First test
THE LURE OF F/2.8 For many years, f/2.8 zooms have been considered the standard for pros and serious amateurs alike, being easier to shoot with in low light and giving better subject separation than variable aperture models. The Z 17-28mm f/2.8 and Z 28-75mm f/2.8 certainly fit in, being highly versatile optics. I used the maximum apertures for portraits, dimly lit interiors and twilight shoots, where you’re looking at a stop more shutter speed than Nikon’s f/4 options. The f/2.8 specification quickens autofocus, giving the camera more light to use locking onto subjects, which was noticeable. These lenses should soon be joined by a similarly designed Z 70-180mm f/2.8, making a nice set of fast glass covering almost any subject.
STANDING PROUD A wide aperture of f/2.8 can prove useful when light is limited, like in the above forest scene shot with the Z 17-28mm, but this is a versatile lens suited to plenty of other scenarios
“IT HAS A VERY LOW WEIGHT AND SMALL SIZE FOR A FAST STANDARD ZOOM”
f/2.8 it shows plenty of definition, even if the frame edges fall away slightly. Generally, I found shooting landscapes at around my usual f/13 or f/14 setting gave pleasing results. Vignetting is quite strong when wide open, but is easily corrected, while there’s very little sign of flare. Chromatic aberration also appears minimal, and another plus: the lens shows very little smearing of points of light at the edges of the frame. That’s useful, as it’s likely to be put into service for starry skies. Z 28-75mm f/2.8 When it comes to framing options, this lens will feel familiar to anyone who’s shot on a 24-70mm standard zoom. It does feel slightly restricted, and often didn’t push as wide as I wanted, while its 75mm setting isn’t a great deal more useful than 70mm. Personally, I love my Z 24-120mm f/4 S. Though lacking the light-gathering potential of a faster zoom, this has a genuinely more useful reach. That being said, I managed to produce some decent results from wide-ish and short-telephoto landscapes, portraits and still-life details. Like its ultra wide-angle sibling, the Z 28-75mm f/2.8 feels quite basic in design and lacks inputs other than zoom and customisable control rings.
The former is a good size, rubberised and turns in less than a quarter- rotation, which means framing is quick. However, the front element does push out when zoomed, which is always a compromise, though it’s one by no means unique to this lens. More positively, it’s very light for an f/2.8 zoom and is sealed all around. OK, it isn’t blessed with vibration reduction, but nor are Nikon’s other Z options; that’s taken care of by IBIS on the full-frame models, bar the Z 5. Optical image stabilisation is more valuable on lenses extending beyond the Z 28-75mm f/2.8’s max reach. The lens has a very low weight and small size for a fast standard zoom, so pairing it with my Z 7II and 17-28mm results in a very light and uncluttered bag on hikes. The 67mm front filter size is identical to the wide zoom, so there’s no messing about with stepping rings or doubling up and fumbling for different sizes of screw-in filters either. On the downside, the front element rotates a little on zooming, so graduated filters or polarisers need to be adjusted,
though you’d likely check them anyway when reframing a scene. As a general purpose lens, the Z 28-75mm f/2.8 performs faultlessly in terms of AF. It’s not the speediest, and often has a microscopic wobble on acquisition, but no more so than with my Z 24-120mm f/4 S. It picks up subjects quickly in single AF and does well to hold them in focus in subject recognition modes, meaning you can work with confidence. Image sharpness is decent, if not spectacular. At its widest, the lens is best in the centre at around f/4 to f/5.6, but it’s still very good at f/2.8. The edges are somewhat less clear but never indistinct, evening up with the middle at about f/8. At the long end, it’s still good at f/2.8, but not as clear – still fine for portraits where any fall-off in the corners isn’t an issue, and delivering a lot of detail. There is some strong vignetting at maximum aperture, but this is gone by f/5.6 and flare is well-controlled. Likewise, I didn’t spot much in the way of fringing, even in high-contrast areas like backlit leaves. PN
17-28mm
Verdict Though not exactly cheap, these are surprisingly good mid-range lenses that give Nikon’s top-of-the-line glass a run for its money at a fraction of the cost. They perform in a very similar way to each other, both in build, handling and optics, being light and giving decent image quality across the range – albeit with much stronger sharpness in the centre than the edges on the 28-75mm. They also focus quickly and quietly. The main downside is the zoom range; while not too far from the competition, they felt a little restrictive on occasions, with the Z 17-28mm making me pine for a Z 16-35mm f/2.8 S or similar.
28-75mm
PROS Small and light, affordable, centre sharpness, very little distortion, good AF CONS Sharpness in corners (28-75mm), zoom range, vignetting (17-28mm)
TO THE MAXIMUM Shots taken at f/2.8 with both lenses remain defined enough – though this isn’t necessarily the preferred setting
Issue 108 | Photography News 37
photographynews.co.uk
Powered by FlippingBook