My time spent with the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 reminds of past eras where first party brands like Nikon and Canada often had three tiers of 50mm lenses: a “plastic fantastic” F1.8 option priced low and built cheap, a mid level F1.4 option, and then a premium F1.2 option. Nikon’s strategy on Z-mount has been a little different, as their initial 50mm release was the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S lens, and that lens was priced (and sized) more like the mid-tier option at roughly $625 USD. That makes the new Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 lens a little harder to categorize, as it is about the same size as the F1.8 lens and priced a bit lower at right under $500 USD. And yet this also feels right, like the proper price and performance for a mid-tier lens. We’ve got the premium Nikkor Z 50mm F1.2 S in the $2000 zone, so it’s really the 50mm F1.8 that is the oddity. I like the Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z a lot (and I haven’t yet tested the 50mm F1.8 S as I’m new to the Nikon party), so the question is the release of this lens going to confuse potential buyers? Find out my thoughts by watching the video review, reading the text review, or by checking out the photos in the gallery below.
Thanks to Camera Canada for the loaner of the Nikkor 50mm F1.4. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Nikon Z8, which I reviewed here.
My biggest takeaway from my time spent with the Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z is “enough”. I feel like Nikon has done a great job of giving us enough of everything – build, autofocus, and optical performance. Yes, there are higher performing 50mm lenses, but this lens feels like enough for most people in most situations, and thus it feels like a really good value to me for a first party F1.4 lens. I had no problem producing images that I liked with this lens.
I also appreciate how they’ve kept the size down. This lens weighs on 422g, which is lightweight enough that you could use it on a Zf body and not feel like it overmatched the camera. It feels positively svelte on my big Z8 body.
Put simply, this is a lens that I really like, and it didn’t hurt that it wasn’t really outclassed in many ways even though I reviewed it at the same time as the new Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM…a lens that costs $1000 more! So is the “enough” lens the one for you? Check out of the reviews if you want more info, or just enjoy the photos below.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
My time spent with the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 reminds of past eras where first party brands like Nikon and Canada often had three tiers of 50mm lenses: a “plastic fantastic” F1.8 option priced low and built cheap, a mid level F1.4 option, and then a premium F1.2 option. Nikon’s strategy on Z-mount has been a little different, as their initial 50mm release was the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S lens, and that lens was priced (and sized) more like the mid-tier option at roughly $625 USD. That makes the new Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 lens a little harder to categorize, as it is about the same size as the F1.8 lens and priced a bit lower at right under $500 USD. And yet this also feels right, like the proper price and performance for a mid-tier lens. We’ve got the premium Nikkor Z 50mm F1.2 S in the $2000 zone, so it’s really the 50mm F1.8 that is the oddity. I like the Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z a lot (and I haven’t yet tested the 50mm F1.8 S as I’m new to the Nikon party), so the question is the release of this lens going to confuse potential buyers? Find out my thoughts by watching the video review below…or just keep reading.
Thanks to Camera Canada for the loaner of the Nikkor 50mm F1.4. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the 45MP Nikon Z8, which I reviewed here.
My biggest takeaway from my time spent with the Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z is “enough”. I feel like Nikon has done a great job of giving us enough of everything – build, autofocus, and optical performance. Yes, there are higher performing 50mm lenses, but this lens feels like enough for most people in most situations, and thus it feels like a really good value to me for a first party F1.4 lens. I had no problem producing images that I liked with this lens.
I also appreciate how they’ve kept the size down. This lens weighs on 422g, which is lightweight enough that you could use it on a Zf body and not feel like it overmatched the camera. It feels positively svelte on my big Z8 body.
Put simply, this is a lens that I really like, and it didn’t hurt that it wasn’t really outclassed in many ways even though I reviewed it at the same time as the new Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM…a lens that costs $1000 more! So is the “enough” lens the one for you? Keep reading to find out.
Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z Build and Handling
As noted, the 50mm F1.4Z is a pretty lightweight lens at 422g or 14.9oz. It accomplishes that by being made of engineered plastics, yes, but also by being relatively compact. The lens is 76.2mm in diameter (3″) x 88.9 mm (3.5″) in length.
For some perspective, that’s about 4mm narrow and 8mm shorter than the Sony 50mm F1.4 GM, though the GM is obviously a more feature rich lens. The Nikkor lens is nearly 100g lighter, however. It’s relatively compact for a modern 50mm F1.4, but if you want to go small and light, you might want to consider the very compact 40mm F2 instead.
The front filter size is a relatively uncommon 62mm.
At least the 50mm F1.4Z has a metal lens mount! It also has decent weather sealing, with about 7 seal points by my count.
I will note that the gasket at the rear mount is so small as to be nearly undetectable. Nikon’s language on the lens listing is a little contradictory. They say, “Designed carefully considering dust and drip-resistant performance” but then add this caveat: Thorough dust and moisture-resistance is not guaranteed in all situations.” In other words, there’s some weather sealing here, but no guarantees if you push your luck. On their listing for the 50mm F1.2 S they are more confident in their language (The NIKKOR Z 50mm f/1.2 S is extensively sealed to keep out dust and moisture, especially around the moving parts of the lens barrel. A little water won’t hurt a Z camera or lens, so go out and make the most of that rainy day) but does have a similar caveat in the fine print. I suspect this is just Nikon covering their rears if someone drops their camera into the ocean or pool!
There is a secondary ring on the lens barrel, which is Nikon’s control ring. There’s a different texture to this ring which makes it easy to differentiate from the wider ribbing on the manual focus ring. This control ring, like Canon’s control ring on their RF lenses, can be assigned from the camera to control aperture, shutter speed, ISO speed, or exposure compensation. Unlike Canon’s control ring, however, which has clicks or detents, the 50mm F1.4Z’s ring is declicked and moves smoothly. I typically use the control ring as a manual aperture ring, and I don’t actually love this particular ring for that. Without clicks it feels imprecise, and I find it very easy to blow right by the aperture value I’m looking for.
There are no switches or buttons on the lens barrel, but rather most of it is dominated by the wide manual focus ring. The feel of the ring is fairly good, with good damping and precision. I like Nikon’s options for controlling the behavior of the manual focus ring, allowing you to choose a linear response and your desired focus throw distance.
The aperture iris is made up of nine rounded blades, allowing for a circular aperture shape when the lens is stopped down.
As you stop the aperture down, the overall shape is “roundish” but you can slightly see the shape of the aperture blades.
There is a fairly deep lens hood included. There are ribs inside and a ridged grip section to make it easier to mount/unmount the lens.
We have got a closer that average minimum focus distance of right over 37cm which results in a very useful 0.17x magnification level.
You can see that the plane of focus isn’t particularly flat, however, so the area of sharpness occupies a thin area even with this two dimensional subject.
Stopping down a bit helps to improve up close performance, and here’s a shot at F2 and at the minimum focus distance.
I would consider that useful, particularly since the average for 50mm lenses tends to be in the 0.15x level. Both the 50mm F1.8 S and the 50mm F1.2 S are at that 0.15x level, so I appreciate the extra bit of magnification here.
There really aren’t a lot of 50mm F1.4 competitors on Z mount thus far, but even if they were, it’s hard to imagine them undercutting this price of $499 USD by much. I appreciate the restraint that Nikon has shown with the pricing here. The 50mm F1.4Z isn’t a fancy lens, but it feels like “enough” and the lens doesn’t feel cheap to me. All told I feel pretty solidly impressed by the lens.
Autofocus and Video
The Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 utilizes a stepping focus motor (STM) that is, for the most part, surprisingly fast. Focus changes happen very quickly whether indoors or outdoors, and most of the time you won’t think about autofocus at all because the job just gets done quickly and efficiently. I was able to track action sequences with good accuracy in a gym even shooting at F1.4. I shot bursts at 30FPS on my Z8 and got nearly perfectly focused long bursts.
I had very good results when shoot portraits, with beautiful focus on the eyes.
I shot backlit shots with very strong directional sun, and I had no problem getting accurate focuses at F1.4.
I used the new Godox AD200 Pro II strobe for this shot, and I continued to have accurate focus results even when shooting at F5.6:
I got accurate results when shooting in low light at F1.4. Focus didn’t seem to really slow down much.
There is a faint whirring sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything. Focus speed in my formal tests was not instant but was nice and fast racking back and forth.
I’ve got no concerns for autofocus for stills.
Video Autofocus
My first test was video focus pulls, and I saw quick, confident pulls from one subject to another in my standard test. The pulls were tuned more towards speed than a slow, cinematic damping, but you could modify that a bit with camera settings. More importantly, I didn’t see any visible steps from the STM motor. There was an occasion little micropulse, but it was rare. I did shoot some low light 8K footage, however, and found an occasional rack in the wrong direction during pulls there, but that was a much more demanding scenario.
Focus breathing felt fairly well controlled. It’s there, but not anything ugly.
My “hand test” where I alternately block the camera’s view of my face with my hand and then remove it was more of a mixed bag. I sometimes had a hard time convincing the camera/lens to focus on my hand (even what that was clearly the domination subject in frame), though other times it would transition fine. That’s fair consistent with what I’ve seen from Nikon relative to the typical performance I see on Sony or Canon. On a positive note, those transitions were smooth due to the relatively low focus breathing.
I had very good results when walking towards the camera, with consistent tracking of my face, and when I ducked out of frame and then back in, the lens was relatively quick in picking me back up. I’ve also used the lens for several review videos for my channel along with about four long format teaching sessions. In every case face tracking has been completely reliable.
I shot one clip where I was tracking dried grasses at F1.4 as they blew in the strong autumn wind. Focus did a great job of staying on the moving subject, as can be seen from the freeze frame above.
All told there is a lot to like here in the autofocus performance. It’s not a high end dual linear focus motor system like what is in my Sony 50mm F1.4 G Master lens, but again, for the money, this feels like more than enough performance to get the job done in just about every situations.
Image Quality Breakdown
The Nikkor Z 50mm F2 is an FX (full frame lens), though it can also be used on DX cameras where it will give a full frame equivalent of 75mm due to the 1.5x crop factor on DX. This is a relatively simple optical design of 10 elements in 7 groups, including one aspherical element. This is clearly not the same optical design as their older DSLR era AF-S 50mm F1.4, which had 8 elements in 7 groups. The MTF chart shows significant improvement all across the frame relative to that older lens.
I really liked the rendering from the Nikkor Z 40mm F2, but I was less impressed with the real world sharpness. Just based on the MTF charts, the 50mm F1.4Z shouldn’t really be sharper, but in real world practice I was perfect satisfied with the sharpness and contrast I got from the lens.
This is the opposite of a paper tiger; it looks better in reality than it does in an MTF chart, and I think the early user reviews reflect that.
This is not a perfectly corrected lens, as we’ll see below, but sometimes a bit of uncorrected aberrations actually allow a lens to have more character.
One of the areas that is not perfectly corrected is LoCA (longitudinal chromatic aberrations), which show up as fringing before or after the plane of focus. You’ll definitely see some of that fringing.
I did see it in real world shots, too, particularly in the places where I have learned to look for it. One example is with fringing around the letters of the lens designation on the Pentax.
You’ll see a bit of a greenish fringe around specular highlights, too.
Lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame are essentially non-existent, so that won’t be a problem.
Unlike more highly correct lenses, you will have some issues with color fringing, though that can have a positive effect that we’ll highlight in a bit.
If we move on to vignette and distortion we find a tiny amount of barrel distortion which required just a +1 to correct for. It is both minimal and linear, so it corrects fine but would also be fine uncorrected in almost every application.
Vignette is another story. I had to add a +88 to correct for the vignette. That’s not as bad as the 40mm F2, but it isn’t great! The correction profile is able to make a clean correction of the vignette, though I will note any lens with high levels of vignette will result in some less clean corners when shooting at higher ISO values. Even shooting at ISO 3200 you’ll find that the amount of noise in the center of the frame is significantly less than in the corners of the frame because the corners have had to receive nearly four stops of additional correction.
We’ll move on to inspecting our test chart. This test has been done on a 45MP Nikon Z8 sensor. I use a high end tripod and two second camera delay to ensure vibration doesn’t affect images. Here’s a look at the test chart that we will examine at high magnification:
If we take a look at crops (at roughly 200%) at F2 from the center, mid-frame, and lower right corner, we find that center performance is good, but the mid-frame and the corners are definitely much weaker.
The chart results look good but not necessarily great. You can see that the detail extends into the corners, but contrast looks weak there.
To me, however, real world results look better than what the chart shows. In this shot, for example, you can see that there is good 3D pop to the subject.
If we zoom in to the pixel level, we see that the subject looks nice and crisp.
The contrast from the lens will depend on the situation. In a F1.4 shot like the one below, there is a lot of subject on either side of the plane of focus, and the near monochrome subject allows more fringing (and lower contrast to show.
This shot is more two dimensional, with less out of the main plane of focus, and I think that contrast and detail looks better here, while the fringing is much less evident.
Here’s a distant shot at F1.4, and I actually find contrast and detail quite good.
Bottom line is that at close focus distances and shallower depth of field, you will get softer results with more fringing. Move even a bit further out and contrast and detail will improve.
As has been my theme in this review, I think that wide open sharpness is enough. I have tested and even own sharper 50mm lenses, but I’m finding that in most situations that I have the 50mm F1.4Z, I’ve been content with its output.
Stopping down to F2 will produce an obvious improvement in contrast in both the center:
…and more noticeably in the corners.
Contributing to that improved contrast is a reduction of the color fringing. It isn’t entirely gone by F2, but you can see in this side by side comparison that there is significantly less fringing both in the letters that occupy the plane of focus but also on the edges of the out of focus SLR in the background.
There’s a very mild improvement by F2.8, with a slightly larger improvement coming at F4.
Even at F2.8, however, I found real world results to be pretty fantastic. There’s plenty of detail and contrast in this F2.8 shot, and that’s true even in the crop from near the corner.
By typical landscape apertures of F5.6 and F8, you can expect nicely detail and contrast all across the frame.
Expect the typical diffraction pattern on high resolution cameras where the image is a little softer by F11 and softer still at the minimum aperture of F16, though frankly I’ve seen much worse when it comes to diffraction.
I noted a tradeoff for some uncorrected fringing, and that comes in the form of a softer background. Often lenses with a little less contrast and a little more fringing are able to produce softer, more pleasing backgrounds.
That’s certainly true at close focus distances, as the 50mm F1.4Z can produce very nicely blurred backgrounds.
I often use this lock for test shots because it’s an easily repeatable subject, and while the falloff isn’t exceptionally creamy here, overall the shot looks good.
The weakness for the rendering, in my opinion, is the transition zone between focus and complete defocus, as it can get a little “nervous” due to a bit too much outlining.
You can see a bit of this in the grasses in the lower left of this portrait shot, though in general I think that the bokeh quality is really pretty good from this lens.
When I consider that it is priced in a range often dominated by cheaper, third party lenses and also by F1.8 lenses, I feel like the quality of the rendering really stands up pretty well.
Colors also look nice, with good punch but some balance as well.
I find that some of Nikon’s color profiles are a little too biased towards magentas, but if I stick to Adobe’s color profiles I was generally happy with skintones.
Flare resistance seemed generally pretty good. I did shoot a number of strongly backlit portraits, and one of the lenses that I was testing during the portrait session flared very badly to the place where I didn’t consider the results overly usable. The Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 held up pretty well by comparison in those conditions, however, giving just a bit of a ghosting pattern at F1.4 but generally pretty flawless when stopped down a bit.
The sunstar/sunburst effect also looked pretty decent in the shots above with a smaller aperture (F5.6 range).
One thing that you shouldn’t buy the lens for is to shoot stars. Coma smear in the corners is pretty bad, with the star points looking like pterodactyls surrounded by a blue glow.
The effect is reduced but not eliminated by F2.
So not a flawless optical performance, but the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 certainly bests the average 50mm F1.4 lens from the DSLR era by a good margin. I wouldn’t call any of its flaws fatal, and I generally liked the images I was able to produce with the lens. It feels like an easy lens to reach for those family moments you want to capture, for walking around when you feel like shooting 50mm, and for portrait work in this range. You can check out more photos by visiting the image gallery here.
Conclusion
In the mirrorless space the typical 50mm F1.4 has skewed up market, with Sony’s G Master costing $1300, Canon’s new RF 50mm F1.4L at $1400, and even Sigma’s 50mm F1.4 DN (not yet available for Z mount) pricing in at $850. All of these lenses have nicer builds, more features, more sophisticated autofocus systems, and superior optics, but they are also all bigger and heavier than the Nikkor lens. I suspect that the Nikkor 50mm F1.4Z will be “enough” for a lot of satisfied users.
I think that what has pleased me the most about this lens is how rare it is in the mirrorless space. We have mostly had to choose between plastic fantastic F1.8 lenses and then ultra expensive premium options, with very few lenses like this in between. Yes, a lens like this may lack some of the bells and whistles, but neither does it feel crippled. It is perfectly functional in the field, has quick enough autofocus to keep up with action, and is good enough optically that I never hesitated to shoot with it wide open.
There will almost certainly be some third party competitors for this lens that will arrive in the future. I suspect Sigma, Tamron, and Viltrox, among others, will invade the Z mount space more completely in the future, but I also think there will always be a place for the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4. It’s a reasonably priced first party lens that delivers a fast maximum aperture at a very popular focal length for a reasonable price. Kudos to Nikon for making what I think will be a populist kind of lens – a lens for the people.
Pros:
Great price to performance ratio for a first party lens
Smaller and light than competing 50mm F1.4 lenses
Weather sealed
Has control ring
Autofocus is fast enough to keep up with action
Video AF works pretty well
Good magnification
Good wide open sharpness
Excellent contrast when stopped down a bit
Bokeh is nice
Flare resistance is solid
Real world images look good
Consistent sharpness across the frame when stopped down
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I’ve had a long lasting love affair with vintage glass. Even though my contemporary lens collection features dozens of great lenses, I still have 6 or 7 vintage lenses that I enjoy taking out periodically. Some of those include classic SMC Takumars and Zeiss lenses, while others include some of the cult classics like Soviet Helios and Jupiter lenses. The latter category I have prized because of their unique “swirly” bokeh. These lenses are often optical designs derived from Carl Zeiss, and almost all of the lenses I own are based on the old M42 screw mount. Many of these lenses have gotten some revival in the mirrorless era, as they can be fairly easily adapter and mirrorless cameras have manual focus aids that make using them easier than ever. There is a subset of photographers who are turned off by modern lenses that are perfectly corrected, and they are more interested in lenses with some individuality and character.
I’ve wasted a lot of time down the eBay rabbit hole trying to find some of these classic gems at a reasonable price, but some of them are surprisingly expensive. The Zeiss Biotar 75mm F1.5 can cost thousands of dollars. But what if you could get a modern version of that exact lens for under $300? If that sounds intriguing, join me in exploring the unique TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 in either my video review or my text review…or just enjoy the photos in the gallery.
Thanks to TTArtisan for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7RV along with the Sony Alpha 1 that serve as my benchmark cameras for Sony lenses.
TTArtisan has chosen one of the three different housing designs this optical formula had in the past, which is often called the “Fat Version” that was sold from 1952-1967. The end result is a stubby lens that reminds me a lot of the recent Voigtländer Nokton 75mm F1.5 that I reviewed earlier this year. It has the scalloped focus ring, all metal body, and anodized finish of that lens.
This is built around that same old M42 mount, so that comes with both blessings and curses that we will explore. The upside is that the M42 is easily adaptable to a wide variety of lens mounts, up to and including Fuji’s medium format GF mount. I used to mostly use M42 glass on Canon EF mount, where the adapters would be quite slim, but because of the different flange distance on mirrorless cameras, you have to use much thicker adapters to get the optics where they need to be. You can see that the Vello adapter I used here is pretty chunky, which adds a fair bit of length to the overall package, unfortunately.
Initially the lens didn’t lineup quite right for me, but fortunately they have thought about that, as you can mount the lens to your camera, and then use the included allen key to loosen three screws near the lens mount, which will then allow you to rotate the lens to the proper position before tightening it back down.
It’s a good solution to a common problem with lenses like this. There’s no question this is an interesting lens with a lot of character. See that character in the images below.
Keywords: TTArtisan, 75mm, F1.5, swirl, swirly bokeh, TTArtisan 75mm review, M42, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Review, mirrorless, Full Frame, Sports, Tracking, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Focus, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, 61MP, #letthelightin, #DA, #Alpha1, #A7RV
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I’ve had a long lasting love affair with vintage glass. Even though my contemporary lens collection features dozens of great lenses, I still have 6 or 7 vintage lenses that I enjoy taking out periodically. Some of those include classic SMC Takumars and Zeiss lenses, while others include some of the cult classics like Soviet Helios and Jupiter lenses. The latter category I have prized because of their unique “swirly” bokeh. These lenses are often optical designs derived from Carl Zeiss, and almost all of the lenses I own are based on the old M42 screw mount. Many of these lenses have gotten some revival in the mirrorless era, as they can be fairly easily adapter and mirrorless cameras have manual focus aids that make using them easier than ever. There is a subset of photographers who are turned off by modern lenses that are perfectly corrected, and they are more interested in lenses with some individuality and character.
I’ve wasted a lot of time down the eBay rabbit hole trying to find some of these classic gems at a reasonable price, but some of them are surprisingly expensive. The Zeiss Biotar 75mm F1.5 can cost thousands of dollars. But what if you could get a modern version of that exact lens for under $300? If that sounds intriguing, join me in exploring the unique TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 in either my video review or the text review that continues below.
Thanks to TTArtisan for sending me a review loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the Sony a7RV along with the Sony Alpha 1 that serve as my benchmark cameras for Sony lenses.
TTArtisan has chosen one of the three different housing designs this optical formula had in the past, which is often called the “Fat Version” that was sold from 1952-1967. The end result is a stubby lens that reminds me a lot of the recent Voigtländer Nokton 75mm F1.5 that I reviewed earlier this year. It has the scalloped focus ring, all metal body, and anodized finish of that lens.
This is built around that same old M42 mount, so that comes with both blessings and curses that we will explore. The upside is that the M42 is easily adaptable to a wide variety of lens mounts, up to and including Fuji’s medium format GF mount. I used to mostly use M42 glass on Canon EF mount, where the adapters would be quite slim, but because of the different flange distance on mirrorless cameras, you have to use much thicker adapters to get the optics where they need to be. You can see that the Vello adapter I used here is pretty chunky, which adds a fair bit of length to the overall package, unfortunately.
Initially the lens didn’t lineup quite right for me, but fortunately they have thought about that, as you can mount the lens to your camera, and then use the included allen key to loosen three screws near the lens mount, which will then allow you to rotate the lens to the proper position before tightening it back down.
It’s a good solution to a common problem with lenses like this. Let’s take a closer look at the performance.
Build and Handling
The TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 Swirl has classic good looks. The lens has some heft to it, weighing in at roughly 570g (20oz). I measure the lens at roughly 73mm in diameter and about 72mm in overall length. The lens will grow an additional 10mm in length when focused to the minimum focus distance (externally focusing).
We have a common 58mm front filter thread on the front of the lens.
There are two rings on the lens. The first is the manual focus ring, which is the widest part of the lens and has easy to grip metal knurls.
There are etched distance markings with metric in white and Imperial distances in yellow. The lens barrel before the ring has hyperfocal markings (from F1.5 to F16) on it.
The second ring is near the front, and it a manual aperture ring. This is a clicked aperture with detents at the half stop position from F1.5 to F5.6, then only full stops. There are markings for each full aperture (starting at F1.5, then F2, F2.8, etc…). The aperture ring moves with nice precision.
There are thirteen rounded aperture blades inside that make for a pretty sexy looking aperture.
Minimum focus distance is 75cm, and the resulting magnification is not particularly high (probably in the 0.10x range).
There is no weather sealing, no electronics, or anything particularly modern. You’ll need to manually set the focal length for in-camera stabilization if your camera is so equipped. You will also miss a lot of EXIF data (only the camera based information like shutter speed and ISO will be recorded, though if you are shooting on Nikon you’ll have a chance to manually input some of that information).
The front cap is an old school threaded variety.
All told this is a nicely made lens that focuses nicely, has good aperture control, and costs a whole lot less than grabbing one of the classic lenses it emulates.
Manual Focus on Sony (Alpha 1 and a7RV)
When I first moved to Sony bodies, I found them a wonderful platform for manual focus. They had IBIS (in-body-image-stabilization), good viewfinders, and much more manual focus aids than the DSLRs that I was accustomed to. Since that point, however, essentially the whole industry has shifted to mirrorless cameras, so those advantages aren’t as distinct anymore. But I still found the TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 Swirl an easy lens to use on my Sony bodies and found that I could easily nail focus despite the large maximum aperture and narrow depth of field. Here’s a few reasons why:
EVF. An electronic viewfinder has a lot of advantages over an optical viewfinder when it comes to using manual focus lenses. You have the ability to see overlays, magnify the image to confirm focus, and as a byproduct I really didn’t have any misses. I don’t always love Sony’s viewfinders due to them going a bit weird when you half-depress the shutter for stabilization, but focus is still really easy due to the EVF.
Effective IBIS (Steadyshot Inside). Sony was a pioneer with IBIS, and while other companies have caught up and even surpassed them, having the ability to stabilize the viewfinder or LCD screen image while focusing makes manual focus much easier. You can hold that image still while you pull focus to the perfect point.
Useful manual focus aids. Sony’s options include the ability to have a color overlay to help to show what is in focus, though I will note that this works better when shooting at larger apertures and at close to medium distances. At longer distances where more is in focus, the color overlays can just become distracting, and just because a lot is in focus doesn’t yet mean that focus is where you want it. I prefer the secondary method, which is to enable an automatic magnification of the focus area whenever you turn the focus ring. This allows you to visually confirm focus is where you want it, and it is pretty foolproof. Sony’s system will both automatically magnify the focus area when you turn the focus ring and then also switch back to the full view when you go to depress the shutter so that you can ensure your composition is still what you want.
I own four different brands of camera (Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Fujifilm), and I can safely say that manually focusing on each of them is really quite easy…even when focusing on very shallow depths of field.
It is worth noting that the beautiful focus ring also makes doing focus pulls during video a treat. There’s nothing quite like a well calibrated true manual focus ring for smooth pulls.
TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 Swirl Image Quality Breakdown
This “swirl” lens has an extremely simple optical design of 6 elements in 4 groups. Two of those are HR elements.
Lenses like this are all about the rendering, the “look”, and not about their technical proficiency. I haven’t seen an MTF chart that looks this bad in a long, long time!
There’s a huge disparity between the wide open performance and the stopped down performance. The corners are particularly weak, but that’s essentially part of the design. The “swirl” that is so desirable in these lenses actually comes from uncorrected aberrations in the sagittal plane. In fact, most of the unique and desirable qualities we like about vintage glass come from optical defects, which is why modern lenses often feel fairly “clinical” by comparison. There’s a lot of defects in this image…but that’s a big part of the charm!
On the technical side of things, there is relatively little distortion and vignette.
There is a very small amount of barrel distortion (+3 to correct) and under 2 stops of vignette (+45 to correct). Neither metric is bad at all, which is good, as obviously lenses without electronics like this won’t get any kind of in camera corrections.
Not so good, however, is color fringing, particularly in high contrast situations. This is not a lens that will always hold up well when there are brighter lights in the frame. You’ll also see some color fringing before and after the plan of focus, and a general spherical aberrations that softens contrast (what we often euphemistically call “dreamy rendering”).
Other shots in lower contrast situations look better.
Stopping down a bit helps with the fringing in most situations.
Control of Lateral CA was pretty much perfect. The transition from black to white is flawless near the edge of the frame.
We can clearly guess that at large apertures, this is not going to be a very sharp lens, particularly when we consider that I am testing on a much higher resolution point than any classic lens had to deal with. All of my chart tests are shot on the 61MP Sony a7RV sensor with crops shown at roughly 200% magnification. Here’s a look at the test chart, which looks a bit like it is warping due to the unique optical signature of this lens.
And here are the F1.5 crops from across the frame:
There’s actually a decent amount of detail in the center of the frame, but you can also see that some fringing is reducing contrast, giving the textures a bit of a “bloom” to them. The midframe and corners are softer still, but it is mostly due to having very low contrast.
That’s all part of the unique look of the lens, however.
I did note some of the typical quirks with metering as I stopped the lens down for my test chart results. I found that I needed to bias results sometimes to keep metering accurate. As I got into the smaller apertures, it was not unusual to get underexposed results like below if I didn’t.
Stopping down to F2 will increase contrast a bit and eliminate a lot of the fringing. You can see that the whole image looks cleaner and brighter.
If we look in the center of the frame, we can see that the resolution and contrast have picked up considerably. It’s like a whole new lens.
The corners are a different story, however, as, while they are brighter, then look like they are in a fog and the sun is just starting to come out a bit!
Corners never get pin sharp, though they are pretty decent by F5.6:
Landscape apertures of F4-F8 look pretty good other than the extreme edges of the frame.
As expected on a high resolution body, diffraction will hit after F8, softening the image a bit at F11 and more so at F16, which is minimum aperture.
So sharpness and contrast will vary dependent on the aperture you choose, which does give you some flexibility with the kinds of images that you can create with the lens.
But if you are buying this lens for sharpness, you’ve missed the point. This is a lens that is more about what’s out of focus than what is in focus. So let’s talk about that bokeh. First of all, the lens is very capable of producing soft, creamy bokeh. Here’s a look at a scene where I’ve pulled focus back to minimum so everything is out of focus.
There’s actually a specific difference where the swirl is most pronounced. That will be shooting at F1.5 and a medium distance of about two meters.
If I focus further, we can see that there is relatively little swirl effect, so it really only works with the background, not the foreground.
On a practical level, this effect works best when there is something on either side of the subject to serve as the bokeh subject. Putting your subject near the center of the frame works better than composing in the rule of thirds zone, as the plane of sharpness is mostly located in the center of the frame and you can get better subject separation. I put my subject in the rule of thirds for this shot, but it doesn’t work as well.
The effect will be more pronounced with a larger sensor. Medium format users will see the biggest effect, while APS-C cameras will crop off a lot of the swirly look. You can obviously get a fair bit of the effect on full frame as well (as shown in this review).
Stop down a bit, and you can get a more conventional image, like this:
Likewise for landscape shots. Shooting at F5.6 or F8 makes for a pretty conventional looking image.
Flare results are going to be situational. In certain positions there’s a general veiling over a shot, like this:
At wider apertures you may see a ghosting artifact like this:
At its best, you can get some fairly artistic effects that really go along with the vintage charm of the lens.
I would say the results are generally better than some of the vintage glass I’ve used, but not as corrected as a modern lens with effective coatings.
I would say that color is good in most situations. Here, for example, it looks great:
It’s also great here.
But if you are shooting high contrast scenes at large apertures, the general lack of contrast can make colors look a little dull.
I would say that this is both part of the charm and the liability of a lens with vintage sensibilities. Use the TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 “Swirl” to its strengths, and you can get much more interesting images than a conventional lens. Use it poorly, and you’ll just get low contrast, mushy images that neither you or your audience will enjoy. You can see more images by visiting the lens image gallery here.
Conclusion
I’ve definitely intentionally sought out some of the “swirl” lenses myself in the past. It is great to see TTArtisan bringing back some of these fun and interesting optics to a modern audience in the TTArtisan 75mm F1.5.
This lens has to be evaluated with a different set of criteria than my typical lens review, because by definition this swirl lens in embracing certain optical flaws that make for visually interesting results.
Yes, you can get conventional looking results with this lens at small apertures, but that’s not really the reason to buy it.
The real reason to buy this lens is to fully embrace the swirly flaws and to shoot the kinds of images you’ll never get with almost all modern lenses. And with a price tag of just $270 USD, you don’t have to break the bank to get it. Just remember to pick up a cheap adapter for your preferred mount if you don’t already have one!
Pros:
The swirl!
Nicely built lens
Well executed focus and aperture rings
Low distortion
Bright aperture
Good sharpness when stopped down
Nice color in some situations
Unique and special rendering
Much cheaper than trying to find a vintage lens that does the same thing
Keywords: TTArtisan, 75mm, F1.5, swirl, swirly bokeh, TTArtisan 75mm review, M42, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7RV, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, Review, mirrorless, Full Frame, Sports, Tracking, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Focus, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, 61MP, #letthelightin, #DA, #Alpha1, #A7RV
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I began to wholesale move to mirrorless, there were certain beloved lenses that were very slow to leave my kit. I had a whole kit of Canon EF lenses, and initially I just adapted those lenses to Canon RF and even Sony. Certain third party lenses slowly began to leave my kit to be replaced with other lenses, but I had a core kit of L series lenses that I found it hard to say goodbye to. Lenses like the 24-104mm F4L IS, 100mm F2.8L Macro, the 70-300L, the 100-400L II, and the 35mm F1.4L II. One by one those lenses slowly got sold off over the years. The last of them remained until 2023, and that was the Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II. I loved that lens. Built like a tank, sharp as a tack, and with utterly reliable results that I consistently loved. It was hard for me to say goodbye to that lens, largely because there really wasn’t an RF replacement for it.
Pretty much everyone wondered when Canon would come up with a replacement, as the RF 50mm F1.2L was one of the early RF L series lenses, coming to market in 2018. I reviewed it in 2019 after finally taking the plunge and buying the extremely flawed Canon EOS R body. That means that six years have gone by without a pro series 35mm lens on RF mount, with the only 35mm prime being the RF 35mm F1.8 IS. But the wait is over, and the Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM has finally arrived. Is this the one you’ve been waiting for? You can get my findings in the video review here, or by reading the text review here.
Thanks to Camera Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*I have done this review on my Canon EOS R5 camera.
Canon’s earliest full frame mirrorless cameras (the EOS R and the EOS RP) were severely flawed cameras, so my early frustration in doing RF mount reviews is that it seemed that a number of the early RF lenses were so good but the cameras were so frustrating. Ironically (at least for me), the tables have turned, as Canon has been producing a number of cameras I really like (I’ve loved owning my EOS R5 for years, and have given very positive reviews to a number of other cameras from the budget R8 to the premium R3.) But I’ve found Canon’s lens design over the past few years very frustrating, as it seems like every lens I review comes with a major caveat. The RF 100mm Macro has weird focus shift issues. The RF 14-35mm F4L IS has epic levels of distortion. The 70-200mm models can’t be used with teleconverters. The RF 100-500L can only use teleconverters at 300mm+. The RF 85mm F2 Macro IS has clunky autofocus. A number of the zooms have very slow apertures. It’s a little weird, and unfortunately that trend continues with the 35L VCM lens, as while it has great autofocus and is very sharp, there are some questionable choices in the implementation of features and optical design. Sigh.
In many ways the 35L VCM seems to be a lens designed with video in mind more than stills. There is one notable new feature that only works for video unless you have a Canon camera made in 2024 or newer. But on the other hand, Canon also knows how to make a optically strong 35mm lens, and the 35L VCM actually comes to market at a $300 discount relative to the 35L II.
While aspects of the lens are a little perplexing, the simple reality is that it is easy to make beautiful images with the Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM. Check out some examples in the galleries below.
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I began to wholesale move to mirrorless, there were certain beloved lenses that were very slow to leave my kit. I had a whole kit of Canon EF lenses, and initially I just adapted those lenses to Canon RF and even Sony. Certain third party lenses slowly began to leave my kit to be replaced with other lenses, but I had a core kit of L series lenses that I found it hard to say goodbye to. Lenses like the 24-104mm F4L IS, 100mm F2.8L Macro, the 70-300L, the 100-400L II, and the 35mm F1.4L II. One by one those lenses slowly got sold off over the years. The last of them remained until 2023, and that was the Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II. I loved that lens. Built like a tank, sharp as a tack, and with utterly reliable results that I consistently loved. It was hard for me to say goodbye to that lens, largely because there really wasn’t an RF replacement for it.
Pretty much everyone wondered when Canon would come up with a replacement, as the RF 50mm F1.2L was one of the early RF L series lenses, coming to market in 2018. I reviewed it in 2019 after finally taking the plunge and buying the extremely flawed Canon EOS R body. That means that six years have gone by without a pro series 35mm lens on RF mount, with the only 35mm prime being the RF 35mm F1.8 IS. But the wait is over, and the Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM has finally arrived. Is this the one you’ve been waiting for? You can get my findings in the video review here, or keep reading.
Thanks to Camera Canada for sending me a review copy of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.*I have done this review on my Canon EOS R5 camera.
Canon’s earliest full frame mirrorless cameras (the EOS R and the EOS RP) were severely flawed cameras, so my early frustration in doing RF mount reviews is that it seemed that a number of the early RF lenses were so good but the cameras were so frustrating. Ironically (at least for me), the tables have turned, as Canon has been producing a number of cameras I really like (I’ve loved owning my EOS R5 for years, and have given very positive reviews to a number of other cameras from the budget R8 to the premium R3.) But I’ve found Canon’s lens design over the past few years very frustrating, as it seems like every lens I review comes with a major caveat. The RF 100mm Macro has weird focus shift issues. The RF 14-35mm F4L IS has epic levels of distortion. The 70-200mm models can’t be used with teleconverters. The RF 100-500L can only use teleconverters at 300mm+. The RF 85mm F2 Macro IS has clunky autofocus. A number of the zooms have very slow apertures. It’s a little weird, and unfortunately that trend continues with the 35L VCM lens, as while it has great autofocus and is very sharp, there are some questionable choices in the implementation of features and optical design. Sigh.
In many ways the 35L VCM seems to be a lens designed with video in mind more than stills. There is one notable new feature that only works for video unless you have a Canon camera made in 2024 or newer. But on the other hand, Canon also knows how to make a optically strong 35mm lens, and the 35L VCM actually comes to market at a $300 discount relative to the 35L II.
That makes this particular lens review a little complicated, but I’ll do my best to highlight both strengths and weaknesses with objectivity.
Build and Handling
One of the key, real world improvements of the RF 35L VCM lens is that they have managed to make it much lighter. The EF 35mm F1.4L II weighed a hefty 760g (1.67lbs), but the 35L VCM tips the scales at a leaner 555g (1.2lb). That’s a 31% difference in weight, which is pretty significant (particularly for wedding photographers who heft their cameras for 10+ hours!) That still doesn’t quite get it to the level of my current favorite 35mm lens, which is the Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM. The GM lens is a svelte 524g, and is also a bit smaller.
The 35L VCM is 3″ in diameter x 3.9″ in length, or 76.5 x 99.3 mm. That’s about 6mm shorter than the EF lens, but about 3.5mm longer than the GM lens. The front filter threads are now 67mm rather than 72mm, a change I appreciate as lenses with 67mm filter threads are far more common.
Lens Rentals did a teardown of the 35mm F1.4L II and found that it was one of the most impressively engineered lenses they had seen at that point. To my knowledge a similar project has not been undertaken with the new VCM lens, but I suspect it too has an excellent level of build. That starts with an extremely robust level of weather sealing.
I count at least 12 seal points in that design, and there is also fluorine coatings on both the front and rear elements to help to protect those elements and make them easier to clean. The rear gasket is nice and thick, which always feels a bit reassuring to me.
I’ve seen some angst over some “clunking” in the lens if you tip it up and down, but this is nothing to worry about. I’ve reviewed (and owned) a number of lenses with floating elements, and they actually tend to be employed in higher end, more expensive lenses because this design isn’t cheap. Floating elements allow for better performance, particularly up close. You’ll find that the “clunking” or sense of movement in the lens immediately goes away when the lens is attached to the camera and the camera is powered on. Those elements become energized and ready for use. This is nothing new, by the way, as floating elements were first used in the late 1960s and have already been used in the acclaimed RF 50mm F1.2L and 85mm F1.2L lenses amongst other EF and RF lenses. I feel like people may be jumping on this with the 35L VCM largely because there’s somewhat of a negative vibe surrounding the lens.
I’m less sanguine about Canon’s odd implementation of the aperture ring. This is, (I believe), the first Canon RF prime lens to receive an aperture ring (and the second lens after the 24-105mm F2.8L IS to have one). Canon says that this is “…the latest L-Series hybrid lens featuring an iris ring for manual iris control during video capture.” Note that final phrase? “During video capture”. That’s right – for most Canon cameras, the aperture ring will only work during video mode, not stills. But, to further complicate things, a Canon rep has indicated that the aperture ring will work for stills on the EOS R5 Mark II and EOS R1 and, in theory, other future cameras. I actually find this a little frustrating, as it feels like Canon is not being strategic but rather making things up as they go. It feels a lot like their early explanations for why in-body-image-stabilization was unnecessary, and lens based stabilization was so much better. But then they switched that up and started putting IBIS in their second generation cameras. You’ll note that this is not the RF 35mm F1.4L IS!
Perhaps the aperture ring behavior can be fixed via future firmware updates, but as things stand on my Canon EOS R5, the aperture ring does nothing when capturing stills. You can turn it all day and it does nothing. In video mode it works as a declicked aperture for doing aperture racking, and, to its credit, input lag is very low, allowing you to achieve near real-time changes from what you do on the aperture ring to what happens to the aperture iris itself.
There is an iris lock that can be employed to either keep you in the manual aperture ring or in the Automatic mode beyond. Even this implementation is a bit odd, as the spring loaded lock design requires you to hold it in place while you rotate the ring either into or out of the manual aperture section. It’s actually not a very easy one handed operation.
The aperture iris itself has 11 rounded blades (like the Sony GM lens) and maintains a nicely circular shape.
Further confusing the issue is my typical setup for the Canon control ring (located at the front of the lens on the 35L VCM), as I typically assign manual aperture control to the control ring. So, when shooting stills, the control ring is my aperture ring. But when I switch to video, the camera defaults to the aperture ring on the 35L VCM, and suddenly the control ring no longer controls the aperture. That just creates muscle memory confusion, as you are very likely to reach for the wrong ring. The only way to avoid having to switch back and forth is to lock the aperture ring in A (automatic) mode, and then the control ring will continue to function to control aperture in video mode. But then, of course, you are basically pretending like the manual aperture ring isn’t there at all! Put simply, I’ve never seen such a confused implementation of an aperture ring in all of my years of lens review, and I’m left scratching my head as to why all of this was necessary.
The control ring itself remains a strong Canon RF feature, and this multipurpose ring can be programmed to a variety of different functions from the within the camera body. It has the typical diamond pattern grip on it that gives it a different tactile feel from other rings.
The manual focus ring is the largest of the three rings, and occupies a good portion of the central housing. An AF | MF switch is to the right of the ring and allows you direct control between the two options. The manual focus ring itself moves smoothly, though I do feel like there is a bit of input lag as it feels focus is just a split-second behind my movements on the focus ring. Focus input is non-linear, which means that it will be speed dependent. Turn the ring fast, and focus will move further; move it slowly, and focus will take a larger rotation to travel the same distance.
The 35L VCM does have a custom/programmable button that can be assigned a value from within the camera. There’s a broad range of functions you can choose from.
While my loaner copy did not include it (non retail packaging), the lens does ship with a attachable rear filter holder. This is for very thin gel filters only, and probably won’t get much use for most people.
The petal-shaped lens hood itself is fairly deep and robust. It has inner ribs and a locking button to ensure it doesn’t get inadvertently knocked. You can see from the photo below that it is probably 40% longer than the hood that comes with the Sony GM lens.
A typical L-series leatherette pouch is included. I prefer the nylon padded cases included with some other brands lenses, as I don’t feel like the L-series pouches have much protection value for transport.
The build quality feels pretty much like a standard L-series lens. There’s an engineered plastic housing over metal internal parts. It has a matt finish with fine flocking with a few platinum colored accent rings that marry nicely to the similar color on the lens mount of the camera, (and, of course that all important red ring near the front!). My experience is that this finish is resistant to scratches and marks. It feels tough and durable, and I’ve personally had Canon L-series lenses that I’ve used for a decade without issues.
As noted earlier, there is no lens-based stabilization (an area of differentiation from the earlier RF 35mm F1.8 IS), and you’ll have to rely on camera based stabilization if your camera is so equipped.
The minimum focus distance is 28cm (11″), and the maximum magnification figure is 0.18x. This is, unfortunately, a regression from the EF 35mm F1.4L II, which could achieve a 0.21x magnification, and is even further behind the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM, which can achieve a 0.26x magnification. Here’s what the magnification looks like:
The figure isn’t impressive, but fortunately the up close performance is good. You can produce some useful and interesting close shots.
Other than a few odd design decisions, the Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM is about what I would expect, namely, a well built, highly functional lens. I appreciate the weight savings and the additional features, though I do wish that Canon could do a better job of implementing some of their new design elements.
Autofocus
Canon has debuted a new focus system here interestingly at the same time as Viltrox. Both have released a new VCM (Voice Coil Motor) focus system, which is similar to what Tamron calls VXD. In the case of Canon, this new VCM is also paired with a Nano USM motor at the front of the focus group to allow for very quick, very quiet autofocus.
Canon’s earlier L series primes like the 50mm F1.2L and 85mm F1.2L actually employed older Ring USM type focus systems. This was a DSLR era technology that works fine for stills but doesn’t work as well for video, and Canon is clearly all in on this being a “hybrid” lens that focuses equally if not more on the video side of things. No complaints from me, however, as this hybrid focus system works equally well for stills and video. It’s much closer to what Sony is achieving with its GM lenses than what the early Canon RF lenses were like.
That puts some action photography on the table. The lens is quick enough to keep up with action, though this sequence was challenging at times due to the fact that Nala blends so well with the autumn foliage.
I had good success in lower light with eye tracking as well.
At this stage it shouldn’t be a surprise to get well focused results from a Canon L series lens during portrait settings, and, of course, that’s exactly what I found. Even using the Canon Connect app to remotely trigger portrait shots, I could see that tracking was always on the eye, and I was able to get consistently well focused results at F1.4:
I get asked sometimes why I use myself as a subject in some of reviews for portraits. I can say with confidence that it isn’t vanity, but rather something more practical. I use myself for a portrait subject at times because A) I’m available and B) I’m free. I’m not actually a wedding or portrait photographer these days (I will do both of those things on rare occasions, but more as a favor for friends and family), so I actually usually only do portrait sessions in the process of reviewing photography gear. I’m most interested in how the gear performs for these specific applications. In this case, I was very positive about the results I got whether my subject (myself) was facing the camera or in profile.
I also had good results in a church setting as well, with good accuracy on the speaker.
I also had no problems with focusing in a strongly backlit scene. I wanted to catch the light coming though these dried wildflowers.
In short, I had zero issues with autofocus during stills capture.
Video AF
This of course is designed to be a hybrid lens, so the autofocus performance during video is equally important. One of the great advantages of a focus system like this as compared to STM (stepping motors) is that STM motors will often show those visible steps during focus pulls. USM lens have a tendency to be jumpy and not smooth during video AF. The VCM motor is perfect, allowing for very smooth, well damped pulls that move steadily from point A to point B in a linear, consistent fashion.
There is also no sound during this transitions, just smooth performance. The only negative I can point to is that there is some focus breathing. Not as bad as the Sony 35GM, however. You may have electronic focus breathing compensation available in your Canon camera if it is a newer one, though unfortunately that technology is not in my EOS R5.
Here’s a look at a frame from one of my video clips.
My hand test (where I alternately block the lens’ view of my face with my hand and then remove it) also went well so long as I gave the lens time to make its transitions. It is not tuned to jump from one subject to another, but rather to smoothly transition from one subject to another.
When gliding along during video capture from one subject to another, I got mostly smooth results with logical transitions. All in all, focus is solid here. That’s a definite strength for the lens.
Image Quality Breakdown
The RF 35L VCM is a somewhat surprising lens optically in a few ways. The EF 35mm F1.4L II had some buzz in that Canon debuted a completely new type of glass element in it. I said this in my review, “The Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM’s biggest marketing buzz centered around a completely new kind of element in the optical formula which Canon calls “Blue Spectrum Refractive Optics” or BR Optics for short. This special organic material gives a greater control over reducing axial chromatic aberrations than any substance before, and is at least partially responsible for the amazing image quality.” At the time we all thought that this would almost certainly would be a part of many future optical designs, but, surprisingly, the only one that I’m aware of personally since then was the RF 85mm F1.2L. One would think that this new 35mm F1.4 would receive something similar, but the answer is surprisingly “no”.
The optical design is similar on paper (14 elements in 11 groups), but no BR Element. We do have 2 UD (Ultra-Low Dispersion) glass elements along with 2 Aspherical elements in the design. The MTF chart looks very good, but not quite as good at that for the Sony GM lens (shown second here).
Sharpness is not a problem for the 35L VCM. It is an extremely sharp lens and able to render the fine details in a way that only the best lenses do.
There is going to be plenty of sharpness for anyone, but unfortunately there is some serious controversy in other areas.
Starting with vignette and distortion. If you look at a corrected JPEG or RAW file, things don’t look too bad.
But you know something is going on behind the scenes when, in the camera, you don’t even have the option of turning lens corrections for distortion off! The image above is what I could see in the viewfinder as I lined up the test chart.
I don’t know what is going on over at Canon, but it seems like their engineers have just given up on trying to correction distortion optically. I have been shocked by how much distortion has been left in their lenses to be cleaned up by software…and that has included a number of L series lenses. If I take an uncorrected RAW into Lightroom, there is a pretty shocking amount of distortion and vignette.
That’s just weird in a 35mm lens. Sony’s 35mm F1.4 GM has almost zero distortion. The Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II had next to no distortion. This lens requires a +26 to manually correct the distortion. It also required me to nearly max out the vignette slider (+96) to get a clean end result.
That will produce radically different results in real world shots if you have corrections off. On the distortion side of things, you will definitely see a pretty wild result if corrections are turned off.
That makes this a dubious pick for interiors and architectural work.
Likewise the sheer amount of vignette is going to be noticeable as well, radically changing the “look” of images at large apertures if not corrected.
Now, to be fair, the EF 35L II also had extremely heavy vignette, though one could hope that Canon could actually get better at this over the past nine years.
But what’s the big deal? As long as things look fine after correction, no harm done, right?
The problem is that all electronic corrections come with a penalty. Correcting distortion has a negative impact on sharpness (and sometimes geometry, if the distortion is complex). Correcting vignette is like recovering shadows in that it often comes at the cost of additional noise and even some color banding. You can get away with more at lower ISO values, but take at look at this shot of a guitar in lower light (ISO 6400). In the crops below I’ve sampled the evenly colored wall behind the guitar from the center and then the lower left area above where the natural shadow begins. Look at how much rougher the noise pattern is in the area that has had to receive vignette correction.
That noise is nearly four stops worse due to the vignette correction.
But it could be worse, because if we sample the area in the upper left, where there is some shadow, we can actually see color blotchiness taking place there due to the corrections.
Put simply, that wouldn’t be the case if the lens was optically corrected rather than relying on so much electronic correction. I’ve seen this far too often from Canon in the RF era. There is so much distortion that Canon is having to designed their lenses much wider than the stated focal length so that the electronic correction can try to bring it back to a semblance of normal. Look back at how much wider the uncorrected result is on my chart as compared to the profile corrected result. In camera I had the sides of the chart aligned, but that was only because the camera would only show me the corrected result. The actual image is considerably wider so that it can be the proper focal length after correction. Canon has repeatedly touted their new RF mount and how it offers up so many new design advantages and opportunities, and yet so many of their RF wide angle lenses are worse in some of these areas than anything I ever saw on EF.
Disappointing.
Things are a little better in the fringing department. Longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) occur before and after the plane of focus, and while I see some fringing, it isn’t severe.
You can see mild amounts of fringing after the plane of focus on high contrast surfaces.
There is, however, more fringing than what was present on the EF 35L II, which is again a bit disappointing.
There is only the tiniest amount of lateral chromatic aberrations (LaCA) near the edge of the frame, certainly not enough to be noticed in real world situations.
Obviously the performance in these areas is a bit underwhelming, as this is a worse lens than the EF lenses it replaces in most all of these metrics.
But all is not lost. Things are about to get better. The Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM is a very sharp lens. Here’s a look at my test chart that the crops will come from.
Here are the roughly 200% F1.4 crops from across the frame. This is on the 45MP Canon EOS R5:
That’s pretty great. Even the extreme corners look fairly good. Even landscape shots at F1.4 look crisp and high detail, and in this crop from the plane of focus you can see that the resolution is consistently good right off to the edge of the frame.
Here’s a closer distance shot that shows great detail and very nice delineation of the little frost crystals on the edge of this autumn leaf.
Obviously there is no lack of contrast and detail for portrait work even at F1.4, which is clearly going to be one of the major strengths of this lens.
35mm F1.4 lenses are fantastic for doing environmental portraits or wedding work, and I think this lens will shine for that.
Stopping down to F2 produces a bit more contrast and detail.
There’s a bit more at F2.8, and more to see at F4, which looks extremely sharp even in the corner (upper left shown here).
At landscape apertures (F4-F8), the lens is sharp from corners to corners.
Things stay that sharp through F8, with a little drop-off at F11, and more obvious softening due to diffraction at F16, which is minimum aperture.
So sharpness is great.
The EF 35mm F1.4L II was exceptional not only because it was sharp, however, but because it had great bokeh and rendering (something I also feel about the Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM, which was the lens that allowed me to let go of the 35LII).
I’m not convinced the rendering is quite as magical here, but I do like the look of images overall. You will get the typical cat eye type deformation in the shape of specular highlights near the edge of the frame.
Stop down to F2, and the geometry looks considerably better.
Get close and the amount of background defocus is fairly strong.
Move back a little, however, and I find a little more hard edges than what I would prefer.
Some of the resulting bokeh in busier settings can look a bit “nervous” or jittery”, as shown here.
I did shoot a number of different direct comparisons with the GM lens, and I did consistently prefer the bokeh from the Sony. The bokeh is softer and creamier and with less hard edges.
I have to say I’m a little disappointed in this aspect of performance, particularly since I really did love the rendering from the EF lens.
One area where I was critical of the EF lens was when it came to flare resistance. I was surprised by the amount of ghosting I saw from such an expensive lens that was optically strong in other areas. I’m also a little surprised here, as there is definitely more ghosting and veiling present that I would have expected. The lens has Canon’s Air Sphere (ASC) Coatings, but unfortunately those don’t stop some issues at both large and small apertures.
One final area of strength is a common one for a Canon lens – great color. I liked the colors produced by the 35L VCM in the various scenarios I shot it in.
Colors are nicely saturated but without being garish. It’s nice optical glass.
All in all, this lens surprised me a bit. I went in expecting it to be great thanks to the exceptional heritage it has…and I don’t feel like this is a great lens. It is a very sharp, yes, but it actually has a surprisingly long list of optical weaknesses, particularly for a 35mm prime lens that costs $1500 USD. I do like this lens in many ways, but I’m not sure it would make my top 5 list for 35mm lenses. I feel bad because I genuinely wanted to love this lens, particularly since I feel like I’ve given a lot of Canon lenses fairly critical reviews over the past few years, and for many of the early years as a photographer and reviewer I was solely a Canon man. But my job is let the proverbial chips fall where they may. This is a unquestionably a very good lens, but it doesn’t quite feel like the lens we should have gotten. You can see more images in the gallery here.
Conclusion
The Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM is a rather complicated lens, and it has already become clear that it will be somewhat polarizing. Whereas the typical rating for first party lenses like this on most retail sites will be 4.5 out of 5 stars or higher, already the reviews for the 35L VCM are much more mixed. Even on Canon USA’s storefront, the rating for the lens is under 4 stars, which is extremely rare. As I’ve read the feedback from early adopters, I find that there are those who ardently defend it and feel like those critical of the lens are being unfair, while others are severely disappointed because they wanted to love the lens but feel like its flaws are unacceptable. The EF 35L II that I personally loved currently sits at 5 out of 5 stars on B&H Photo; the new RF 35L has 3.8 stars, with 15 5-star ratings, 9 4-star ratings, 2 3-star ratings, 3 2-star ratings, and 5 1-star ratings. As I said, polarizing.
But don’t let that discourage you, necessarily, as there are a number of people who are delighted with the lens. Yes, the argument that a lens this expensive shouldn’t need to rely on software corrections is valid, though, at the end of the day, if you’re happy with the end results, does that really matter? I personally was a little frustrated that the aperture ring doesn’t work during stills on my R5, but I’ve long had the control ring on RF lenses work as an aperture ring anyway, so I really wasn’t any further behind than I was with any other Canon lens.
Autofocus in particularly stands out to me as being exceptional in this lens. This is definitely the fastest focusing of the big L series primes that I’ve reviewed on RF thus far. Autofocus is near instantaneous in all situations, and the ability to keep up with fast action gives this lens further value for sports, reportage, and even in critical wedding situations. I don’t really understand Canon’s logic in this mirrorless phase, but I’m glad that the Canon RF 35mm F1.4L VCM exists nonetheless, as it fills a definite need on the platform. Let’s just hope that by the time we get to a MK II version down the road all of this ambiguity will be gone.
Pros:
Over 30% lighter than the EF lens
Great build with additional features
Advanced weather sealing
Very fast and confident autofocus
Exceptional video AF performance
Extremely sharp
Good contrast
Good color
Cheaper than the EF lens by a good margin
Cons:
A shocking amount of distortion for a 35mm lens
Very heavy vignette
Very confusion implementation of an aperture ring
Some flare issues
Bokeh and rendering isn’t at the level of the EF 35L II
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I’ve finally done it. I’ve had people asking me to cover Nikon for more than a decade, but initially I wasn’t interested in adding the time and expense of yet another system and I couldn’t set up a reliable partner to get review loaners from. Unfortunately that is still the case, as Nikon Canada doesn’t seem to really have a loaner department and even some of my retail partners that get loaners haven’t had much. Add to this that until recently Nikon’s Z-mount platform was closed to third party development, which meant that I couldn’t get Z-mount lenses directly from third party lensmakers, either. But Nikon has eased their restrictions on third party development, and I began to get more and more requests from lensmakers to cover Nikon Z-mount lenses, so I began to seriously consider the idea of adding a Nikon body to my personal kit so that I could cover these lenses and the system itself. Here’s hoping for better opportunities to get first party Nikon loaners in the future, as that remains the big challenge for me at the moment.
I did a lot of research as to which Nikon body would best suit my needs, which are somewhat unique as a reviewer. I typically need the highest available resolution on any given platform so that I can thoroughly test lenses (the reason I currently own a Canon EOS R5, Sony a7RV, and Fujifilm X-H2) along with a camera that has one of the best autofocus systems on a platform so that I can give lenses a fair evaluation there as well. I decided on the Nikon Z8, as it seemed to check all the boxes. The Z9 does as well, but I’m personally not a fan of cameras with integrated vertical grips. I purchased the Z8 in late April 2024, and have spent the last six months getting familiar with the camera and using it on a daily basis. I’ve already done eight different lens reviews on it, including primes, normal and telephoto zooms, and even a high end manual focus lens. I didn’t want to jump into a review too quickly, as I like to be as expert as possible when I report on a product, and in this case I was having to learn a whole new system and get familiar with the way that Nikon does things. I’ve become much more comfortable with the system over these months, already, and I’m now ready to share my findings. You can find my full thoughts in the video review below or in my thorough text review…or just enjoy the photos below.
This review is of a retail Z8 that I purchased from Camera Canada. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.
The Nikon Z8 is in essence a condensed version of the Nikon Z9 flagship camera. The Z9 is the larger “pro body” with an integrated vertical grip, while the Z8 has roughly the same feature set, sensor, and autofocus system in a more standard sized body. The Z8 is still easily the chunkiest of the four full frame cameras I own, which also include the Sony Alpha 1 and a7RV along with the Canon EOS R5. The overall grip size may be a little big for those with smaller hands, but it is comfortable enough for me. You can see that it is easily the biggest of the bunch.
In fact, I noted when doing my Fujifilm GFX100S II review that the medium format body was actually a bit smaller and lighter than the Z8, so don’t choose a different camera if you want to travel light!
But it isn’t wasted space, as Nikon has packed a lot of controls into this body.
Key Features
45.7MP FX-Format Stacked CMOS Sensor
Lightweight Design, 30% Smaller than Z9
8.3K 60p N-RAW, 4.1K 60p ProRes RAW
8K30p and 4K120p Video, 10-Bit Internal
Up to 20 fps Raw, 30 fps JPEG Shooting
493-Point AF, AI-Based Subject Detection
Blackout-Free Real Live Viewfinder
5.5 stops of 5-axis image stabilization
3.2″ 4-Axis Tilting Touchscreen LCD
CFx Type B & SD Memory Card Slots
5 GHz Wi-Fi and Bluetooth
My first six months with the Z8 have been great, and I’ve come to appreciate the deep versatility baked into the camera and the reliable performance I’ve had with a variety of lenses. My favorite thing about the Z8 is somewhat ironic, however. For the first several years of Z-mount existence the chief complaint was the same as Canon RF mount: it was a closed platform, with only first party (Nikkor) autofocus lenses available for the platform. While Canon has unfortunately continued that policy to date (at least on full frame), Nikon has opened the floodgates to third party development. I’ve reviewed several lenses that I had previously tested on Sony, and I’ve found that in every case I preferred the overall performance on Nikon.
There are two primary reasons that spring to mind. The first is that there are no artificial limitations on burst speed (Sony limits third party lenses to 15FPS, which is half what the Z8 or my Sony Alpha 1 are capable of). Nikon has no such limitation, so I’ve thoroughly enjoyed getting the full potential out of lenses like Tamron’s telephotos for sports or wildlife.
The second thing that I’ve found is that Nikon’s VR (in camera vibration reduction) just works better than the Sony equivalent. More and more lenses (including some telephotos like the Tamron 70-300mm RXD that the photo below comes from) don’t have lens-based stabilization and instead rely solely on camera based stabilization, so that means that the stability of the lens is going to widely vary from camera to camera and from platform to platform. I’ve noticed a significant difference between the stability of lenses on the Z8 as compared to what I’ve seen from identical lenses on Sony. This 300mm shot was taken at 1/8th of a second (over 5 stops of stabilization), and I found that a result like that was very repeatable on Nikon.
In short, I’ve enjoyed the Nikon Z8 a lot thus far. Enjoy the photos!
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I’ve finally done it. I’ve had people asking me to cover Nikon for more than a decade, but initially I wasn’t interested in adding the time and expense of yet another system and I couldn’t set up a reliable partner to get review loaners from. Unfortunately that is still the case, as Nikon Canada doesn’t seem to really have a loaner department and even some of my retail partners that get loaners haven’t had much. Add to this that until recently Nikon’s Z-mount platform was closed to third party development, which meant that I couldn’t get Z-mount lenses directly from third party lensmakers, either. But Nikon has eased their restrictions on third party development, and I began to get more and more requests from lensmakers to cover Nikon Z-mount lenses, so I began to seriously consider the idea of adding a Nikon body to my personal kit so that I could cover these lenses and the system itself. Here’s hoping for better opportunities to get first party Nikon loaners in the future, as that remains the big challenge for me at the moment.
I did a lot of research as to which Nikon body would best suit my needs, which are somewhat unique as a reviewer. I typically need the highest available resolution on any given platform so that I can thoroughly test lenses (the reason I currently own a Canon EOS R5, Sony a7RV, and Fujifilm X-H2) along with a camera that has one of the best autofocus systems on a platform so that I can give lenses a fair evaluation there as well. I decided on the Nikon Z8, as it seemed to check all the boxes. The Z9 does as well, but I’m personally not a fan of cameras with integrated vertical grips. I purchased the Z8 in late April 2024, and have spent the last six months getting familiar with the camera and using it on a daily basis. I’ve already done eight different lens reviews on it, including primes, normal and telephoto zooms, and even a high end manual focus lens. I didn’t want to jump into a review too quickly, as I like to be as expert as possible when I report on a product, and in this case I was having to learn a whole new system and get familiar with the way that Nikon does things. I’ve become much more comfortable with the system over these months, already, and I’m now ready to share my findings. You can find my full thoughts in the video review below or by reading on.
This review is of a retail Z8 that I purchased from Camera Canada. As always, this is a completely independent review. All opinions and conclusions are my own.
The Nikon Z8 is in essence a condensed version of the Nikon Z9 flagship camera. The Z9 is the larger “pro body” with an integrated vertical grip, while the Z8 has roughly the same feature set, sensor, and autofocus system in a more standard sized body. The Z8 is still easily the chunkiest of the four full frame cameras I own, which also include the Sony Alpha 1 and a7RV along with the Canon EOS R5. The overall grip size may be a little big for those with smaller hands, but it is comfortable enough for me. You can see that it is easily the biggest of the bunch.
In fact, I noted when doing my Fujifilm GFX100S II review that the medium format body was actually a bit smaller and lighter than the Z8, so don’t choose a different camera if you want to travel light!
But it isn’t wasted space, as Nikon has packed a lot of controls into this body.
Key Features
45.7MP FX-Format Stacked CMOS Sensor
Lightweight Design, 30% Smaller than Z9
8.3K 60p N-RAW, 4.1K 60p ProRes RAW
8K30p and 4K120p Video, 10-Bit Internal
Up to 20 fps Raw, 30 fps JPEG Shooting
493-Point AF, AI-Based Subject Detection
Blackout-Free Real Live Viewfinder
5.5 stops of 5-axis image stabilization
3.2″ 4-Axis Tilting Touchscreen LCD
CFx Type B & SD Memory Card Slots
5 GHz Wi-Fi and Bluetooth
My first six months with the Z8 have been great, and I’ve come to appreciate the deep versatility baked into the camera and the reliable performance I’ve had with a variety of lenses. My favorite thing about the Z8 is somewhat ironic, however. For the first several years of Z-mount existence the chief complaint was the same as Canon RF mount: it was a closed platform, with only first party (Nikkor) autofocus lenses available for the platform. While Canon has unfortunately continued that policy to date (at least on full frame), Nikon has opened the floodgates to third party development. I’ve reviewed several lenses that I had previously tested on Sony, and I’ve found that in every case I preferred the overall performance on Nikon.
There are two primary reasons that spring to mind. The first is that there are no artificial limitations on burst speed (Sony limits third party lenses to 15FPS, which is half what the Z8 or my Sony Alpha 1 are capable of). Nikon has no such limitation, so I’ve thoroughly enjoyed getting the full potential out of lenses like Tamron’s telephotos for sports or wildlife.
The second thing that I’ve found is that Nikon’s VR (in camera vibration reduction) just works better than the Sony equivalent. More and more lenses (including some telephotos like the Tamron 70-300mm RXD that the photo below comes from) don’t have lens-based stabilization and instead rely solely on camera based stabilization, so that means that the stability of the lens is going to widely vary from camera to camera and from platform to platform. I’ve noticed a significant difference between the stability of lenses on the Z8 as compared to what I’ve seen from identical lenses on Sony. This 300mm shot was taken at 1/8th of a second (over 5 stops of stabilization), and I found that a result like that was very repeatable on Nikon.
In short, I’ve enjoyed the Nikon Z8 a lot thus far. Let’s explore why in a little more depth.
Build and Handling
As noted, the Nikon Z8 is a BIG camera. It’s the largest full frame camera I’ve used to date (excluding body styles with a vertical grip integrated like the Canon EOS R3). It weighs a full 2 pounds (910g) with battery and memory cards inserted, which is a half pound (240g) heavier than the Canon EOS R5 MKII, and 173g heavier than the Sony Alpha 1. I use these as a point of reference, as they are the flagship standard body (no integrated vertical grip) cameras of these respective brands. The Z8 is taller (4.7″/118.5mm – nearly an inch taller), wider (5.7″/144mm – 1/2″ to 3/4″ wider), and is deeper than the Sony (3.3″/83mm) by 13mm while being very slightly less deep than the Canon (5mm shallower). You can see that the Z8’s center stack housing the viewfinder really sticks up.
That makes the Z8 very beefy in the hands, which is fine (even desirable) if you have larger hands, but will be less appealing to those with smaller hands. The ergonomics are good, however, and when I asked my wife to handle and use the camera, she noted that it was big but was fine in her hands. She didn’t mind using it. A large body is great for balancing larger, heavier lenses, but will dwarf small lenses like the Viltrox AF 40mm F2.5 that I reviewed on it.
Part of this weight comes from the fact that this a pro-level camera with a very tough build. Its shell is a combination of carbon fiber and magnesium alloy, and Nikon states that the professional grade weather sealing is to the same standard as the flagship Z9.
I have definitely gotten this thing wet while shooting in the rain on a number of occasions, and have had zero issues.
I do have one complaint that is more of a general Nikon complaint and not Z8 specific. I own five different camera platforms, and have tested a variety of other ones, including a few quirky Sigma models, a lot of Fujifilm medium format cameras, and then the host of full frame and APS-C mirrorless models that have come in the past six years. Nikon persists in their lens mounting process being backwards from literally everyone else (at least in my experience.) Whereas all other cameras involve rotation a lens to the right to mount it, and then to the left to release it.
Now, I understand that this has been the Nikon standard all along, and that a change at this point would be very difficult (it would affect F-mount lenses being adapted as well), but there is one practical consideration. The direction of mounting lenses on Nikon also happens to be the direction that unlocks lens hoods from their bayonet mount. When mounting a smaller lens, I have found it quite easy to inadvertently rotate the lens hood as well, particularly if that lens hood does not have a great lock. There’s also the reality that for those of us who use multiple systems, you are forever rotating lenses and lens caps the wrong direction because everything else rotates the opposite direction. Minor rant aside, let’s move on.
I’ve used big cameras that seem to have a lot of wasted space, but that’s not the case here. Nikon has loaded this body with physical controls. The Z8 might in fact be a little intimidating to less experienced photographers, as there are a lot of controls. But more experienced photographers will appreciate the ability to really assign a lot of important values to dedicated buttons to allow for faster control on the fly. This is a camera that you need to spend some quality time with and really get comfortable using it…and then it will pay dividends for you!
There are two Function (custom) buttons located to the right of the lens mount. Each of these can be assigned a function from a huge range of choices. There is also an accessory port on the front where things like a remote release can be attached (amongst other things). Lower down on the front/left side is an AF mode button that will allow you select between various focus modes (including MF). Most of Nikon’s custom buttons that have multiple options (like the AF mode button) work through that particular option being highlight in yellow on the screen or viewfinder while you hold the button down, and you use a wheel (rear control wheel by default) to scroll through the options. It’s not immediately obvious until you become familiar with the process, but then it works fine.
Nikon has implemented a sensor shield that covers the sensor and helps prevent dust from reaching it when the camera is powered off. I have found that this is a useful addition to modern cameras that does help keep the sensor cleaner.
The top of the camera is definitely rich with controls along with a very useful LCD screen.
We will start by looking at the cluster of controls near the shutter button.
There is an ON-OFF switch there surrounds the shutter button itself, allowing for quick one handed operation. You can further rock that switch past ON to light up many of the controls for use in the dark, which is a handy feature altogether lacking from Sony bodies. Beneath the shutter button is the front control wheel. There is also a exposure compensation button along with a dedicated ISO button. Both of those functions work in the fashion that you hold the button down while rotation the rear wheel to change the value. The final button is a video recording button.
The rear wheel at the upper right corner of the camera in the back is the default means of scrolling through different values.
The rest of the top plate on the right of the viewfinder stack is devoted to an LCD screen that shows a variety of information while also retaining a passive display when the camera is powered off. It is fairly reminiscent to a similar screen on the Canon EOS R5, and I find it useful for getting info on the fly.
The viewfinder stack has the standard hotshoe on the top, but, as of yet, Nikon has not matched Sony’s multi-interface shoe that can also record digital audio through appropriate microphones.
There is another cluster of buttons to the left of the viewfinder stack, including a button dedicated to bracketing. This would allow for multiple shots to be taken at different exposure values for the purpose of combining them at a later date or just experimenting with different lighting approaches to a particular scene. The right button is a dedicated White Balance button, there is a mode button to the right that will run you through the P-S-A-M modes (i.e. manual, shutter priority, etc…). The final button to the left gives you your burst or release mode options. You have a lot of versatility with how many frames per second you capture, with multiple options for each mode (including self timer options).
The viewfinder itself reminds me of a general philosophy with the Nikon Z8 – it tends to underpromise and overdeliver. The viewfinder specs are unimpressive – just 3.69m dots. This is vastly outclassed on paper by a number of competitors. But the viewfinder is actually quite good. It is a high quality OLED display, so very clear and bright (Nikon even says it is capable of reviewing HLG footage, which would suggest that it is capable of HDR). It runs at 60Hz but can run as high as 120Hz. The display typically looks great and reminds me more of the good display in the Canon R5 and less of the higher specced but often disappointing displays in my high end Sony cameras. I’ve enjoyed using the lifelike viewfinder for everything from sports capture to using manual focus lenses.
One other positive for Nikon’s approach to lenses without electronics (I’m doing a review of an upcoming lens on the platform right now) is that it allows you to set up a number of “non-CPU lenses” (lenses without electronics) and assign a name to those lenses along with a focal length so that the camera can set the proper VR setting and also provide at least a lens designation for EXIF data. That’s very helpful to someone like me who reviews many lenses every year, as lenses without electronics are harder to search for in Lightroom.
The back of the camera should seem pretty familiar to those who have used Nikon before. On the upper left side there is a third Fn button (custom button) and then a delete button with the garbage can logo on it. The right side has a Display button surrounded by a toggle for switching between stills and video control setups. And yes, you can assign unique control assignments for both (different functions for buttons, for example). There is an AF-ON button next to that, and below that is first the control joystick (can be clicked for a secondary function) and the “i” button to access the quick menu.
Underneath that is a D-pad for navigation with the OK/Select button in the center. Another cluster of buttons include the Menu button along with the Playback button and the ability to either zoom in or zoom out via a final pair of buttons.
The rear LCD screen is a 3.2″, 2.1m dot TFT panel that is fairly average. Touch responsiveness is pretty good, however, and it gets the job done. The rear LCD can be tilted on two axis, but I don’t like this approach nearly as well as a fully articulating LCD screen. I also recognize that this tends to be a point of division for many photographers, so perhaps this is your preferred arrangement.
Like the screen itself, the tilt function is fairly average. My favorite configuration at the moment is Sony’s a7RV, which allows you to do both tilt along with full articulation.
The right side of the camera has a nicely executed compartment for the memory cards. Like the Canon EOS R5, it has both a CFexpress Type B slot along with a UHS-II rated SD card slot. People have different preferences, but I personally like to have RAW and movies written to the faster card and use the SD card slot for JPEG/HEIC backups. This is helpful if I need to quickly deliver an image to someone.
The majority of the connection ports are found on the left side of the camera. These are found under two rubberized port covers that unfortunately don’t open like doors and instead just sort of hang around. The top area includes a full size HDMI port and has both a 3.5mm mic input along with a 3.5mm headphone monitoring output. The bottom area has (uniquely) two USB-C ports. One is used for charging the camera or even powering it, while the second is used for data transfer. That would allow for an excellent setup for someone who shoots tethered for long periods of time, as you can have data coming out and power coming in simultaneously.
The battery compartment is on the bottom of the camera, and houses a single Nikon EN-EL15c battery pack. It is a 2280mAh (16Wh) battery that is similar to that found in rival cameras from Sony or Canon. It is, however, considerably smaller than the much larger 3300mAh battery found in the Z9. The battery pack is rated for just 340 shots in the power hungry Z8, so buying a spare or two is worth doing. This is similar to the rating in the Canon EOS R5, and, frankly, I haven’t noticed a big difference in ordinary use even when compared to my Sony Alpha 1, which is rated for a much higher 530 shots when using the rear screen. For some reason the Sony drops quite a bit when using the viewfinder (430 shots), which is my preferred method, which is why I may not notice a big difference, as the rating for the Z8 is almost the same when using the viewfinder or screen (330 for viewfinder).
Nikon’s in camera VR (Vibration Reduction) is rated up to 5 stops, though with Nikon lenses equipped with in-lens VR the two systems will work in harmony and provide up to 6 stops of stabilization. But, as noted in the intro, I actually find the VR to be more stable than what I see many times on Sony, particularly when working with third party lenses. There are always limits to these type of systems, however, and if you want to walk and shoot, a motorized gimbal is always a better idea. The great thing about in-body-image stabilization is that you can use it with all lenses, including those without lens-based stabilization.
If you have a lens that doesn’t have electronics, be sure to manually set the focal length to help get better stabilization results.
The MSRP for the Z8 in the US is $3996, though it currently selling for $3796 at the time of this review. That undercuts the current main competitors like the Canon EOS R5 MKII and Sony Alpha 1, though it is more expensive than the original EOS R5.
Shutter and Buffer Depth
Like the Sony Alpha 1, the Nikon Z8 is designed around a fully electronic shutter. This works due to having a stacked sensor with extremely fast readout rate. It’s 1/270th rate even slightly bests the 1/260th readout speed of the Alpha 1, and is much, much faster than the 1/60th of a second readout of the Canon EOS R5. This kind of readout speed allows for rolling shutter to be largely eliminated (a distortion caused when the action being captured moves too quickly for the sensor to properly record it). My Fujifilm X-H2 really suffers from this, but that’s because the readout speed is nearly ten times slower. Look at this very odd looking basketball in this shot from the X-H2 (*not the Z8!)
With the Z8, however, even fast moving little bees right near the edge of the frame are well captured.
Another previous issue with electronic shutters was flash sync speeds. The X-sync speed of the Z8 is 1/200th of a second. That’s fast enough to be useful, but doesn’t quite compare to the exceptional 1/400th of a second possible with the Alpha 1. If you need faster sync speed, move into HSS mode, which gives you a bit less power output from your flashes but allows for much faster sync speeds.
Those are the primary downsides to electronic shutters, but there are also a host of advantages. The first is shutter speed itself. The maximum shutter speed is 1/32,000th of a second, which far exceeds the typical 1/8000th second limit attached to mechanical shutters. There is no wear to a mechanical part, and, if desired, you can operate completely silently (a shutter “click” will be activated by default).
You also can eliminate blackout between shots, as no mechanical shutter is opening and closing. That really helps when tracking action, as you are able to be more reactive with following the movement as you aren’t have split seconds blackouts all the time. Keeping a flying bird properly centered in the frame is much easier without blackout.
This also unlocks a lot of burst speed, as you’ve eliminated the mechanical movement of the shutter from the equation. The Z8 is capable of shooting up to 20FPS when capturing RAW images, but can shoot up to 30FPS when shooting full frame JPEGs. There are expanded modes where shooting is possible up to 60FPS and even 120FPS, but with serious compromises, including increasingly smaller JPEG sizes and without active autofocus or metering. In other words, consider 30FPS the practical limit for any kind of useful application.
Nikon is a little less forthcoming with buffer depth than other brands, and the results seem to vary widely. The worst case scenario for buffer depth will be shooting at 20FPS and with the lossless compressed format, which takes the most processing, where the buffer depth will only be around 80 shots on a CFexpress Type B card. Switch to High Efficiency★ and you will get hundreds of RAW images (600+) before the buffer fills, and if you move on to the standard High Efficiency format or JPEG, the buffer pretty much becomes the size of your storage card. You can also drop the frame rate to 15FPS and get virtually unlimited shots even with the Lossless Compressed format.
Remember also, however, that if you are using an SD card for backup and using a RAW format, you could potentially run into buffer issues there, as the write speed for the SD card (even a very good UHS-II card) is never going to match the write speed of the CFexpress.
On a practical level, I’ve found buffer depth sufficient for my work personally, and knowing the potential workarounds to increasing buffer depth helps.
I’m personally very comfortable with purely electronic shutter based cameras after having own the Sony a9 and Alpha 1 cameras, and the Z8’s overall performance easily bests that of the original A9.
Autofocus for Stills
*A caveat for those who read this review and wonder why the results seem more favorable than earlier reviews. I’ve had the benefit of reviewing after the significant fimware 2.0 update that improved AF performance and added new features like Bird Eye Detect, Auto subject mode (which I love!), and Pixel Shift. The end result is a more capable camera, so kudos to Nikon for sticking by their customers.
The Z8 largely inherits uses the flagship 493-point phase-detection AF system from the Z9. The stacked sensor and fast readout speed enable AF readings to occur at up to 120 fps, making sure that autofocus is running ahead rather than behind burst speed. This is the typical hybrid AF system we see in modern mirrorless cameras, where the Phase Detect system is backed by a Contrast AF system. I can attest that bird eye detect works well:
As per usual, you have a wide range of options for how large of an area that you want autofocus to focus on, but most of the time I just leave it the widest area or with 3D tracking enabled, and the AF generally does a great job.
One of the most challenging situations I threw at the lens was a middle school graduation. Their theme was “Under the Sea”, which meant that the gym lighting was extremely low. I had to shoot the whole thing at very high ISO settings (minimum 12,800), which means that the focus system of the camera/lens combo was being challenged (the Tamron 35-150mm VXD, in this case). While it was difficult to maintain the kind of shutter speed that I would prefer in that setting when people were moving around, I was very satisfied with the quality of focus on my various shots.
We shared my photos far and wide with parents of graduates because few of their photos turned out in those lighting conditions. When things slowed down after the ceremony, I was able to get some surprisingly good photos even though I was shooting at ISO 12,800 (and only a shutter speed of 1/60th of a second here, which shows you how dim the lighting was.
The combination of a great focus system in the Z8 and an effective focus motor in the 35-150mm made this challenging situation relatively easy. I shot a high school graduation as well, and while the lighting was slightly better there, I lived at ISO 12,800 there as well. I shot hundreds of well focused photos throughout the evening.
All of this means that shooting in better lit situations was a piece of cake. Even the typical event lighting (1600-3200) produced essentially instant focus results.
I’ve now shot the Z8 with about 8 different lens options, and I haven’t really been disappointed with anything for stills. I shot a long burst of my son jumping off a wall while I tracked his face throughout the sequence (using the Viltrox AF 16mm F1.8), and not only did I get the 30FPS but also got consistently well focused results throughout…at F1.8:
I’ve really enjoyed the Z8 for shooting BIF, finding it to be fairly effortless. Whenever the eye becomes visible from behind the wing as the wings pump up and down, it is clear that focus has been accurate all along.
I’m loving not have third-party speed restrictions that Sony imposes. Some of these excellent lenses no longer feel like second class citizens, and it’s a delight to fire well focused bursts.
Focus on eyes is precise and delivers great looking results.
Portraits have also been pretty effortless, allowing me to consistently get well focused results.
I was able to focus precisely on other subjects as well, even when depth of field was paper thin.
All in all, I’ve found the Z8 to be a very competent autofocusing camera that is right up there among the best I’ve used from Canon and Sony.
Manual Focus on Nikon Z8
Mnaul focus was not a primary consideration in my purchase of the Z8, but has been one of my pleasant surprises. I’ve actually really enjoyed the various Nikon focus aids and the overall focus experience on Nikon. Here’s a few reasons why:
Clear, useful EVF. On paper, the EVF of the Z8 is nothing special, but, in practice, it works very well. I’ve got much higher resolution viewfinders on Sony cameras, but Sony viewfinders do some weird things when the shutter is half depressed. And I typically want the shutter half depressed when manually focusing, as this helps stabilize the viewfinder while I focus. Nikon’s viewfinder is clear and makes it easy to see focus moving as I turn the manual focus ring.
Effective IBIS (VR). I’ve been impressed with the real world stability of Nikon’s in camera VR. It works effectively and allows for both a stable viewfinder experience as a I focus and also stable results when I take the shot. To my knowledge, no manual focus lens to this point has included lens-based image stabilization, so having effective in-camera stabilization is very important.
Useful manual focus aids. There are three primary manual focus aids that I’ve utilized when manually focusing, including the onscreen focus confirmation box (put it where you want focus to be, and it will turn green when proper focus has been achieved), magnification of the image to visually confirm focus, and focus overlays (peaking). With some lenses Nikon includes a directional arrow that points you the direction you need to turn the focus ring to focus in the right direction, but that isn’t always the case. I’ve found that the focus box is quite accurate, though, and it makes manual focus fairly easy.
My one complaint is that it feels like magnification out of the box could be handled a little more effectively. Some camera brands allow for an automatic magnification of the focus area when you start to turn the focus ring (Sony, for example, and this is true with Voigtländer lenses that are true manual focus lenses but have electronic contacts). My Z8 doesn’t do that out of the box, but I discovered a menu setting (D18 in the custom setting) which does allow that change. I was able to consistently get pinpoint accuracy during my review of the beautiful Voigtländer Nokton 75mm F1.5:
Video Autofocus
In general I would say that while video autofocus is good on Nikon, it is here where I see a little more daylight between the Z8 and the best from Canon and Sony. I do a lot of different tests with each lens I review, and in some of those standard tests (sometimes with a Z-mount version of a lens I’ve already tested on Sony), I find that the video AF is a little poorer. That’s not to say that it is bad, as it isn’t. There’s much more separation between Fuji video AF (worse) and Nikon video AF (better) than what there is between Nikon and Canon or Sony (best).
In my “hand test” where I alternately block and then remove my hand, I’ve found that the Z8 is more reluctant to switch to my hand even when my eye is not visible and the hand is the obvious subject to focus on.
I will sometimes see a few more pulses, and just a slightly less amount of confidence in focusing…particularly when a trackable subject isn’t in frame. I have had good results with things like vlogging, however (here’s a screenshot from one of my vlogging outings).
Sony remains my brand of choice for filming for my YouTube channel, but if I only had the Z8, I would have no problems. I find that I perhaps need to tune AF speed in the settings a little more frequently, but that’s not the end of the world.
Video Performance
The Nikon V8 is just loaded with video options. Here’s a look of the various resolution options from the Z8 product page.
Headline features are the 8K30 and 4K120 specs. These rival the very best, and you can even record in a 8K60 N-Raw format that is a slightly different FX 8256 x 4644 resolution. Nikon says, “Internal 12-bit raw recording at up to 8.3K 60p in the N-RAW format is supported along with internal ProRES RAW HQ. Raw recording offers greater tonal and color latitude and can improve dynamic range, benefitting color grading needs and post-production flexibility.”
Just to give you an idea of the difference between 8 bit and 12 bit video, while 8 bit video can produce 16.77 million colors (that’s a lot!), 12 bit video can produce up to 68 billion different color variations!! That results in richer video with more tonality and subtle details.
As would be expected at this point, you can shoot in N-Log and HLG color profiles to give you more control over editing/grading the footage or producing high dynamic range footage. When shooting in N-Raw and with N-Log enabled, you can get as much as 14 stops of dynamic range. That’s not at the top of the heap, but is very competitive with other brands.
Another strength for the Z8 is the very fast readout of the sensor and the vast reduction of rolling shutter. That makes the Z8 an excellent camera for capturing action.
A potential negative for video use is the lack of an articulating screen. That not only eliminates the potential for front monitoring but also can be limiting when putting the camera on a gimbal. Sometimes the motor assembly of gimbals can block the rear of the camera in certain positions, so getting that image off to the side is preferable. An articulating screen allows for this, but obviously a screen limited to tilting function cannot.
Nikon does have a function similar to Sony’s Clear Image Zoom, which they call Hi-Res Zoom. Essentially this takes advantage of the high resolution of the camera by allowing some digital zoom without much (if any) quality loss. I’ve periodically used this function and it can be useful to assure you get the framing you want.
There are a number of factors that will impact recording time, though there is no artificial limit imposed. This could include the size of your memory card (or how much room is left on it!), battery life, and, in rarer situations, overheating. I haven’t personally seen an issue, but if you are trying to do long format recording in, say, 8K, you could potentially see an issue.
One personal critique I will add is that sometimes I don’t love Nikon’s skintones in video out of the box. The magentas are a little oversaturated for my tastes, though I do know that color science is subjective and others may feel differently.
Image Quality Breakdown
The Nikon Z8 employs the same 45.7MP Stacked CMOS sensor found in the flagship Z9 camera, meaning that imaging performance should be roughly identical between the two. We’ve already discussed the advantages of a stacked sensor in terms of readout speed, but there are also some advantages for image quality as well. Nikon’s most revered sensor from the DSLR era was found in the D850, which happened to be the only Nikon camera that I tested from that era. That also had a 45.7MP sensor, but that was a more traditional back-illuminated non-stacked sensor. The key advantage of the Z8’s sensor is of course speed, as we’ve already discussed the very powerful burst speeds of the Z8 whereas the D850 capped out at 9FPS burst speed.
The sensor found in the Z8 has a base ISO of 64, which makes it unique from most other full frame cameras that use a base ISO of 100. It does make the mental math a little more complicated, but it does provide some advantage in certain situations because there is less gain/amplification being digitally applied to the sensor. In theory this can produce more color depth and greater dynamic range, though sometimes at the cost of poorer low light performance at high ISOs. Of course each camera is going to do different things with both strengths and weaknesses based on the performance of the individual sensor, so this section will explore different areas of strength and weakness. At its best, the Z8 is very capable of producing beautiful images with rich color and strong dynamic range.
Modern sensors in these flagship cameras are very, very good, and my experience is often that the difference in performance from one brand to another is fairly marginal. I make this statement not only as a person who has had a chance to review cameras from different brands, but also one with the very good fortune to own a top camera from four major brands as a part of my work. There isn’t a big difference in editing images from any of them, so these days I would choose which brand offers the whole ecosystem that you prefer the most.
With that caveat aside, let’s explore the details of the Z8’s sensor.
Dynamic Range
Dynamic range has become one those topics that was really debated ad nauseum on photography forums, particularly when there was more of a difference between certain brands. It was an area where photographers could brag, “my camera is better than yours!” That’s become less common in recent years, however, as there really isn’t much of a difference between brands any longer.
Dynamic range is the ratio between the darkest point and the brightest point possible on a sensor. The more “stops” there are between those two points mean that more and more information can be recorded in a single frame. I can definitely say that there are a number of situations where improved dynamic range gives the photographer (and particularly the post-processor) more latitude to fulfill their vision. This could be in the ability to recover a blown-out sky or shadowed area as a landscape photographer or the ability to balance a foreground subject with a background or sky for portrait photographers. I frequently use good dynamic range in portrait photography to bring up exposure on the faces of subjects when shooting with only available light. Lightroom/ACR has great tools for detecting subjects and creating masks for them, and good dynamic ranges makes it easy to add exposure to the subjects cleanly. It allowed me to balance the lighting between my wife and the brighter forest beyond her on this hike, fore example.
I like to use Photons to Photos as an additional frame of reference to the more real world tests that I run, as it gives some raw numbers and how those compare to other cameras. In the previous generation, the D850 mopped the floor with the Canon EOS 5DSr in these metrics, though the Canon had a bit more resolution (50MP). The 5DSr was rated at 9.8 stops of tested dynamic range, while the D850 tested at a whopping 11.63 stops. A nearly stop two stop advantage is huge in this kinds of comparisons. But Canon has flipped the script in the mirrorless conversation, as the EOS R5 has a nearly identical 45MP sensor but boasts a rated 11.85 stops compared to 11.32 stops for the Z8. As another point of comparison, the Sony Alpha 1 has a similar stacked sensor to the Z8, 50MP of resolution, and is rated at a near identical 11.36 stops. It’s worth noting that Canon has moved to a stacked sensor in the R5 MKII to allow for more similar burst speeds to the Z8, and Photons to Photos actually rates that sensor a bit lower than the R5 at 11.45 stops of dynamic range. That’s still excellent, obviously, and slightly bests both the Z8 and the Alpha 1, but it does show that there are perhaps some tradeoffs for having a sensor designed for speed.
This is at base ISO, however (ISO 64 for the Z8, ISO 100 for Canon and Nikon), but we see that the Canon advantage does remain throughout the ISO range.
So how does the Z8’s sensor hold up in my tests?
We will start with shadow recovery. In my tests I start with an established base exposure shot of a photography themed still life setup that I use. It looks like this:
This is what I’m calling the proper exposure for the scene, the baseline. In a subsequent series of images I progressively underexposed the image by 1-4 stops so that I could measure how cleanly the shadows could be recovered. The goal is to avoid color shifts, additional noise, or other artifacts from this process. Our goal should be to see a recovered result that looks as similar to the baseline result above as possible.
Modern cameras are often very good with shadow recovery, and that’s the case with the Z8. There isn’t much to see at 1-3 stops, so I’ll skip right to the 4 stop recovery. Below you can see the captured result (four stops underexposure) and then the result after I’ve add those 4 stops back in.
On a global level we can see in fact that yes, the recovered result on the right does look quite similar to the baseline result. If I put them side by side, I can see that the recovered underexposed result has a slightly different white balance, but ironically I personally prefer the recovered result’s white balance.
Looking in at a pixel level, we can see that the results are mostly similar, with the tiniest bit of additional noise for the recovered result. The biggest negative I can find is some faint striations in the solid shadow area, shown here:
It’s not significant, however, so I would consider this to be a very successful result. I’ve not had any issues that spring to mind with shadow recovery on the Z8.
Modern cameras also tend towards being less sufficient at recovering highlights than shadows. Overexposure causes texture to be lost in bright highlight areas, and it will also result in certain colors starting to disappear (which is why I include the color swatch board in the scene). In this series I progressively overexposure the image by 1-4 stops and then try to recover the highlights by reducing the exposure in post. At two stops of exposure you can see the loss of details in the image on the left. Colors and texture information have been lost in overexposed areas, but the right side shows a successful recovery of that information.
We can see that colors have reemerged in the swatches, and, if we look closely, we can see that lost textures in the metal of the camera have been recovered successfully.
The recovery looks very natural, so that’s what I define as a successful recovery. Somewhere between 2 and 3 stops we start to find the limit, however.
You’ll note that some of the colors aren’t completely recovered, resulting in an uneven color result on the timer face between the areas more in shadow and those with more full light. Some of the textures on the SLR face have been lost, and the saturation levels on a number of colors aren’t as good. The result is no longer completely natural looking. I won’t show the 4 stop recovery result (you can see it in the video review), but suffice it to say that it doesn’t look natural at all.
This result is pretty consistent with what I’m seeing from other similar cameras, as the numbers from Photons to Photos suggests. There’s enough real world dynamic range to take difficult landscape scenes and get a more compelling image out of them.
You can see the limits in this image. I essentially could raise the shadows as much as I want, but not all of the blown highlights in the sky were recoverable. In a scene like this, you might want to bias exposure towards the highlights (underexpose) to allow for more information in the sky, as the shadows are more easily recoverable.
ISO Performance
High resolution cameras are often disadvantaged relative to lower resolution cameras due to having more pixels packed into the same area. When viewed at a pixel level, far more flaws are in evidence. Modern cameras are pretty good at mitigating these issues, however, and that’s mostly true of the Z8, though this is one area where having a lower base ISO can potentially have a negative impact. As you raise the ISO, dynamic range drops, which means that you have less latitude for editing images. If you are shooting at high ISOs, be sure to nail your exposure, and you won’t be doing the huge shadow or highlight recoveries that I showed above. The dynamic range of the Z8 at ISO 12,800 is under 5 stops! The native ISO range of the Z8 is 64-25,600, though it is expandable in both directions.
As you raise the ISO, the goal is to have as little additional noise as possible, no obvious colors shifts, and to avoid patterns in areas of the image that should be uniform (like blank walls, for example). Through ISO 1600 there is no problem. All I can see is some very faint pattern noise in the color swatches as compared to the base ISO on the left:
The pattern at ISO 3200 is largely the same, though with just a bit more noise. It’s still clean, overall, but I can see the shadows lifting just a bit due to the noise (black levels aren’t as deep). The results on a global level still look large the same.
At ISO 6400 this has become more obvious, and we can see that if we look at what should be a uniformly dark area (on the right), that the shadows are more irregular compared to ISO 1600.
I’ve shot a lot at ISO 6400 when doing events, and for the most part I’ve been happy with the results.
The detail and skin tones are still fine, but a closer look at the background shows that some grid patterning is emerging in the background.
Noise reduction software can help with this, though often at the cost of a bit of detail. I consider that to be usable, however.
I feel the same about ISO 12,800, which is largely the same but with a bit rougher noise. Things start to fall apart by the upper limit of ISO 25,600, however, as the rough noise in the pixels starts to really negatively impact black levels.
I would only use ISO 25,600 if absolutely necessary. I’ve used ISO 12,800 when necessary and found the results acceptable:
I don’t feel the same about ISO 25,600.
You’ll definitely want to avoid the expanded modes like 51,200, as the pattern banding becomes unacceptably noticeable. What I don’t notice is any kind of significant color shift at high ISOs, meaning that colors stay accurate.
The Z8 lags a bit behind either the Alpha 1 or the EOS R5 in ISO performance, but not by much. I haven’t hesitated to reach for the Z8 as an event recording camera, as I don’t feel I’ve been let down by either the autofocus or imaging performance.
Resolution
As noted, the 45.7MP resolution of the slightly bests the 45MP sensor of the EOS R5 (8192 x 5464 pixels compared to 8256 x 5504 for the Z8). This is actually a sweet spot for resolution, in my opinion, as it enough to provide for deep cropping options while not being overly compromised in other areas. That being said, the newfound ability of cameras like the Sony a7RV to shoot RAW at lower resolution options has (in my mind) really offset any significant penalty for the higher 61MP resolution of a camera like that.
The Z8 essentially gives you 3 options when shooting RAWs: Lossless Compressed (which averages roughly 60MB in file size), High Efficiency* (roughly 30MB), and High Efficiency (roughly 20MB). There isn’t really other full frame resolution options to choose, though you can of course switch to a DX (APS-C) crop at 1.5x which remains at a still useful 19MP. This is actually more useful than the Canon EOS R5’s APS-C mode, as Canon’s larger 1.6x crop results in a lower 17MP resolution despite the two cameras having very similar resolution. I shot for years with a Canon T1i (15MP), then a Canon 60D (18MP), and got a lot of great photos with both. The APS-C mode of the Z8 has more resolution than either of those.
You have a lot of cropping options with any shot:
I’ve been perfectly satisfied with the resolution point of the Nikon Z8.
Color Science
Every company has a slightly different approach to color science. Of the four major brands that I regularly use, I would probably rank Canon and Fuji in my top bracket with Sony and Nikon on the lower bracket, but with the recognition that there isn’t much of a difference. I can get beautiful portrait results with great skintones out of the Z8:
Images with a variety of colors look great, with nice saturation levels.
I would say that the optical glass in the lenses probably has more of an impact for me than the sensors in modern cameras. Put a Voigtländer on the Z8, and the colors just sing:
In fact, thanks to adapters like the Megadap ETZ21 Pro or the Neewer NW-ETZ, I can even shoot my Sony FE lenses (with autofocus) on the Z8. Want Sony G-Master quality on Nikon? No problem:
While Nikon can’t really match Fuji in the film simulation department, it does have a number of color profiles/”looks” in camera, and a number of those are interesting. There’s a wide variety of options, including a number of good monochrome options that filter certain colors for different looks.
All in all, this is a good sensor that isn’t class leading in any particular level, but competitive in them all.
You can check out a variety of images from different lenses in the image gallery here.
Conclusion
I had long been resistant to adding yet another camera brand to my kit, as I really don’t have enough time to cover the vast amount of new products that are continually making their way to the market, but when Nikon began to allow for more and more third party development, I knew that it was probably time to take the plunge. When I personally began to research their current offerings, I found that the Nikon Z8 was the camera that ticked the right boxes for me. It’s the kind of versatile, high performing camera that is a perfect match for the other cameras I use as tools for my business and for for my personal enjoyment.
I’m not personally a big fan of the integrated vertical grip style cameras, so discovering that the Z8 was essentially the flagship Z9 (vertical grip) in a more compact body told me all that I needed to know. The Z8 is not a small camera, obviously, and that was immediately apparent after I unboxed it, but I’ve also found the body to be tough and reasonably well laid out. After nearly seven months of use, I’m not convinced that I love all of Nikon’s ergonomic decisions, but I don’t hate them, either. It also feels like Nikon has largely caught up with the top competition in autofocus, as well, leaving me with a camera that I feel like I can use in basically all situations.
The Nikon Z8 currently retails for about $3800 USD, which isn’t cheap by any metric, but is certainly competitive with the other cameras in its class. This is a jack-of-all-trades camera that can be used effectively for everything from sports to portraits to landscapes to cinematography, so it is easy to justify the price…particularly if you make some money from your work. But even if you don’t the Nikon Z8 might be worth saving up for…particularly now that there are so many great lenses becoming available at reasonable prices. Put simply, after my first half year of ownership, I have no regrets.
Pros:
A Nikon Z9 in a more compact body (essentially)
Extremely versatile camera is pretty good at everything
Tough, durable body with a professional level of controls
Outperforms its specs in several areas
VR feels more effective than higher specced Sony systems
Excellent autofocus after firmware 2.0
Excellent tracking capabilities
No viewfinder blackout
Good viewfinder performance
Fantastic burst rates and (mostly) excellent buffer
Does not penalize third party lenses
Excellent video specs
Strong sensor performance in all tested areas
Solid price to performance ratio
Cons:
Rotations are opposite to all other camera systems I’ve tested
Some may find the body too large and heavy
Reliance on rear wheel for adjustments isn’t as ergonomic as it could be
Relatively little tilt options in the screen
Video AF feels a little less confident than the best from Canon and Sony
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 Review 
Sony FE 28-70mm F2 GM Gallery 
Sony FE 28-70mm F2 GM Review 
TTArtisan 75mm F1.5 “Swirl” Gallery 
Nikkor Z 50mm F1.4 Gallery 
