Markag

I used the converter, together with my F-mount 70-200 2.8E on my Z7.
Traded for the 2.8Z version and yes, thrilled with the results. You won't be disappointed.

Highmesa

I’ve used Nikon cameras since 1968 after being given the Nikon F as a gift. Since then I have used every other camera mfg , including Canon, Pentax and Pentax. The F mount 70-200 was terrific. Because I will never part with my gift Nikon, Nikon FM2, D2,D3, or D850, I will always keep this glass. However, I now use the Z9 and my wife uses the 7.2. I will not say the F mount is not a keeper, but the Z 70-200 is noticeably better to me. I used this lens only on our loop through Bryce Canyon Utah last Summer. Understand, this NP practically screams for a wide angle, but I just wanted to try my visualization with the moderate zoom telephoto. I was amazed at how I saw everything differently and how great the Z lens was. Drop the bucks, get a full frame Z Series Nikon, I suggest a 7.2 or Z9 and go with the newer Z70-200. You won’t go back. The Z8 will be out this year and you may want to wait. But Nikon has a history with the Z Series of being slow on orders for newer models. Get a 7.2 or newer with your Z70-200 and you’ll never go back.

daledo Loc: Billings, MT

I shoot the z9 and have been making do with the f mount lenses with adapter until I can save the money for the z 2.8 lenses. This is maybe a nutty suggestion but after struggling with the prices for the z 2.8 zoom lenses I decided to get a cheap z 50-250. It's dx but meets my needs in the short term for a walk around zoom that produces good sharp pics. Reduces pic size to around 15 mb but that is adequate for much of my shooting needs. With the 50-250 and the z 24-70 f4 and I have the ranges covered and can go with the two lenses and have the equivalent of 24-350 with the two lenses for a decent walk around combo until I can afford upgrades. Of course indoor light without a flash poses a problem with those lenses but my low fstop fz mount lenses work really well on the z9 so I don't feel an urgent need to upgrade. Long explanation of a solution to the problem of inadequate zoom walk around s lens currently available.

Markag

I'd also add that although I was thrilled with the Z's 70-200/2.8, I lusted for a longer lens. Rather than lay out the big $$ for a 400 I purchased the TC 2x teleconverter. This "rig" is on my Z7 currently. My testing shows no perceptible image loss with the converter.

Markag

Test shot with the "rig" mentioned.

(Download)

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

It did take quite some time for Nikon to meet the demand for the Z9, but the other Z cameras were readily available shortly after release. We shall see what the Z8 (??) brings.

kenzlenz Loc: Western North Carolina

thanks

ELNikkor

If you've got a Z camera, get Z lenses.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I've had the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8G zoom for many years and have used it on everything from a D200 to a D850. The newer versions are said to be better, although in real life it's pretty hard to imagine how that might be. Personally, I cannot imagine how you could go wrong with any of the 70-200mm options from an optical standpoint.

Now having said that, it is also true that you have just spent $6000 for the most recent generation, technically current camera. What would be the rationale for purchasing a less current lens to save a few hundred bucks rather than one that is optimally designed to work with that camera? Besides...all of the F Mount 70-200mm lenses are substantial, heavy beasts. The S lens will save a little of that.

I'm not trying to be judgmental with this question. I have so far not purchased a mirrorless camera because none is available that does what I want at a price that I am willing to pay. But if I were in your shoes, that is the question that I would be pondering.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I like to slightly stop down all of my lenses to ensure extra sharpness. Including my f2.8s.

neillaubenthal

The Z 70-200 is really sharp, has that nice 2.8 bokeh when needed, works excellently with the 1.4 TC and still very acceptable with the 2.0 TC. The 100-400 is also very sharp up to about 325 or so and still plenty sharp after that and also works well with the 1.4 but wouldn’t use the 2.0 unless I had to for reach. The 400/4.5 is better than both, better than the 500PF, and still slightly better to the same as the 500PF with the 1.4 and better with the 2.0 then either zoom. Then there are the really expensive 400, 600, and 80”s…but they’re a niche lens more than general purpose, expensive as I noted, and too big for 69 year olds to hike with too far anyway…

Pretty much across the board the Z lenses are better than their F equivalents…more sophisticated design software, larger throat t9 the body, and improved coatings.

Royce Moss Loc: Irvine, CA

I d all the research I could find and decided on the f/4. I picked up a like new one. A great lens.

Royce Moss Loc: Irvine, CA

I did all the research I could find and decided on the f/4. Very happy with it.