For me camera or objectiv is not the thing witch doing good picture. Only your artistic personality can do really art pictures. Human eye see different than cameras. I know fotografer, witch use one fix objective and old camera and his pictures are still perfect. Fotografy is art, and if you are not artist your fotos never be good.

I wonder, when you compare F lenses with Z lenses, you are actually also comparing what DSLR (F mount) and Z bodies do. And since there is no way to test a Z lens on a DSLR body, my question is how much of what we see is a product of the lens and how much is a product of what the machine or software precesses, corrects, compensates or whatever you want to call it do. Because I have a theory that it is cheaper to make a mediocre lens and "correct" it by software than to make a very good optic that needs fewer software corrections.

If “better” equals soft edges, peak resolution over 2 stops darker than maximum, busy background details and huge focus breathing, then yes, F lenses are always better 😂

Sometimes you need character over clinical sharpness.

Please, ask the professionals about the lenses! And, it seems these days that there has never been a good photograph shot with any lens until now! And yes, I am a pro and I shoot with Nikon since the beginning but don't ask me with which gear because I could get ashamed 😂 Or, just watch some great photographers and learn from their work! All this stuff about what's better is a pure nonsense and very far from the art of photography, get serious!

The 24-70 2.8 S lens is one of my favorites ever. Nostalgia is one of the worst and most expensive aspects of photography and videography. A lot of us would be well off to just move on.

Didn’t notice much difference between 24-70 g v 24-70 z except for the far corners. The vignetting is better on f mount as well as the colors are more intense and brighter. So much so that I kept my f mount 24-70 2.8G. The image from z mounts are a bit too contrasted for my taste and I usually have to dial down the contrast slider.

Ftz itself is heavy as a lens.

I'm not a pro photographer anymore and mainly shoot video. So the lenses I want for video I'm moving to Z mount. But I still have some F mount lenses I do use for my personal stuff, mainly the dogs and as they were good enough for pro work a few years ago, I can't really justify splashing the cash for that little bit extra (sharpness or convenience). To be fair I don't really see a difference in IQ between my new Zf and my old D750, apart from the ZF just nails focus on my dogs eyes with a greater hit rate than I can on my D750.

in till nikon makes lens like Sigma Sport 120-300mm F/2.8 for Z mount body's. my F mount lens is better

Having sold all my Canon kit after 15yrs and finally going mirrorless with Nikon Z bodies, I love the vast choice. Z lenses for work, hands down. But for personal work I picked up, by chance, a Voigtlander 50mm f1.5 Aspherical lens. The beauty of the mirrorless bodies is being able to use focus peaking and IBIS with a small, manual focus, old school lens and seeing the micro contrast and rendering of these beautiful lenses. It’s reignited my love for photography after so many decades. A Z6/7 with a small, manual lens is also compact and light. Great for personal work.

Loved the briefly overlayed comment “We have no money for new clothes“ 😂

The Z Mount Objektives are superb and the “S” versions are amazingly good. F mount was good (some of them superb as well) but the Z objectives are a different world.

I jumped from my old d3200, which I Love, straight into Z6II with 50mm 1.8s. All I can say is it's Fantastic. The 50mm 1.8s is a superior lens, specially for the price.

I fully jumped on the Z-bandwagon. I really liked the 105/1.4, but the 85/1.2 has even more/better characteristics for my kind of pictures - definitely not clinical. Sold my last F-mount lens (58/1.4+FTZ) to get a bit of down-payment on my ordered 135/1.8. I hope to both get my Z8 back from its inspection and then the 135/1.8 soon. I'm a bit strange, but before the 105, my main used focal-lengths were the (f-mount) 85/1.4 and 135/2.0 (before the high-megapixel-cams). And I plan to use the same 85+135 combo with the Z-system. Not sure if I'm not totally weird, but I really look forward to the 135's rendering for my images. For anything wider than the 85, I plan to just use my smartphone.

Very enjoyable conversation. Glad I came across it. For the time being I’m staying with my D750. In fact several of my prime lenses are old Nikkor D lenses because I sometimes shoot film. I’m no film snob, I just like the process of film. And I like the convenience of digital.

The new S lenses for Z mount are superb.

I put my voigtlander 40mm f2.8 on my z7ii. Lots of character. Micro-contrast good. Colors really pop out.

I won’t get rid of my 105/1.4, the 58/1.4 and the 28/1.4. but I bought the 24-70S, the 50/1.8S, the 85/1.8S and the 40 and 28 pancakes. I am doing people photography.

For me it started almost three years ago, I tried the Z50 1.8S and half a year later I had the whole 20/35/50/85 family. I have a lot, a huge amount of RAW on disks, I often go back to them and there is no way to go back to the F bayonet. The image with Z combined with S lenses is do "ready". In the Z6II, AWB and ADL work, the colors even at high ISO are often so good that they make you lazy... Size Z body and glasses, the silent operation of AF and VR during video and photography gives such freedom and fun that I will only think about changing it when medium format will achieve this accessibility for the average person. I think that in 10-15 years the next step that will provide so much fun will be medium format!