A Look at the Nikon Z 5 and NIKKOR Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 Lens

The Nikon Z 5 offers shooters the chance to get into full frame mirrorless territory at a relatively affordable price, while the NIKKOR Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 lens backs that up with a small footprint and extremely reasonable cost. How do they hold up in practice? Check out this great video to see.

Coming to you from Nigel Danson, this great video takes a look at the Nikon Z 5 and NIKKOR Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 lens. The Nikon Z 5 is a well-rounded budget full frame option that offers 4K, 5-axis sensor-shift Vibration Reduction, 3.69m-dot electronic viewfinder, dual SD slots, dust- and weather-resistant magnesium alloy chassis, and built-in focus shift mode. Meanwhile, the NIKKOR Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3 lens features three aspherical elements for reduced distortion and increased sharpness, two extra-low dispersion elements for reduced chromatic aberrations and improved clarity, Super Integrated Coating for improved contrast and reduced flares and ghosting, a compact design, programmable control ring, rounded seven-blade diaphragm for smoother bokeh, and dust and moisture-resistant construction. Altogether, it looks like an impressively affordable, durable, and portable option, making it a nice setup for landscape photographers. Check out the video above for Danson's full thoughts on the combination. 

Alex Cooke's picture

Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based portrait, events, and landscape photographer. He holds an M.S. in Applied Mathematics and a doctorate in Music Composition. He is also an avid equestrian.

Log in or register to post comments
18 Comments

That's a whole lot of money for a consumer grade camera with a cheap zoom with very limited range.

Don't really see the point in this lens. If you pay that much for a camera, isn't the 24-70/4 the least you would want? And it's not like weight and size are significantly different, you need the same kind of storage space for both and you can't pocket either of them.

Nikon has this half-assed approach. They said they want to focus on higher end but of course totally giving up on entry level will crush their reach and market share in no time. Canon is well set-up with their EF-M line and they have the Canon RP as well as more affordable FF primes. Nikon still thinks it's 2009 and throws the poor people a bone with the Z50 and the same old boring zoom lenses (and you can forget about a DX prime of course). The Z5 with this dinky lens is supposed to be the RP alternative, I guess? Well, it's not. Nikon is screwing up on the lenses time and time again.

That kit lens is lighter and much more compact when stowed. I suppose you could buy the camera separately and also buy the 24-70 f/4 if you wanted. Are you upset because you have the choice?

I am "upset" because Nikon spent all this time hyping up the Z-Mount as if it was the second coming of Jesus and all they deliver are those boring-ass zooms. 16-50 and 18-140 for DX for instance. Like, really? 2007 called, they want their lenses back. This 24-50 falls in the same category. With e.g. a 21-50 they might have gotten something (wasn't Z mount supposed to be this revelation for wide-angle?) This is just boring.

Like, "hey, I have my iPhone here, what can you recommend?"

"Well, how about this camera for $1700. I mean, it has worse zoom range than your iPhone and those cool oof-backgrounds, you can pretty much forget about that. Low light might be on par with your iPhone though, so I guess that's something."

"So what I am paying all this money for?"

"Well, you have more resolution, which is very important when you will print all your photos instead of posting them on social media. I mean, you are going to print them... large? Right? Right?"

"Uhhh...."

Wow! None of that rant was based in reality. Congrats.

Got an argument as well or did I just make you upset?

I just couldn't come up with an argument to the stuff you made up. I guess I could create my own fantasy if you like.

"and all they deliver are those boring-ass zooms." And the 5 S-line primes and that crazy 58mm Noct lens.

"16-50 and 18-140 for DX for instance." I don't think that you (have tried) to understand the purpose of these lenses. They are light and compact and not boat anchors. If you don't like them, they are not for you.

" I mean, it has worse zoom range than your iPhone and those cool oof-backgrounds" This made no sense. I don't know what to say.

"Well, you have more resolution, which is very important when you will print all your photos instead of posting them on social media. I mean, you are going to print them... large? Right? Right?" If all you care about is instagram, why are you even interested in these cameras and lenses? No sense.

Oh, yes I forgot about the NOCT.... ROFL holy sh*t, that is so funny. I am sure you bought that monstrosity, like so many others did :D Nikon is losing it, which is apparent when you look at market share and apparently so are its fanboys.

Are you here for any particular reason, or just Trolling?

Irrefutable arguments =/= trolling

Its more the unnecessary anger and vitriol... it is possible to have a discussion without trying to sound like a twat

Which ones were your irrefutable arguments? I just saw nonsensical ranting that had no basis is reality.

Sorry you couldn't read my in-depth comment for whatever reason. In short: Nikon's lens offerings are embarrassing considering their propaganda regarding Z-Mount. There is zero innovation compared to the 50 year old F-Mount. Noct? A bad joke that Leica did already years ago. It doesn't even have AF (again, super embarrassing). 18-140? 24-50? How about 16-300 (Tamron) or 10-25 (Panasonic) No innovation. Sad state of affairs indeed.

Caveat emptor: Cost of Sony E mount lenses very high because lens mount design smaller than new Nikon Z and Canon R lenses. Upgrading my Sony A7 to Sony A7III about 2000 euros out of pocket....not really worth it. Nikon Z5 as my next f-stop?

Cost of Sony lenses is high, but you can buy tamron, samyang, tokina, viltrox, etc. All of them with AF and exif data. Obviously the A7III is more expensive than the Z5 because it's a better camera although it should come down in price on the next months. You already can fish some good deals.

If you come from an A7, you can also upgrade to an A7RII as I did. A big upgrade in AF, IBIS, video, resolution and high iso. I paid for it 1400€. The same price I paid for the A7. Also, nikon lenses aren't the cheapest out there on mirrorless.

Good idea. Sony A7RII well worth considering in any exchange deal. The battery life as the only negative. New Nikon Z5 outstanding camera but not available with NIkkor 50mm f1,8 in France as of now. So Sony as my best option. Nikon seems more interested in US market?

Not sure why he’s so outraged . The Z5 is actually a decent buy . It’s FF with IBIS , dual slots and what will most likely be great dynamic range . The 4K might be cropped but you can get the FF with 1080p at 60 FPS. The 24-50 will make a great walk around lens that will cover anything from landscape to a portrait . It’s a reasonable price to pay . In addition you can get the FTZ in the bundle for about $47 , which brings the price to around $1750 . Some people get too hung up on a few negative narratives propagated by YouTube “photographers” . Every user case is different .

I have no problem being offered an extra choice.