fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

Archive 2025 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Keiththom
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Hudson Henry's top lens recommendations include the Nikon Z 20mm f/1.8 AND and Nikon Z 14-24 2.8.

I'm in the process of changing from mainly DSLR to mainly mirrorless. The cost of the switch is daunting. I'm going to add a few lenses in and I've recently purchased the Nikon Z MC 105 and the Nikon Z 800. Also a Z9 and Z8. I'm going to need to be very careful in what lenses I add due to budget constraints. (I make no money from photography)

My main question is why recommend the Nikon Z 20mm 1.8 AND the Nikon Z 14-24? What does the 20 mm lens do for you that the 14-24 can't?

Obviously the zoom has a huge convenience factor because it includes so many focal lengths. And I realize primes generally have a bit more quality at their particular focal length than zooms. But is there a compelling reason to need a 20mm if you already have a 14-24? (which I don't yet)

My old f mount 14-24 is a beast and I could easily see getting a wide open prime to carry instead. They there's the issue with filters. But these two Z mount lenses both seem small in comparison, so size isn't a compelling issue, nor is the filter mounts an issue.

Apr 24, 2025 at 08:08 AM

Wezre
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I've never used or owned the 14-24, but as an owner of the 20mm 1.8S I can say that it's outstanding for astrophotography. I'm sure the 14-24 is great for astro as well, but that's the main use case I could see there would be a difference due to the faster aperture. But, the 14-24 is reportedly very sharp out through the corners at the wide end of the focal range even wide open. At f/2.8, my guess is that they're probably about equal unless you have a very discerning eye. The 20mm also uses a much more manageable filter size (77mm vs 112mm) and the 14-24 requires a second hood to use filters. I think this comes down to what you'd use the lens for and if you can live with 20mm as your only wide focal length. If that's not wide enough, if you need the flexibility of the zoom, or if you don't need the f/1.8 aperture for astro work then the 14-24 is probably the better choice.

Apr 24, 2025 at 08:44 AM

Ripolini
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Keiththom wrote:
Hudson Henry's top lens recommendations include the Nikon Z 20mm f/1.8 AND and Nikon Z 14-24 2.8.

he explains it here:
https://www.hudsonhenry.com/ats-list/#lenses
"Nikon 20 1.8 S My favorite night sky lens ever"

Anyway, I do own both the Zeiss ZF.2 21/2.8 and the Z 14-30/4 S.
Why? because I bought the Zeiss in the DSLR era, and the zoom in the ML era. I love both. The prime is amazing. The zoom is flexible, with similar size & weight. I do not practice astrophotography.

Apr 24, 2025 at 08:53 AM

NissanPatrol
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

the price delta is huge in favour of the 20mm f/1.8 ($2,496.95 vs $1046)

I will ask my self How often do I need the 14mm-19mm?

In my case not at all

Apr 24, 2025 at 09:32 AM

Todd Warnke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I have both, plus the 14-30. Each serves a different purpose. To start with, the 14-30 is light, easy to pack, uses normal filters, and at landscape apertures, plenty sharp. Plus, I like having that 25-30 range without having to swap lenses when shooting landscape. So, it's my travel wide, when I know I won't need f/2.8 (a note, the 14-30, 24-120 and 100-400 make up an excellent, 14-400, three lens kit that easy to carry and use).

The 14-24 is a wonderful lens. When absolute quality is required, it's on my Z8. It does take filters easier than the F mount version did, but they are still bulky to carry around. So, if the image requires it, I'll use it. And it works well for astro, with the flexibility of the zoom when creating compositions, and a decently fast aperture.

That said, the 20/1.8 is truly a great astro lens. If I know my comp and know that 20mm is close enough to get what I want, it's my lens. Plus, as a landscape lens it's also near perfect, though lacking the versatility of the 14-24.

For me it works like this - travel or landscape only, I will likely have the 14-30 on me. For critical landscape work, it's the 14-24. And If I'm combining landscape and astro, then it's also the 14-24. Then, if astro is the primary use, it's the 20/1.8 all the way. Also, I will often take the 14-30 and 20/1.8 as that's a real flexible setup and takes up no more room that the 14-24 + filters.

Last, if I had to give one up, it might just be the 14-24 as the 14-30+20/1.8 combo is roughly the same price and covers just about every use case pretty well.

Apr 24, 2025 at 11:59 AM

PixiPhotography
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I think Todd hit the nail on the head. I had all 3, and the 14-24 is something special. You can find a great condition used one for $1500 give or take. To answer your question:

What does the 20 mm lens do for you that the 14-24 can't?
I think it comes down to 1.8 vs 2.8, and at 20mm I'm sure its sharper. If you owned the 20mm 1.8 G for the F Mount, the Z mount is just that bit better

Apr 24, 2025 at 12:09 PM

rico
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Nice comparo by Todd. Not a big UWA shooter myself, although I do own the CZ D21 C/Y. The 14-30 would otherwise be my must-have, and replace my plastic fantastic 12-24 DX AF-S.

Apr 24, 2025 at 02:19 PM

jrscls
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Very good advice here. I have owned all three, 20mm f/1.8 S, 14-30mm f/4 S and 14-24mm f/2.8 S. Can't go wrong with any of these, but I ended up keeping the 14-30 for the small size and extra versatility with the ability to use 82mm filters. The 20mm f/1.8 is also excellent, although a bit large considering its focal length. The 14-24 f/2.8 is probably the best optically, but to use filters, you must use very large filters mounted in the lens hood, which can be a bit ackward.

If f/4 will do, I would start with the 14-30 and then add the 20mm f/1.8 if you want a faster aperature. IMO, these two lenses are preferable to only having the 14-24 even though it is technically the best of the bunch.

Apr 24, 2025 at 08:21 PM

woodstork
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

The 14-24 is special and worth every penny if you shoot landscape. One if the best lenses Nikon make. Absolutely prime lens quality across the frame. It is the widest high quality optic for Z mount. Main drawback is cost and the fact it requires massive filters. But it is a lens I usually pack when traveling in nature.

I rented the z 20 and liked it a lot but couldn�t justify owning it and the zoom. I don�t need f/1.8. I shoot night sky on a tracker every once in awhile, and the zoom does well. If I shot primarily night sky and didn�t use a tracker the 20 would be a must own. If you really want the 20, you could pair it to the Viltrox 15mm/1.8 and cover almost what the zoom does on the wider end. Total cost would be less than the zoom. I did recently buy the Viltrox for some night sky experiments because it is so cheap and very good for the price. Side by side the zoom at 15mm is stronger than the Viltrox with a more pleasing render and slightly better corners at 2.8. They are very close at f/4 and beyond. That Viltrox out kicks its price and if I were just starting my z-mount collection now and was trying to save money and manage cash flow I�d buy that first and add the 20 later. But cashflow aside, having one lens that does it all is hard to beat and I wouldn�t trade my zoom for the other two lenses.

Apr 24, 2025 at 09:01 PM

Lance B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

The 14-24 f2.8 is a stellar lens. I do not have the 20 f1.8S but have read the reviews and seen the evidence that it too is a stellar lens. For optical quality, they both deliver superb quality. So, the question is, what do *you* get for your extreme wide-angle duties. If you do not shoot the night sky, do not really need f1.8 and will want to shoot wider than 20mm from time to time, then the obvious answer is the 14-24. That is the reason I have it and love it. If you would not use wider than 20mm and f1.8 is a requirement, then get the 20 f1.8.

Apr 25, 2025 at 08:24 PM

Dj R
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I came back to Z mount in December.

I got the 20/35/50/85/135 primes

After a short while I realized I wanted 14mm bc of the need for UWA for interiors.

So I purchased the 14-24 off the f/s board for around $1500. I couldn�t believe how compact and light it was. Usually a 2.8 zoom is a huge penalty in that regard. Not this time. Nikon somehow managed to keep this one on a strict diet, while besting it�s F mount predecessor.

I�m a prime guy. But for ultra wide, I really dont think it matters for me. Sold the 20. I don�t do night skys though.

Hope this helps.

Apr 26, 2025 at 02:49 AM

bernardl
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I own and like both very much.

To me I pick either depending on the application. If weight is the priority, which pretty much is only the case for challenging hikes/climbs then I pack the 20mm f1.8 S, if I use the Z system for other applications and need a wide the I use the 14-24mm f2.8.

But the truth is that I have been using the GFX-100II + 20-35mm f4 for generic landscape work these past 2 years.

Cheers,
Bernard

Apr 26, 2025 at 03:16 AM

PIOK
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Be very Careful with comments here

Most of the time 14-30 f4 is all you need and is the most useful and versatile lens if you don't shoot indoor or at night

I have 14-30 and 14-24 ... ( before I have 24 mm - no 20 mm, and I loved opticaly but I just could not accept limitations of no zoom lenses especially wider angle so I sold it to actually help purchase 14-24)

Apr 26, 2025 at 10:07 AM

SoaringSprite
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I have the Z 20mm f/1.8 S and really like it. It has a pretty good MFD (20cm or 7.87"), which can get you some interesting wide-angle almost macro shots. If you like to get close, blow out the background wide open and get a wide field of view, this lens can do that. You can see some casual sample images with this lens in this gallery.
It's cheaper, lighter, maybe a tad sharper and faster, slightly better MFD, but you're stuck at 20mm.

Instead of going with the Z 14-24mm f/2.8, I got the Z 20mm f/1.8 S and the 14-30mm f/4 S. That way I still have the ultra wide angle for landscapes with 30mm at the long end, but I also have the wide aperture of the 20mm for low light. Those two lenses combined are about $100 less than the Z 14-24mm by itself when purchased new.

It depends on what you value the most.

Apr 26, 2025 at 10:26 AM

Charles Loy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I own both, 14-24 and 20mm 1.8 S lens. Both are wonderful lenses. The 20 1.8 can turn night into day, simply amazing! At night, follow the electric line down the road a half mile, read the roadway speed sign at 3/4 mile, razer sharp. Superior, as is the 14-24, for astro photography. I bought the 24 1.8S too, returned it.

Apr 27, 2025 at 08:30 AM

newyork
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

I keep thinking of a wide angle to go with my 40/2 or 35 apo for nyc stuff as well as local concerts and interesting kids shots. 20 keeps coming to mind. I wonder if 25 is wiser.

I�d grab the Voigtlander z but 15 is wide!

Apr 27, 2025 at 09:46 AM

AcuteShadows
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Nikon Z 20mm vs Nikon Z 14-24

Charles Loy wrote:
I own both, 14-24 and 20mm 1.8 S lens. Both are wonderful lenses. The 20 1.8 can turn night into day, simply amazing! At night, follow the electric line down the road a half mile, read the roadway speed sign at 3/4 mile, razer sharp. Superior, as is the 14-24, for astro photography. I bought the 24 1.8S too, returned it.

I'm very happy with the 24mm f/1.8 S, as a wider lens would just induce me to include more in the image than I should.

Apr 27, 2025 at 01:11 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell