I Completely Changed the Lenses I Use

I was so surprised when I looked back at the lenses I used in 2022.
Squarespace: www.squarespac...
Check out my new gallery pages - www.nigeldanso...
KZbin viewers get $100 off Mastering the Art of Landscape Photography - www.nigeldanso...
New book Seascapes - geni.us/seascapes
A big thanks to Rick for the help with editing this video - / rickbebbington
Sign up for my newsletter - geni.us/nigeln...
Where I get my AWESOME MUSIC - geni.us/amazin...
Kase Filters (my fav filters) - geni.us/Kase | And use code NIGEL for 5% off
Instagram (follow my daily stories) - / nigel.danson
NIKON GEAR (Main STILLS camera)
Current landscape camera - Nikon Z7 - geni.us/nikonz7
Awesome telephoto lens - Nikon 70-200m f/2.8 - geni.us/nikon70200
Great ultra-wide angle lens - Nikon 14-30mm f/4 - geni.us/1430mm
Hiking mid lens - Nikon 24-70mm Z f4 - geni.us/nikon2470
Sharpest mid lens - Nikon 24-70mm Z f2.8 geni.us/2470mm28
Very long lens - Nikon 500mm F5.6 - geni.us/nikon5...
FILM GEAR
AWESOME DRONE - geni.us/dji_ma...
Nikon Z6 - geni.us/z6nikon
Nikon 20mm Z F1.8 - geni.us/nikon2...
Nikon 24mm Z F1.8 - geni.us/nikon24mm
Nikon 50mm Z F1.8 - geni.us/nikon5...
Nikon 85mm Z F1.8 - geni.us/nikon8...
OTHER PHOTO GEAR
Clever camera strap (peak design) - geni.us/PDstrap
Microfibre Cloths - geni.us/microf...
Arc'teryx Beta AR Jacket - geni.us/Rainja...
Rab Downpour Pants - geni.us/rainpants
Awesome sensor brush - geni.us/brush4...
GorillaPod - geni.us/Kb9mV
The great printer I use Canon P1000 - geni.us/cIIc
Great bag for hiking - Tenba 24L - geni.us/orPwh
Great bag for travel (carry on) - Tenba 32L - geni.us/tenba32l
Super light Benro Travel Tripod UK - geni.us/Benrot...
A must have for tripod (L bracket) - geni.us/myLbra...
Lightweight tripod - Benro Mach3 Carbon Fiber Tripod - geni.us/benrom...
Paper I use for all my prints - Fotospeed - geni.us/fotospeed Use DANSON10 to get 10% off your paper.

[@NigelDanson]

What is your most used lens from 2022?

[@marcoloberto]

My only one (35 mm)

[@nickscangas1058]

24-120!

[@TheWillRogers]

It's pretty close between the Z 50-250mm DX and the Z 50mm 1.8 S prime.

[@Reason-fg4ik]

Yep, I carry a 20mm f2.8, 24-120mm f4, and either my 70-200mm f2.8 or my 200-500mm f5.6. However, I will carry the 200-500mm more often than the 70-200mm. I don't carry my 24-70mm f2.8 because it's too heavy compared to the 24-120mm and I don't find I need the extra 1/2 stop of light. If I need an ultra wide pano I'll just take the extra images and stitch in post. Oh, the reason I'm shooting Nikon G series lenses is they work on both my F5 and D810 camera bodies. I'm old so I won't likely upgrade to the mirror-less type bodies. BTW, very nice video, I appreciate your work! Thank you!

[@MichaelCantwell]

For seascapes, I take the Nikon 20mm and the 24-120. For walk around in the landscapes, I take the 24-120 and now the Tamron 70-300. I bought the Tamron instead of the Nikon 100-400 because of the cost factor. In 2022, I used the 24-120 for landscapes far and away the most. I'm with you, I stopped using the 24-200, though I still use that lens on occasion when traveling light. I'm taking a trip to Alaska later this year and I think the only 3 lenses in the bag will be the 20mm, the 24-120, and the Tamron 70-300. I'm considering taking the 50mm only because I'm taking my infrared camera too and the 50mm lens is the best I've used so far with the infrared camera. My main camera is the Nikon Z7II.

[@chrisroot7182]

When you consider quality vs. weight, I think my current setup of the Z 14-30 F4, 24-120 F4 and 100-400 F4.5-6.3 is optimal for landscape shooting. Nikon is producing some amazing lenses these days.

[@berndtsturznickel8548]

Have the same set up and I‘m more than happy with it.

[@williampetersen2899]

My photography consists of about 45 percent landscape (including intimate landscapes and abstracts), 50 percent nature macros, and 5 percent wildlife. My most-used lens is the Nikon 100-400 S followed closely by the 24-120 S (a lens I bought immediately after watching your first comprehensive video on this lens). In fact, they're the only lenses I carry. Both lenses focus so closely, I traded in my macro lens. You make wonderful videos Nigel...that's why we stick with you!

[@abhilashd220]

I always wondered why a big number of landscape photographers don't use 100-400 mm. It is such a versatile focal range. One of the reasons it is so difficult to go medium format. Btw the effort you put into making the pie chart towards the end of the video is amazing!

[@NigelDanson]

Thanks - glad you liked it

[@frankbelt633]

I am a beginner / hobbyist photographer. The difference, value, for me, of your videos is to listen to your thought process about what ever it is your talking about. You are very comfortable talking with the video camera running / recording. Very few cuts in the video. It’s like having a friend explain something to me. Extremely helpful. Thanks.

[@dustytotheMax]

I continue to learn more and more from watching your video each time Nigel. Over the past 12-18 months, I have returned to photography after taking 20 years off and find your videos a wealth of knowledge. Landscape photography is my passion and has improved since watching and following your channel. I find a great balance between fieldwork, editing, thought process, and equipment across your videos. Keep up the great work as I truly appreciate your casual but professional approach.

[@iwasapirateonce1639]

For hiking, wild camping & long distance trips I am in love with the 24-200. With it's built in VR it is a great lens imo for those who don't use tripods often or who are out in conditions where lens changes are a massive pain (just some corner softness and CA would be my complaints). But I have been doing a bit more woodland photography and that 24-120 is a very tempting lens. Those 400mm shots are amazing however and a bit of an eye opener for sure.

[@kaiworleyphotography]

The 24-120 is perfect for hiking etc, the constant f4 and noticeable increase in IQ and sharpness makes it a worthwhile upgrade from the 20-200!

[@iwasapirateonce1639]

@@kaiworleyphotography I think it depends on the type of photography. I only shoot about >10% of my shots at F4-6.3. About 85% are F8-F11. I also handhold about 80% of the time and the 24-120 does not have in built VR which means it loses ~1+ stops of stabilization at the ~100mm range. For the ~5% of shots it would be a good upgrade for sure, but for me it does not make sense as a long distance hiking lens. For tripod work I would love a 24-120 and may get one in the future, especially for woodland photography I can see incredible value from it. Currently I just find the 24-200 too versatile to replace, often I will take 3 shot Panos at say 35-50mm where the lens is very sharp and combine them for pretty great levels of detail, and that even covers the wide end where the lens can be soft in the corners.

[@stevemozzie6497]

Never had the brass to buy expensive lenses OR cameras. My old Nikon 18-70mm is a cracking piece of kit. Bought for £70, it will do for me. Had a Nikon D7000 with a cheap 35mm lens on. Took it on a trip in 2014 to India and Nepal. Extremely pleased with the quality of the images I managed to capture.

[@dfinlay587]

I picked up the 24-120, and it is always on my camera. Its so versatile and the quality is amazing. When I shot APS-C, my go to was the 16-80, which is nearly the same field of view, also a great lens. When I think of a Photo I like, I think of Subject, Composition, Exposure, Color, Focus, and then Quality/sharpness. I find, with the 24-120, I can get all of those. Thanks Nigel.

[@Joseph-iu6ip]

My 24-70 2.8 and 85 1.8 are my bread and butter lens for portraits. However, I’ve recently added the 24-200 for my landscape which I do on an enthusiast level and it helped lighten my load leaving the 24-70 & 70-200 out of my pack. I must say that I’ve started using a 40 year old 50 1.2 on my Z7 and the results for portraits is pretty cool. I have a 120-600 that I hardly ever use for wildlife, but now you’ve got me thinking I should try it for landscapes. Going off now to checkout your new website.

[@jakev4016]

I shoot most portraits with the Nikkor Z 50mm 1.8 S but I also picked up a 40 y/o 50mm 1.2 AIS several months ago, it’s a lot of fun!! Hexagonal bokeh as well depending on your aperture which I’m personally a big fan of. The focus peaking on my Z6 is pretty helpful in being able to nail portraits wide open.

[@nickscangas1058]

Thank you for validating my choices! I’ve also moved over to using the combo of 24-120 + 100-400. I was previously using the 24-200 and noticed that a cropped shot from the 24-120 appeared sharper than an uncropped shot from the 24-200. So if I ever need that extra length and don’t have my 100-400, I just crop after I get back to lightroom. I also recommend a 1.4x teleconverter for the 100-400. Fits easily into your bag in case a pretty bird decides to land nearby 😂

[@frankpusch4616]

Interesting opinion. I have no experiene but expected it. Crop 2x to 240mm you mean? Thx

[@AndreaJump]

This is exactly the reason I love my 70-300mm in a Fuji aps-c body (105-450 equivalent). Not for wildlife but for details on the landscape. Great job Nigel, hope you'll have a nice 2023. Peace

[@arvidjohansson3120]

best part, it is only 580 grams!

[@LandscapesDronescapes]

Like Mads I use a 28-200 Tamron and even though I have GM and G glass I use that the most. It’s so versatile

[@christianbreinbjergfotokunst]

Just waiting to get my hands on the 24-120 to combine with my 14-30 and 70-200. Thanks for going through your thoughts on the lenses!

[@sgt.kamarov7536]

First time I got a DSLR on my hands at school like 2 years ago. D610 + the F-mount 24-120mm f/4. I fell in love with it😍. No wonder my first lens for my Z7 II was the Z-mount version. In my opinion the best lens for the system. Still would have loved to see the VR in that lens like it had in the F-mount version.

[@micbarka]

Hi Nigel, it is March 2024 and I have been a Nikon guy since birth... of my 'serious amateur' photography. I have a cabinet of Nikon F lenses including fixed prime lens, but only one 'holy trinity' lens and have been shooting with a D750 on a limited budget. But it is now mirrorless time, and with my existing NIKKOR glass Nikon is the only option, as well as trusting Nikon quality and knowing Nikon menus, etc, already too. Lucky for me, 2024 seems to get the best year to get into Nikon mirrorless - the Z8 is out and awesome, and the Z6 III also looks to being awesome for the money. I have been seriously researching mirrorless cameras and lenses for the last 24 hours, and your video has actually confirmed the conclusion that I had also come too in theory (after researching prices and using KZbin video reviews). The 'holy trinity' is still the 'holy trinity' and arguably Nikon's is still the best, but there is now a cheaper 'holy quattro lite' option for those on a budget - Nikon marketing's aim? My Nikon Z kit is planned to be: Nikon Z8 (because it's full-frame, speed, versatility and all-round awesomeness); MB-N12 grip (I can't live without a vertical grip and better battery life); FTZ II adaptor (for my F lenses, which gives me instant access to thousands of $ of high-quality lenses I already have at minor photo quality cost); NIKKOR Z 14-24 (lens 1 of 'holy trinity' - expensive and I need to research a cheaper 'holy quattro lite' option); NIKKOR Z 24-120mm (lens 2 of the 'holy quattro lite'; Nikkor 100-400mm (lens 3 of the 'holy quattro lite'); and NIKKOR Z 180-600mm (lens 4 of the 'holy quattro lite'). My purchase order is determined by my budget and finance, the lenses I already have in my cabinet, and the use I put them too: Z8 body, grip and adaptor first, with 24-120 lens (I have the NIKKOR F 70-200mm 2.8 ED VR - still very sharp); NIKKOR 14-24 f 2.8 (or a cheaper 'holy quattro lite' option); NIKKOR Z 180-600 (which surprised me when I just realised that as I was writing...); and then NIKKOR Z 100-400mm. After that... not sure anything else is needed. I have a NIKKOR 105mm 2.8 D Micro lens already for micro and portrait photos and I'm not sure if I could justify replacing it despite it's age. Getting fixed length lens to replace what I already have - also mostly old 'D' and 'G' lenses - will depend on budget, photo quality using the adaptor, and need. Anyway, thought I would share that you are not alone in your assessment of the paradigm shift in necessary glass. The other important issue is the cropping in camera to take photos in DX format - the crop takes the soft edges off the 'holy quattro lite' glass, makingt them the modern 'holy quattro'? Thanks again.

[@andyuk1233]

Why have a Z8 and a vertical grip? Would a Z9 not be a better bet? I'm thinking about moving over to Nikon Z from Canon DSLR and deciding between Z8 and 9.

[@JohnRoth-f9e]

I really enjoy your program. It is informative on so many levels with respect to photography. You have help me understand my own wants and needs in photography. Thank you and I'll see you on the next one.

[@wassie11]

I love the longer focal length as it means you don't need to get as close to the subject. Hiking at my age is a chore.

[@judilecompte9377]

Nigel, you’re killing me! I want the 100-400 so bad, but just don’t want to spend the $$$ right now. Glad to hear it’s everything I think it is.

[@NigelDanson]

Sorry!

[@popsybear6773]

Is corner softness really that important, especially when most photos are cropped a little or vignettes are added in for effect ?

[@paulcunninghamw00dlandph0t0]

I’m still using Nikons F mount holy trinity, with two prime lenses 105mm prime and 300mm. I don’t really see the need to spend a huge amount of money on the mirrorless system as yet. I have D850 Nikon giving me 45 megapixel, I’m happy to stay with F system for a few more years.

[@NigelDanson]

Completely agree. The d850 is awesome. I like the weight and size of the mirror less and for my back that is good news

[@paulcunninghamw00dlandph0t0]

@@NigelDanson I will be moving over to the mirrorless system although wait for a couple years when they are models in full frame to choose from with affordable prices, hopefully Z9 will be more affordable. Thanks for another great vlog on a Sunday morning Nigel. Happy 2023 🤩

[@martharetallick204]

Keep those F lenses. I am using the Holy Trinity with my Z9 with FTZ adapter. Works for me. I am also keeping my D850. It's the new home of my 105, which I use for nature closeup work.

[@MrSindriSvan]

It blew my mind as well when I got the 100-400mm lens. I'd been shooting lot's of landscapes but my sales on the Long Distance shots have been better than the wide angle ones. The compression also helps out a lot! Ironic seeing as I got the lens for birding in the first place!

[@antonoat]

The new 100-400 Z lens is superb! 500k subs is not that far away! 👏👍😀 To my mind, 24-120, 70-200f2.8 & 100-400 is the perfect 3 lens kit, the Z 70-200f2.8 wide open is amazing for subject isolation in so many shooting scenarios! 😀

[@ArnaudLerondeau]

Totally agree with you here ! I couldn't ever get rid of my 70-200 2.8. Ever. But i totally understand new Nigel's standpoint !

[@billkipper3264]

I love my 70-300mm on my Fuji X-T3. I even use it with a 1.4x teleconverter quite a lot. It stays on my camera a vast majority of the time compared to the 16-80mm.

[@adamcogan8171]

I switched to the Canon R and subsequently to the R5… updated all of my lenses.. I did not replace my 24-70 f2.8 as I have the superb 24-105 f4 which basically lives on my camera. I did get the 15-35 and 70-200 f2.8’s but I use them much less than their EF counterparts for exactly the reasons you outline. I did the same Lightroom analysis you performed :-)

[@RussWeymouthPhotography]

Same here, Canon R5 and RF 24-105mm is a great combo, together with the RF 100-500mm are my two lenses of choice.

[@jimbruton9482]

When I moved to mirrorless with the R5, I set a goal to eventually replace my preferred DLSR EF lenses to RF. I sold all my Ef lens and my "Trinity" is the RF 15-35 F2.8L, the RF 24-105 F4L (a really underrated lens), and the RF 100-500 F4.5-7.1L

[@NikonDave]

I use 2 distinct bags. The one bag is "objective based" meaning I know what I intend to shoot. It can vary by subject...usually includes some primes. Then I have a "travel" bag that includes the 14-30mm f/4, 24-120mm f/4 and the 100-400mm if there is a chance for wildlife. All the Z lenses are amazing.

[@lindakarlin2980]

I agree with you totally. Those two lenses are used constantly. I also still love the 14-30mm. I love the wide angle shots with it and the ease of using filters. My other favorite lens is the 500 PF with the ftz adaptor, for wildlife . Thanks for another super video.

[@Shutternutteruk]

Great video Nigel… that 24-120mm has such a useful focal length range. It’s still on my list as is the 100-400mm. Weight is often the enemy and taking a bag with just two lenses is such an advantage if you intend to be going any distance.

[@rodbotic]

I don't shoot landscape much, but my 200-500mm almost never leaves my Z5. Several times this year I have tried to force myself to shoot wider, but I usually end up putting the big lens back on to get a composition I see.

[@JasonLorette]

Z 24-120 is my most used lens, quality, range, versatility…no question. It’s hardly off my camera. 😎📸

[@andybaldwinphoto]

My favorite lens is the 24-120 S. I was hesitant to get it as I had the F-mount version with my D810 and it just wasn't very sharp. I love the 24-120 S, though and recently took my favorite image ever on it - at 85mm. I also have the 24-200 for hiking and overlanding, plus the 14-24, and 100-400.

[@jimcastanzo8736]

Interesting video, Nigel. This got me thinking so I ran a similar test to see what I've been using. 14-30 f4.5 (15%), 24-70 f2.8 (40%), 70-200 f2.8 (30%), and MC 105 f2.8 (15%). Interesting results. The MC 105 is a newer lens and I've been using it more lately for fun closeup and macro subjects.

[@peterzpictstube]

I like your thought for a Landscape shooter. For guys like me who shoot theatre and sports a 2x TC with the 70-200 2.8 would be a better compromise.

[@RFranks]

I find that the more extreme long focal lengths start to look too flat and they generally work better for more abstract shots like textures or patterns than straight up landscapes. I've been having fun with primes recently as they really force you to try different things.

[@freetibet1000]

I agree! When I feel I need to improve my vision I put on a prime rather than a zoom. That forces me to really understand the scene in front of me and what I want to do with it. If I’m on a longer hike and don’t know what I will encounter then a compact zoom may come very handy though.

[@boristahmasian9604]

I agree too. I do not have native primes for my Sony. So, my solution was to bring only one zoom in each outing and force myself to find compositions or subjects that fit the range.

[@uhoh7541]

I'm a hobbyist that has played with the Z series for a little over six months. It was nice to hear someone repeat (especially at your level) some of the things i noticed about these lenses. Also own the 14-30 f4 and was contemplating buying the 14-24 f2.8 for extra sharpness- but ultimately didn't. Hearing you say you split usage has me feeling better about that decision. Same with not liking the sharpness from the 24-200, but keeping it around if i ever needed something light and versatile.

[@MadsPeterIversen]

Lovely to finally see all your favorite photos in good quality! :D

[@NigelDanson]

It is about time isn’t it! 🙈

[@Mitigator123]

Which is why I am starting my Canon R kit with the 24-105 F4 - the ideal "just 1 lens" solution for a day outdoors. Light pack, zero lens switching, love that. Longer tele is on the list of future considerations, along with a better set of eyes to be able to see those distant details in the first place.

[@stevenrobinsonpictures]

Because I am shooting a Z 8 , I just couldn't bring myself but to offer it the best glass. I'm using the 14-24/2.8S with the 24-70/2.8S. It's heaven. That 24-70 is the best I have every used, and the 14 can still take Lee filters. I am not really much of a tele landsacpe shooter so I don't know if I'll bother with a 70-200 this time, it's too heavy to bother with. I'll at a redcat51 for my astro deep sky though, that's about 250mm of pure quality if I need it! Ps you have too many lenses. I used to be like this!

[@HR-wd6cw]

Just got the 24-120 myself and (sadly perhaps) I find myself using the 24-70 2.8 a bit less since the 24-120 is very good (especially when shooting around f/8 and f/11). It's gotten to a point where I don't really even shoot with the 24-200 anymore either (And will likely sell it although I'm a bit hesitant because for travel it's a great walkaround lens), but I do agree that out at the longer end, it's not all that sharp. But it's is better than not having 200mm which is part of the reason I'm maybe thinking of just keeping it. For the money the 14-30 is a great value. I just try not to shoot all the way at 14mm on that lens, and prefer to stick to 16mm which for most of what I do, is fine, and helps a little with the sharpness in the corners (but the 14-30 and 24-200 do have high copy to coy variation so it's possible someone might get one that needs to be sent back and tweaked by Nikon). I too am considering my current kit as well. Have the 70-200 and love it, along with the 24-70 obviously (don't feel the need to buy the 14-24 yet due to cost) but am considering adding the 100-400 for some wildlife and landscape. Then I think I could have a lighter landscape kit, so the 14-30, 24-120 and the 100-400 and that would cover pretty much all FLs for both landscape and widlife in three lenses. That's the goal at least. Maybe if i do sell the 24-200 I can put that towards a 100-400. Oddly, I realized that I wasn't shooting much with the 70-200 as i had though, as it's probably the least used out of the lenses I have (I actually shot more with the 24-200 than I did with my 70-200). But the thought of seling the 70-200 has me also hesitating too. On one hand, I don't use it much and got a really good deal last year when it was on sale (so I could probably sell it and take a minimal loss, like $100-$200) but part of me says I'll regret selling it later -- the 24-200 probably not so much).

[@billmacier3703]

I shoot a good deal of macro and closeup. So aside from my 105 macro I have the 24-120 and the 100-400 both because they are great for landscape but also because of their amazing closeup capability.

[@MAWAJR]

I have been eyeing the 24-120 for quite a while now. However for portraits I do not feel I can control the depth of field as much as I need/want to. Interesting ideas and thoughts. Thanks a bunch. have a great Sunday. I just got the 100-400 waiting for the first fieldwork in February.

[@MichaelCantwell]

I agree for portraits, the 85mm F1.8 is the go to lens for me. I've used the 24-120 at F4 for portraits when shooting kids in more of an action setting because of the zoom capabilities, but for straight portraits, the 85mm beats the 24-120. However, as an overall lens, I would take the 24-120 over maybe any other S lens.

[@carlmcneill1139]

Hudson Henry tested the old 14-24mm f/2.8 f mount with the new z mount and the 14-30mm. The 14-30mm sits right in the middle in terms of sharpness. I would have liked having the wider aperture but I went with the 14-30mm because of the cost and the thread size. I didn't want special filters just for that lens at some point that might change. I did have a situation last spring when I needed the f/2.8 for a milky way shot but I got decent results with the 14-30mm even though it's an f/4 lens. I have a 20mm f/1.8 that I use but I couldn't for everything in the frame at 20mm. I was on the side of a shopping hill near a bluff. I couldn't back up to make the 20mm work. I have never tried shooting a pano of the milky way. I may try the next time I'm in a situation like that again and just use the 20mm.

[@paulng3913]

Thank you for sharing

[@jonstout7635]

Interesting and helpful. It does make me want to go back and watch what you said when you first used each lens.

[@MartinFransson]

My 100-400 (Canon) has also quickly become one of my favourite lenses. It's so versatile.

[@wallystellmacher6794]

Hi Nigel. The lens you use depends on the subject you photograph. If you hike on top of a mountain/hill, the 100-400 is a must, because there is so much to see and you are urged to photograph details. On the the other hand, if you are in the middle of a woodland, you don‘t need a 100-400, because you a closely surrounded by trees and a 70-200 or 24-120 would be the better choice. Cheers

[@nickolaibrowne]

I rarely comment on KZbin videos but this is among the most thorough and insightful lens reviews I’ve ever seen. Thanks so much for taking the time to make this!

[@joerg_koeln]

Very interesting video. I like your pictures a lot, but not because of sharpness - it‘s all about the overall composition 😉

[@nickyfoulkes8476]

The 24-120mm F4 lives on my camera. I sold my 14-30mm F4 because I found I ended up cropping anything wider than 24mm. I may well get a 20mm prime if I need a wider focal length. I am still hoping we get a 70-200mm F4 Z lens this year.

[@ChrisClayton]

Nice to have the choice, for a lot of us the cost of these lenses make the decision for us

[@NigelDanson]

Totally Chris. I realise I am very lucky

[@michael-4k4000]

14-30 for life!

[@martinjn2920]

Nigel, if you have an issue with keeping your unused lenses then please feel free to send them to me, I have a debilitating issue called GAS which needs constant injection of gear, I am not a snob so I am more than happy to take your used and unwanted gear. I look forward to receiving your f2.8 lenses in due course. Many thanks and kind regards. 😊

[@garymc8956]

Same trinity plus the 1.4 TC and very happy.

[@borromine]

Very very interesting! One of my kits is GF 20-35, GF35-70 and canon 100-400 all with either GF 50S or 100S. It’s a 35 equivalent of 16mm to 320mm. But the large sensor allows LOTS of cropping. Your analysis of not only lens but also focal length is very helpful. !!

[@Bonjurro]

I picked up the 24-120 and Nikon 100-400 both last year. Great lenses.

[@ihknilsen]

As a serious hobbyist I think I will be looking at the 24-120 for sure. I travel for a living as an entertainment tour driver here in the USA and I get many opportunities to see many wonderful locations. Sometimes I want the freedom and flexibility of one lens to just grab, go, and shoot. I also like the idea of the 100-400 which I will be renting this week for 10 days to see if it is something I would add to my bag. Thanks for your videos and I really appreciate your insight.

[@stephenthompson1998]

Recently purchased Canon R10 and have 2 lenses 18-150 an£ 100-400 with the camera crop factor of 1.6 changes the lenses reach Don’t want excessive weight or keep swapping lens so am happy boy

[@gerryphilpott9766]

I loved my 24-200mm for the range it gave me and almost perfect IQ. Still have it but I got the 24-120mm when it came out and that is my new 'Most Carried' lens and very happy. Kept my 70-200 2.8 which gives me low light and fast options and the 2x TC when I need the 200+mm. People say that the TC is a bit soft but I found almost zero degradation on the 70-200, and I get the portrait options with the 2.8 lens that I wouldn't really get with the 100-400mm. If I find that I need more than 400 some day i'd consider the 100-400 as I've heard such great things about it.

[@MrJason8957]

My most shot lens was the 14-24mm. It is a pain to put filters on but I chose it over the 14-30mm because sometimes I like to shoot the night sky as well and f/2.8 makes a difference there.

[@paulseymour7485]

Excellent info. Thanks so much.

[@leonardbertaux6897]

I recently went to South Africa and rented the 100-400. It worked really well except for birds, a 600 would have made a big improvement. As an amateur who doesn’t shoot wildlife renting makes more sense for me, but it’s a really capable lens.

[@killoylean]

Hi Nigel, thank you for your review! I bought this lens for my Z6 for my trip to Norway this February to avoid lens changes in the sometimes rough weather up there. As a second lens I just brought along the 14-24mm f2.8 for the night photos (aurora), and thought I would not use the 24-200 a lot after that trip. But meanwhile it's on the body most oft the time except when I do night photography or portrait. It is so versatile with an amazing quality for the price, and as my wife with her Z50 wants to use ist more and more we are thinking of buying a second one. Thank you again, best regards and good light!

[@johnd5244]

I am still trying to get a 14-30mm f/4S along with the 24-120 f/4S to add to my kit. I could get the other 2 f/2.8 S primes but going with the f/4’s gives me the room to buy 2 others for what it would be just for the primes. So I have the 70-200f2.8S and a 2x teleconverter. but I have a chance to pick up a 200-500 mm f/5.6 ED VR which I have a ftz adapter so that would give me long reach for here.

[@PhilosophyProf14]

Great stuff, Nigel. I realized I needed a new lens when I noticed that almost all of my shots were at one end or the other of my 24-70mm. Now I'm shooting a lot dolphins and whales from a sailboat using a 70-200, sometimes with a 2x converter, but now I really want more reach (sailboats are slow, dolphins are fast, so they aren't often right next to the boat) over sharpness. A "Bigma" might be my next acquisition.

[@JB-oj5yq]

Hi Nigel, I enjoy your work. I'm no pro, but I went through this exercise a few weeks ago. When I did, I found that a lot of my images were shot in the 30mm-105mm range with my 24-105G lens, which lived on my camera. I love my 16-35GM but was often too lazy to change lenses even when I felt the shot would benefit from a wider lens. That’s when I decided to sell the 24-105 and 24-70 GM and replace both with the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8. Now I will be forced to changes lenses for the wide end, pick up 45mm on the long end and get better image quality compared to the 24-105. Now to choose between the Sony 200-600 and the Tamron 150-500.

[@artiedoc]

OK based on your excellent advice I have packed off my 70--200 f/2.8 to mPB to sell and have ordered the Z 24-120mm f4s ... like you I have been using the 100-400mm f4.5/5.6 much more the the 70-200 ...While I hate to see it go makes no sense keeping ... I am however still gonna keep the 2.8 24-70 too good a lens to let go... 🤞hopefully we will be good with this for Antarctica next year ...we shall see what Nikon comes up with ... Thanks for the excellent advice Nigel !!

[@petemellows]

Whatever works for you is the best.

[@PanzerIV88]

One of the best change I've done as well when selling everything I had with (Canon RF) to go with a (Sony A7IV) was to get ride of my overpriced (70-200 F2.8) and get instead a 3.2x cheaper (Sigma 100-400 F5-6.3) which is far more versatile! Anyway if I want to use a versatile F2.8 I'll use the 24-70mm, then if I want straight portrait I have my 85mm F1.4 prime. Best of each categories for me.

[@alexdelvalle5597]

The Z 24-120 f4 is money!

[@hairuwang2812]

24-105 F4. Been climbing to so many peaks with it. Never let me down ever.

[@skyrunr]

I have gone down the same path as you, but as a hobbyist. I'd be tempted to swap the 14-24 with the 20-S though. If the f2.8 is your argument for it, the f1.8 is that much better. I also feel like 20-xxx for a super zoom and having the storage/compact feature should go together. 24mm isn't that great on the DX bodies. Sony made a 20-70, but it doesn't have that 105/120 reach. I also went with the Sigma 100-400 after trying the 100-400S (which I loved.) It wasn't $2,000 better, but the Sigma needs an Expeed7 body, and I can't wait for the next one from Nikon!

[@stanleyleary]

I have changed my trinity of lenses as well. I am mainly using today 14-30, 24-120 & 100-400 as well.

[@TheWillRogers]

Man, I've been watching Nigel's videos for long enough that Stay for a Minute by Windshield triggers nostalgia.

[@matsfotografi]

It took me a while to find this video, but now I'm really happy I did. As I'm moving into the Z-system I've felt that the 24-120 mm and the 100-400 mm would be a good pick for me. To have it broken down to why it is a good pick by an actual user was a really good help. Since switching away from Nikon isn't something I want to do you being an ambassador for the brand doesn't bother me at all😊

[@samtaylor4592]

Just goes to show what a market there is for premium f4 zooms, I wish they wouldn't tie image quality to aperture size and make the best, most versatile f4 zooms possible! People will buy them

[@mattgarber8658]

Can you make a video about how you go about finding new locations?

[@michaelj.1121]

Thanks Nigel for the thoughtful insight. The “tools” need to match the use cases and as a Olympus fan of their 12-100 I couldn’t agree more to your analysis. Lens quality has gone up for zooms in the recent years and we benefit from a much broader and better selection. And sure, primes are great when needed - but that can be planned in advance. Keep it up and have a great 2023 - 500k will be well deserved.

[@cyrilhamel8289]

I like a lot your work and your videos 👍🏻 Keep up with the good work

[@liveinaweorg]

I've been shooting a lot of film but if I look at my digital shooting I have been using three lenses over the past year: Olympus 12-40 F/2.8 Olympus 40-150 F/2.8 Adapted Takumar Super Multi Coated 50mm F/1.4

[@jjjkenny]

Just came back from a cruise around Africa. The 70-200 stayed on the ship and used the 100-400 instead.

[@tomaszbrodzic8381]

Thanks. A very helpful video!

[@russellschundler6559]

For lightweight and versatility, my top 3 top Z-lenses are ... 14-30mm, 24-120mm, and 100-400mm. I also agree with you that being able to use the Kase magnetic filters on each of these lenses is a considerable benefit. Other lenses are great "specialty" lenses that I add when needed to by bag. Also loved your pie chart.

[@joebroyles5680]

I opted for the Nikon 17-28mm, 24-120mm, and 100-400mm for my load out. I also have the TC 1.4 and a 50mm 1.8. I am completely satisfied.

[@carlmarch603]

I’m sure you’re aware of the HB-97 or NiSi hoods for the 14-24 which include 112mm threads. I keep the NiSi on my 14-24 with the Kase threaded adapter (or clear filter) which allows the use of their 112mm magnetic filters. The same hood can be used on the 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses (thank you Nikon for making the bayonet size the same on the Trinity lenses!). The Kase 112mm pouch holds up to 6 filters and of course, you can use step-up adapters to use the 112’s on your other lenses. Thank you, as always, for the great content on your channel…

[@stefanoviolaphoto]

Nigel you can't immagine how useful this video was for me...thanks a lot, really!

[@antoinemaume4387]

Merci ❤

[@mdw1927]

I also changed my kit last year. I shoot mainly landscape. I now carry Sony 20mm 1.8, 24-105 f4 and the sigma 100-400. If I need wider than 20mm I can take a two shot pano. I changed from the 70-200 to the sigma because often 200 was not enough and I very rarely shoot in low light without a tripod.

[@ChrisClayton]

How do you rate the 100-400? Seems like a lot of lens for the money.

[@mdw1927]

@@ChrisClayton It is not quite as good as the Sony 100-400 but very close. For the price I think is great value and most people will not notice the difference. Tamron has just released the 50-400 for the e mount system which could be another option if you are thinking of buying new. However I have seen some really good secondhand deals on the sigma which, in my opinion, makes it a no brainer.

[@michaellewis5921]

canon shooter, and my bag has been set on 3 RF lenses since I got my R%. RF 14-35 L, RF 24-105 L, RF 100-500 L. Full coverage from 14mmm to 500mm, can shoot landscape (my passion) but also Wildlife too, just a great combo and basically the same type of setup as you are describing...

[@kevinhinesphoto]

Probably my most recent acquired lenses, 50 1.2 z and the 400 4.5 z are my most used lenses now.

[@joebwan0240]

I wonder how you would feel about lenses if you compared divided by with each lens. The keeper rate seems more valuable than just numbers of photos taken.

[@bmwohl]

Thanks again for the 2023 calendar. Mine arrived before January 1st. This is a wonderful video that will probably push me to buy the 24-120 S lens. My most used most of the time is the 24-200 but I don't seem to get fast focus even on the Z9. I'm pushing myself to get better focus.

[@stolenthimes4391]

Thanks a lot;) This was so useful to me, because I`m just getting back to photografi and bought a Z7 gen 1 and a pancake 26mm for a start. And I just happen to love trees and fog;)), Getting more lenses soon, so this was perfect.

[@EmilWall]

I think your choice of lenses reflect how and what you shoot. For landscape photography, I think it makes a lot of sense to use lenses with smaller apertures whereas personally I couldn’t live without my f/1.4 primes because I shoot so much in low light.

[@marcandamalia]

Living in Manhattan NY, I always end up grabbing my Sigma Art 135mm 1.8 over my arsenal.

[@MrGgraham76]

very logical outcomes.

[@wesfoto_vegas]

I made very similar recommendations to some friends recently (not Nikon shooters, but the 3 lens ranges are close). You're analysis and choices made me feel confident in my recommendations to them.

[@Realletsplaygrey]

Recently bought the 24-120 for a trip to Japan last week, absolutely loved it. Such a fantastic lens. I only brought that and the 14-30, and i barely touched the ultra wide. The 24-120 is the perfect travel companion!

[@jameslovell71]

A really insightful video Nigel and one that confirms that I have made the right recent lens choice. I shoot with Sony, but have a Sigma 16-28 f2.8, Sony G FE 24-105 f4 ad have recently swapped my little used Sony 70-200 f4, for a Sigma 100-400 f5-6.3.

[@MeAMuse]

LOL. Quite a bit of waffle there... but... totally get it (and its obvious you are excited). Here is the thing... how often does a landscape photographer need F2.8.... Astro? I primarily have a 100-400mm, and a 16-35mm F2.8 (because... astro), and then I choose between a 24-70 and a 24-200 for the mid. Realistically though... all this focus on sharpness in corners.... literally it's only photographers that care.... If you are looking in the corners at sharpness.... chances are that your image is not compelling enough. My 24-200 is not great.... but... I do have a 20"x30" print from that at 200mm (its least sharp focal length) taken with my A7 (Mk1) on my wall in my formal living room... why? because the photo is compelling.... you don't need it to be tac sharp... I have plenty of photos of half dome.... and a lot are much sharper etc. but this one, the mist, the clouds, the mood.... it's better than the rest. Would it have been better at 42MP and with my 100-400 - sure.... but this was back when the 100-400 was not released, and I had just switched to mirrorless and I was trying to be SUPER LIGHT. And in the end... It still works at that size printed.

[@toke7560]

I'm a photographer and totaly don't care about corners. I don't care about rules and shoot with the centre as my focal point. I also never pixel peep. I only do content and have 40x30 inch that i and friends think are great.

[@samuelsherman5513]

I know this video is a year old but I’m planning on picking up a Z6 III with the 24-120 f4, and then the other two lenses I’d want in a three lens kit are the 180-600 f6.3, and some kind of fast prime that’s decently wide (as of right now probably either the 20mm f1.8 or 35mm f1.4). I feel like for what I’m usually shooting this would cover the vast majority of it with the fewest number of lenses

[@DominikMarczuk]

I was considering the 24-120 mm one to be my first modern lens and I think your video confirms it's a solid bet. Thank you so much for this, Nigel.