO vignetting with it. Also the 14-24 mm lenses is a fantastic one to have in your tool box. I hope this makes sense...I typed it pretty fast...Thanks for sharing...

[@seancjmatthews]

I just bought the 14-30 and made a comparison video to my vintage 20mm lense. I hike long distance a lot and need the lightest wide angle and this is perfect for this. I do like astro too so this will test me but I also have the 20mm 1.8 on my list so that I can swap the lense out if the nights are clear for shooting.

[@jimtrull683]

I own the 14-30 and when the 14-24 came out I thought about it but I remember owning the 14-24 F mount. I hated carrying two filter systems for the big bulb on the 14-24. It just wasn’t the trouble so I sold it. I have been very pleased with the 14-30Z and it works great for IR. I also rarely shoot night photography for the reasons you listed. I my however buy the 20mm solely for a trip I’m taking that will have night photography opportunities.

[@envyrish]

Oh I remember this spot!! This was your focus stacking episode years ago!

[@gavmiller]

Worth mentioning that the larger lens hood on the 14-24 can also be used on the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 so you could just pack the single hood and filter solution you decided upon for the wide angle lens and use it with the other lenses. The 14-24 2.8 also can use rear filters, albeit that's a bit more of a faff to change in the field but the option is there and of course they're tiny plus no vignetting.

[@craigmaisfield3247]

I have enjoyed your recent videos. Being a nikon user it's been interesting an i have the 14-30 F/4 , 24-70mm F2.8 and the 100-400mm in my bag..

[@Blizz4rd]

To be honest I really like your tech videos. :D They also make your channel more versatile.

[@bensmith612]

I was hoping for a video of you out and about with your camera

[@RichardAmesMusic]

If you do pure astrophotography then yes, larger aperture helps. But if you do astro-landscapes then you're going to be stopped down anyway. Plus, cameras are so good these days that a stop or two of exposure difference isn't much of a problem, especially if you're stacking images. Bottom line for me is that 2.8 isn't that big a deal these days for astrophotography. I have both the 14-24 and 14-30 and use them interchangeably. For motion timelapse the 14-30 is a huge advantage because you get a lot less wobble on the mount.

[@rst33079]

I am a real estate agent and I use the 14-30 on the z6 for real estate photography. This is the only lens I use for this occasion. Very rarely I use the 24-120 in addition. In the past I used the 16-35 f mount glass on my d750. The optical quality was far behind compared to the z mount lens. The z 14-30 is definitely the perfect lens for me.

[@nevvanclarke9225]

No it’s really easy to shoot wide angle lens is what you need to do when you shoot with the sun is put it on a timer get the camera little bit lower so you the tripod isn’t in the sun and then use a timer release and then reset it all hit the timer and then jump out the way and let the photo get taken and you’ll find that nine times out of 10. The shadow of the tripod is not in the shot. You might need to move it forward to 20 mm in some shots but generally speaking this works really well. I shoot a lot in Australia Thomas where the sun is bright and harsh and I often come across this with my wide angle lenses and I have a 12 to 24 equivalent lens on my Fuji.

[@ronawood]

I haven't bought either lens yet but I went ahead and bought the 112mm Kase filters and step up rings. That way, I'd just have 1 set of filters and I just use the Kase magnetic step up rings for any other lens. If I go with the 14-28 F2.8, the 112mm filters will fit them natively and I won't have to worry about vignetting, even when stacking filters.

[@timryan894]

After watching Ricci's comparison of the 2 lenses, I went with the 14-30- Optically very similar and I don't need anything below f/4 for my architectural and landscape photography. No brainer, the f/4 is lighter and smaller for traveling. Easy decision

[@robertleidner9703]

Loves this episode of Between Two Monitors.

[@destinyangel5]

Great TH what if you crank up contrast and add a bit more sharpening to the cheaper lighter F 4 in post processing your raw file or jpeg in light room? then can it mach the more expensive bulky heavy F2.8 when its at F4 as well, so was it a fair test one at f4 the other at 2.8? The F4 is struggling against the F2-8 that has superior brightness contrast sharpness , maybe do a test both at F4 to see and difference ?

[@mm8276352]

For occasional Astro, I suggest loaning either a 20/1.8 Z (which I also own and it's fantastic) or the new Sigma 14/1.4 (and buy a Sony E to Nikon Z adapter if it's still not available for Z mount at that point).

[@heythere6983]

At 10:49 it seems the 14-30 has more of that inward bend towards the center while the 14-24 is a bit straighter . That could be a big difference for people wanting to photograph architecture . Iv seen some videos with people using the 14-30 and on buildings, vertically, the warping is fairly drastic. I’m not sure if photoshop hs a profile for these lenses to correct this? But if there is internal correction it doesn’t seem to make a huge difference in some of the photos Iv noticed with the 14-30 atleast . Whereas I saw a Sony 12mm -24? (I think) and at 12 mm the building vertically was totally straight .

[@GeoffCooper]

Love the thumbnail on this one :) I have the 14-30mm f/4 and have been very very happy with it - I don't really user ultra-wide enough to justify anything bigger or more expensive, but given what you do it must be a more difficult decision!

[@breadtomato]

Another fantastic video. Cheers!

[@Realletsplaygrey]

I love my 14-30 f4, such a lovely little lens. I love how compact it is!

[@dac9404]

Thanks for the video. I enjoy listening to the thought process on how and why you choose a lens. I prefer your travel videos (to include those that are two to three episodes) but these are important too. I think you're fine so long as you keep a balance of mostly your bread and butter travel, landscape videos in the majority. With respect to your video I own the 14-30/4. I am learning to shoot wide so that was a factor in buying as well. I like the lens and all the issues I have with it can mostly be narrowed down to user error.

[@Jack-qn6vy]

Thanks for saving me the time to do this, lol. I ended up going with the 14-30 F4 for the same reasons, price, size, and low probability of the f2.8 use case for me. My thinking was that a person who uses a wide zoom at f4 will know in their bones when they need an f2.8, whereas a person who would be fine with an f4 but is ok spending oodles of money to carry a heavier lens at f2.8 would be harder to figure out.

[@karlratcliff1205]

Good to see you on local territory and it was funny watching you on the boulders of death. Not too sure if I care for the lens comparisons though.

[@Mark-qn9xl]

Good Choice Thomas. I have the Nikon 14-24/2.8 for my DSLR, D800e. I then had to buy a Fotodiox Filter kit specifically for it at great expense. I rarely use it as I am not really a wide angle photographer in most cases. A poor decision at the time based on the images of a fellow photographer that they took over a weekend. Lesson learned. You covered most of what I was going to say. Is corner sharpness really that important as its unlikely, especially landscape photography, that a critical element will be at the corner extremities. Size is as important as weight as you have to fit it into your bag. Lastly, will a wireless remote solve your shadow problems. Seems an easy fix.

[@typhoon-7]

I have the 14-24 2.8 and its an outstanding lens but i do agree on the filter issue. I also have to carry a whole set of 112mm ND and CPL filters around which by definition are huge and take uo bag space.

[@MatthewSaville]

The usefulness of being able to slap an 82mm threaded polarizer or ND filter cannot be understated. I absolutely love the 14-30mm; it was a first of its kind, and it is still the most compact and affordable way that you can get to 14mm with an UWA zoom on the market. Canon's 14-35mm f/4 L IS is indeed a winner too, in multiple ways, but for the price tag and portability, the Nikon wins my heart as a lightweight adventure travel lens. Throw it on an original Z7, or even a Z5 if you're on a serious budget, and you'll have one of the absolute best collective ratios of performance, versatility, portability, and value. Having said that, the 14-24mm 2.8 is also quite a winner for those who do nightscape work and need f/2.8 a lot. (Pixel-peeping the extreme corners of either lens should never be a deal breaker for any landscape photographer, not at f/8!)

[@tonymckeage1028]

Great Video Thomas, I'm with you 100% on the 2.8 zoom, plus the 14-30 covers a lot of your Landscape subjects, I believe that focal length, overlap to avoid frequent lens changes is far more important than and extra stop of light. we use tripods and much wider ASA range to cover that! and weight is important! thanks for sharing

[@jasonr428]

I opted for the Nikon Z 14-24mm f/2.8 lens because of my interest in astrophotography. Moreover, as someone who frequently produces large landscape prints, the lens's performance in corner sharpness is crucial as we all know. With the testing I did before I bought either lens, I observed a tangible disparity between the 14-24 and its alternative, particularly evident in corner clarity. While the 14-24mm f/2.8 may entail a higher investment, for me the added expense was worth it. Admittedly, I scrutinized even the subtlest variances, and have to acknowledge the 14-30mm f/4 is an excellent choice for those not heavily invested in astrophotography. Nonetheless, I recognize the exceptional quality of both lenses; had I opted for the 14-30mm, I'm confident I would have been satisfied. The Nikon Z series has truly excelled with its holy trinity lenses, they all perform exceptionally.

[@pradippatel9345]

I use the Kase filter system on the 14 to 24 and use the step down rings on the other lenses. So I only have one set of filters that I can use on all of my Z lenses.

[@jakefowler8522]

Just to note, you can use case magnetic filters I’m in the special lens hood of the 14-24. They are 112mm I think, nd can live in the lens hood for when you want to use them. You can then use step up rings on all other lenses so that one set of filters will be useful for all your lenses. They are an expensive set of filters though.

[@robynkis2075]

My personal favorite is the 17-28 f2.8

[@AcuraTechMan]

The 14-30mm is outstanding, and accepts 82mm filters. Small, powerful package.

[@AdamMuise]

I just had to make the same purchase decision so thank you.

[@marvinhoferphotography1983]

Excellent review. Convinced me to get the 14-30 mm f4. I was impressed with how you put on the polarizing filter. Please confirm if it is a magnetic clip and who the manufacture is. Thanks.

[@StevePorter_au]

My 14-30 arrived today. It was on special at about 40% off, plus Nikon in Australia are doing a cash back at the moment, so win-win. My initial impressions are, it's a really nice lens.

[@mitchallen55]

You can buy the 14-30mm f4 and the 20mm 1.8 for less than the 14-24mm 2.8

[@danielson_9211]

I'm using the R5 and was deciding between the 14-35 f/4 and the 15-35 2.8 and I went with the 2.8 because it was on sale during Christmas, f4 1500 2.8 1900 instead of 2400 reg price. And the 2.8 comes in handy at Churches, museums, events and the few times I do Astro.

[@AadidevSooknananNXS]

BRING MORE LENS VIDEOS!! Although please don't do ONLY gear videos, we also love your hiking and technique videos

[@robertdavis1255]

Thanks Thomas for sharing your thoughts and feelings on both lenses.....I am only a hobbyist & only have a D500 camera...I use a Tokina 12-24mm F4 lens & love the results although most of my pics with this combination are close ups of graffiti etc... Cheers from Australia 🦘🦘😊