kit lens
is cheap and quite satisfactory
in everyone's impression
but in the past two years
Nikon has refreshed my view on kit lens again and again
Hello, everyone, I'm Kelvin
Today, let's talk about
these 3 kit lenses for nikon mirrorless camers
they are
24-50mm f4-f6.3
24-70mm f4s
and 24-200mm f4-f6.3 vr
In this video
I will also compare their basic specs and workmanship
image quality and performance
as well as suitable people and shooting scenes.
I hope this video can help you to choose a suitable kit lens
Let's start with the basic specs,
24-50mm f4-f6.3 is the smallest one
and 24-200mm f4-f6.3 vr is the longgest one
weight, 24-50mm 195g, 24-70mm 500g, 24-200mm 570g
24-70mm and 24-200mm feel almost the same on hand
all 3 lenses are external zoom lenses
however, 24-200mm is the only lens can be used at the 24mm end, without zoom
and it is also the only one lens with VR
the other 2 lenses need to twist and go to 24mm.
because the 24-70mm f4s is s-line lens
there is an additional s logo
and the number of the focal length is also engraved
and the number of 24-50 and 24-200mm are directly printed on it
also, because 24-70mm is s line lens
so it has manual and auto focus switch
while the rest do not
but 24-200mm, got a lock button at 24mm end.
both 24-70mm and 24-200mm are made in Thailand
since the 24-50mm is a pre-production lens, so the country of origin is not printed
but I guess it is also made in Thailand
No matter where it is made, Nikon's lens quality has always been very guaranteed
In terms of filter size, 24-50mm is 52mm, 24-70mm is 72mm, 24-200mm is 67mm
Comparing these 3 lens carefully, the external materials of them all look the same
so I think the s-lines lens are mainly different in performance.
In terms of materials and workmanship, the non s-line lenses are also very good
Nikon is really very conscience.
Finally, look at the lens structure and coating
These 3 lenses have their own characteristics, and in short, they are all great lenses.
In terms of optical properties
except that 24-70mm is constant aperture f4
the other two are f4 to f6.3
also, 24-50m and 24-200mm's aperture at f4 only when they at 24mm
with the change in focal length, aperture getting slower
the closest focusing distance of these 3 lenses are
24-50mm, all focal lengths are 35cm
24-70mm , all focal lengths are 30cm
24-200mm, the closest focusing distance varies with the focal length,
from 50cm to 70cm
in this part, I also added 70-200mm f2.8 vr s for comparison
On the 70mm end, the closest focusing distance of the 24-200mm is 58 cm,
70-200 closest focusing distance is 50 cm
and at the 200mm end, the 24-200’s closest focusing distance is 70 cm
and the 70-200 is 100cm
Next, let’s take a look at the close-up shooting capabilities of the four lenses.
at the closest focusing distance, if you want to take some macro shots
I personally think that whether it is the 70mm end of the 24-70mm
or the 200mm end of the 24-200mm, they are almost the same
We compare the image quality performance of these 3 lenses at different focal lengths.
close up indoors shots,
at 24mm end in the same f4 aperture
either 24-50mm , 24-70mm or 24-200mm central area of sharpness is very close,
edge sharpness, 24-70 the best, 24-50 second, 24-200 performance most Poor,
the aperture is reduced to f5.6 , the sharpness of the center area is hard to see the difference,
but the edge sharpness, 24-70 is still the best, 24-50 continues to second, 24-200 continues to third,
when the aperture is f8 , Both the center and the edges of the 24-50mm and 24-70mm are very close,
and the 24-200 is still the worst performer.
At 24mm , using the aperture f4 at the same time,
shooting at their closest focusing distance,
you can see the difference between their bokeh
at the 35mm end
24-50 maximum aperture of f5 , 24-70 remain f4 , 24-200 4.8
the center sharpness is still similar
due to the smaller aperture, the edge sharpness, 24-50 is better than 24-70 ,
24-200 still the worst
when f5.6 aperture
whether it is the center or the edge， 24-50 and 24-70 are difficult to tell the difference,
24-200 Center sharpness are similar to the others two lenses
but the edge was poor
when we set at f8, 24-50 and 24-70 still performed excellent in both centre and the edge
24-200 was relatively poor at the edges, but the difference from the other two lenses was not that big.
at 50mm
the maximum aperture of 24-50 is f6.3 , - remain f4 , 24-200 f5.6 ,
at their maximum aperture, whether the center or edge sharpness are very close in these 3 lenses
it is difficult to see the difference between these 3 lenses when we changed to f8
at 50mm
I also use the maximum aperture of their focal length and shoot at their closest focusing distance.
You can see the difference of bokeh.
at 70mm, 24-70mm vs 24-200mm
24-70mm remain f4, and 24-200mm set to f6
both lenses, the centre and edge sharpness look very similar.
you can spot the different of their bokeh easily.
when set at f8, whether it is centre or edge sharpness, 24-200mm seems a little bit sharper,
but you really need to compare carefully to see the difference.
next, we zoom to 200mm
lets compare with the 70-200mm f2.8 vr s
at this focal length, the maximum aperture of 24-200mm is at f6.3, and 70-200mm is f2.8
the centre sharpness , both are very close
and the edge 70-200mm wins.
when we set at f8, the result continues to be the same, the center difference is not big, the edge 70-200 wins.
In order to be able to compare more accurately, I shoot at outdoors, shooting at normal distance to compare these 3 lenses.
at 24mm f4
the vignetting control of these 3 lenses are very close, which is not obvious.
at 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm
the difference between the 3 lenses is similar to the results obtained when shooting at closed distance
but the difference is relatively small, and it is more difficult to see the difference between the 3.
I personally think this is due to the It is the Z6 with 24.5 million pixels ,
not the Z7 with 45.75 million pixels
so when shooting at a distance, the difference between them seems relatively small.
At the telephoto end, 70-200mm is still superior.
At 200mm , what is the difference between a 2.8 aperture and a 6.3 aperture?
I used the 24-200 and 70-200 lenses to shoot in the same scene.
When they use the maximum aperture,
you can see the blur effect of 70-200mm, which is incomparable with the 6.3 aperture of 24-200 .
lets compare their purple fringing and chromatic aberration control.
The performance of these 3 lenses is almost the same.
When shooting at the widest angle of 24mm and the maximum aperture of f4 ,
it is difficult to see the purple fringing of all three of them.
At 24mm , if you shoot at close distance
from the perspective of the distortion control of the three lenses, 24-70 is the best, followed by 24-50 , and finally 24-200 ,
but when we shoot at the normal shooting distance,
the 3 lenses Distortion control is very close and all performed well.
In order to better show the star burst of the three lenses, please see the photos below.
Since they all have 7 aperture blades
they can shoot 14 starbursts when the aperture is reduced
Anti-glare, as seen from the video
24-70 is relatively better. However, the difference between the 3is not obvious.
Focus speed, I use single-point focus, from near to far to test,
in fact, at 24mm , 35mm , 50mm , 70mm , the three are almost the same,
at 70mm and 200mm , even if compared with 70200 2.8vr s
the difference is not too big,
especially when the two lensse at 200mm, and focus from far to near
both need to find the target, and the focus is not very quick
Video focus, it can be seen that no matter which lens is used, their performance is very close .
In terms of video breathing effects, the three are very close.
If you compare them carefully, 24-50 is relatively weak.
Hand-held shooting, also shooting at 24mm , walking normally,
although only 24-200 has vr
but hand-held shooting, they all look very similar .
All three lenses can be used on Zhiyun's weebill s
But if you use Ronin-sc , only 24-50 can be perfectly balanced
24-70 needs to remove the eyepiece and hood to be perfectly used,
24-200mm I believe it cannot be balanced
Finally, which people and usage scenarios are they suitable for?
I personally think that these three lenses are all good kit lenses, and they have their own characteristics.
The 24-50 is suitable for people who often take the camera out of the house and like a light and compact lens.
It is good to use it to record life.
Or maybe if you like to shoot vlog ,
14-30mm and 24-70mm are too heavy for you
and 20 and 24mm 1.8s are too expensive,
and also, you really want to hold the camera for long time to shoot, 24-50mm will be the best option!
compare to 24-70 f2.8s, 24-70mm f4,
it is lighter, the overall quality is also good,
this lens can be either hand-held camera, also suitable for shooting video on gimbal,
with a prime or zoom lens,
both entry level and professional photographers can meet most of the shooting needs.
The 24200 lens is actually more suitable for ordinary enthusiasts,
and do not plan to buy a telephoto lens like 70-200 ,
but also, would like to shoot at 70 to 200mm focal length
this lens can satisfy most people's daily shooting and travel shooting.
In fact, If paired with any 1.8 aperture prime lens,
this two-lens combination, I personally think it is the most suitable for travel photography
even for daily use, it is also the most cost-effective combination
Please leave me a message, and let us know your choice.
above is all the content of this video.
if you like my video, please give me a thumb up, leave a message share it
and don't forget to subscribe to my channel
thank you for watching, see you next time! bye!