Link to the announcement
Key points:
-
Does collapse like the 24-70 f4 or 16-50 DX
-
Weather sealed (?!)
-
Minimized focus breathing
I haven’t seen an MTF chart yet, though I doubt it’ll really impact my purchasing decision having seen the performance of the other zooms in the system.
Background: I’ve been waiting for this one for a while at the same time as the 24-200. I currently own the 24-70 f4, 24-70 f2.8, and 16-50 on the Z7. The f4 is likely the one to go from this set and the 16-50 plays the casual role, and the f2.8 for more serious shooting. Make no mistake, the 16-50 is bewitchingly sharp. I’ve historically been against the notion of dropping that much resolution, but the tradeoff has been really worth the convenience; it impressed me much more than when I got the f2.8.
With this 24-50, we have an FX-native replacement for the 16-50, and it underlines the convenience and practicality side of the Z-mount philosophy. I personally don’t shoot wide often, so I’m a bit sad to lose the 50-75mm eq range of the DX lens, but I could do the same with the 24-50 in DX mode. F6.3 is slow indeed, but I got on with it better than expected with the 16-50; pack a 50 1.8 in tandem if you must.
I’m pretty surprised this thing is weather-sealed, it continues to show the efforts made towards kit for rigorous use as we saw with t he 24-70 f4 that I’ve shot with in various levels of rain.
This is a polarizing aspect, but I’m in the camp that likes the collapsing designs if it affords a noticeable difference in packed size. With the 16-50 mounted, the profile of the Z7 is no more than stowing away just the body in a bag and it can go in sideways rather than lens faced down and taking up the width of the camera bag. Heck, it’s even jacket pocketable.
One thing that doesn’t get covered often is the perceived shape of a lens when it comes to standing out. Something like the 24-70 2.8 with petal hood has an aggressive shape and size that makes it stand out and scream “photographer”. This one has an outward tapering end towards the end for the hood bayonet and looks a bit cheaper. Philosophies and elitism for what “real” street photography is, I think this is a good candidate for some discreet shooting, assuming you can handle the f6.3 on the long end.
Historically, nobody in their right mind would buy a kit lens at full price when it can be had for 60-70% bundled with a body and abundant on the secondhand market. I feel that this and the 16-50 are priced reasonably well that if you’re already a Z6/7 owner and were interested, you could swallow the full cost of this without feeling so bad. That said, I’m curious how much I could pick up a used of these for in a year from now.
Talking exclusively about Z-native lenses, these are the ownership pairings that make the most sense to me, with whatever primes you like sprinkled in between:
-
24-50 + 24-70 2.8: One for going light, one for performance
-
24-50.+ 24-200: One for easy packing, one for zoom range convenience
-
14-30 + 24-70 (either version): I don’t really see the wide zoom paired that well with the 24-50 for the overall focal lengths covered for the number of lenses involved
