jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

I am hearing a lot of great feedback for the new Z24-200. I own the Z24-70S and 28-300 and 70-200 f/4. I've also watched Ricci's nice comparisons of both lenses to the new Z. Nothing yet comparing the 70-200 f/4.
This is my take right now.
Z24-70S vs Z24-200: There are no significant differences between the two lenses at comparable aperture and focal lengths. The 24-70 is a little better regarding focus breathing, but not significant. If this was it, then I would sell my 24-70. But, I am wondering how much better the 24-70 will perform at f/4 @ 50-70 regarding portraits and tighter pictures. Will I be giving up too much if I do sell the 24-70?
28-300 vs Z24-200: Not only was the new lens superior at every comparison; but there is also a significant difference in focus breathing at 200mm! Now I wondered what I would be giving up at the 201mm-300mm range. So, I did a deep dive in Capture One for these focal lengths using the 28-300. It represents 1%-2% of my total files. I can easily dismiss a bunch of these since I only kept them because I have the 'room'. But there are a handful that I do really like. I think that I would probably have been able to get the same pics with the 24-200 since I could get closer to the subject. So, even fewer keepers are at the longer focal lengths 250-300! I'm leaning towards selling this lens. And, if I did wildlife or birds, which I do not; I would get a different lens anyway.
So, I am really interested in hearing form those who may have a similar quandary. And to add...I do not want to keep a lens for the sake of keeping it for the chance it may be used. I know it will stay in the closet until it is an antique!
Thanks to your thoughts.

User ID

The 28-300 has such extreme focus breathing that for my use its REAL available long end is seldom 300 ... mostly 200 or less. I don’t shoot sporting events from the bleachers which would allow the lens to operate at 300mm. Point this lens at an informal portrait situation and when it focuses the max FL drops to around 135mm. Somewhere between sports and portraits the max FL is about 180 to 225.

Soooooo for my use I’d hafta know if the 24-200 has MUCH less focus breathing. If good news, I’d see the 24-200 as equal to the 28-300 at the long end plus wider at the short end. IOW no loss in updating.

Having added the 24-120 which has no significant focus breathing, I tend to neglect the bulkier 28-300 as it’s really only about 25% longer in my use. I find the wider short end is more important than the modest loss on the long end.

The other aspect of “for my use” is that I don’t worry about distortion, shading, and resolution lab test numbers. For the special jobs that need the “view camera look” from a small camera, I have non-exotic primes. So I don’t require my zooms to do the work of primes.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Just curious.
Is focus breathing a problem because you do focus stacking or video productions?
Because for general photography it is usually not an issue at all.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Like a carpenter you have to match your tools to your work needs. Don't perseverate over the details which may, in the long run, not be visible in the end product - the image.

Only you truly know your needs.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Yes, you are right! Right now I am fixating on technical aspects and not real use. Will wait for some real world feedback.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Some times details don't allow us to see the forest through the trees....will wait for more feedback. Thanks.

harry-j

I had a similar dilemma, and decided to order the Z 24-200 f/4-6.3 to supplement my Z 24-70 f/4S that I enjoy for night photography. Granted, there's crossover in focal length coverage, but there's something to be said for shooting at f/4 @70mm 1/6th sec ISO 100 without a tripod.
Considering the superior edge sharpness, lack of focus breathing, weight, and the elimination of the need for the FTZ adapter, there may be other advantages through the focus ring programming and more to go with the new Z 24-200.
Sell the 28-300...you won't miss it.
Harrimon

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Did you have the 28-300?

harry-j

I rented one for a couple of weekends, it is a great lens but the technological advancements in the Z glass is an improvement.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

I gotta say that 24-70 f4 is some great glass. Not a big fan of variable focal lengths, tho, so the ftz is gonna be a goto for awhile if I want to shoot long (just got the 14-30 f4 and it's working nicely, so the short side is pretty cool!).