Nikon Z 40mm f/2 versus Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 S

 

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/5.6 1/60 ISO400

After writing some positive blot entries about the 40mm, let me tell you why I sold it now. I see others writing in the forums how much this lens pleases them. Most of the time, someone adds that the lens is "good enough" and only pixel-peepers will notice the difference. Some claim that the 40mm range is more versatile because it is wider. While I understand all that, we should really be aware what we are doing.

In fact, we are placing a <200€ lens on our >2000€ full frame cameras, only to save a bit of weight. If you put a good lens hood on the 40mm (and you should due to its lack of flare resistance), the size difference is not that big anymore. Your combo will be 20% lighter. I too was very fond of being able to put everything in a small backpack or shoulder sling. However, my 50mm fits in there almost just as well.

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/3.2 1/60 ISO560

If you really want a compact setup to walk-around, an APS-C or even MFT one would be the better choice. Those cameras are meant to be small and lightweight. I do understand that buying another walk-around camera when you already own an expensive full-frame one is a financial matter too. But you should really decide what you want.

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/5.6 1/60 ISO1400

Is the 40mm f/2 really on the same level as the S-line lens? In fact it is, "most of the time". On closer inspection you will find difference even without pixel-peeping. A bit more sharpness, a better Bokeh look, a little less flare and blooming, lack of CA in critical situations, a faster AF, better cooperation with the IBIS etc. all add up to an overall better experience. It does indeed not matter much most of the time, and thus the lens is considered "good enough". Wider than f/4, the differences are more pronounced, and the strong field curvature of the 40mm at f/2 might really matter. 

So my point is that you should really consider your overall goals. If you want a high-end camera, but also a lightweight one, the Sony A7C is a good choice. I am a Nikon guy. So I got myself the entry level full frame Z5, a camera which satisfies my needs. But I begin to realize that it is not a good idea to put anything but the best lenses on it. The best that I can afford or want to afford, I mean.

If you are just attracted by the retro design of the ZF and its technical specs, but want to put a retro 40mm SE on it because of the "fit", I strongly advice to reconsider your thinking. You might be misled by the fashion look of this combo. Maybe, a Fuji is the better choice for you. They have small lenses that are much better, and their cameras are just as retro.

Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/5.6 1/250 ISO100