I got into this hobby thanks to a friend who used to shoot with a Nikon D700. My first interchangeable‑lens camera was the Nikon D90, and from there I moved up to the D800 before eventually switching to Sony mirrorless. At the time, Nikon was pretty far behind in tech, especially autofocus, so the switch made sense. Fast forward to today, and I’ve completely fallen for the look of the Nikon Zf. I picked up a used one on the buy‑and‑sell forum in almost new condition with fewer than 1,500 shots.
The deal included the Voigtländer 50mm f/1, which is a gorgeous lens. I’ve never owned anything faster than f/1.2, so I’m excited to keep it for now and really explore it. The manual‑focus aids on the Zf work beautifully, and I can easily see this lens staying in my kit. I also picked up the 40mm f/2 SE, and that finally made the Zf feel closer to my highly portable X100VI. I’m not planning to leave Sony just yet, but long‑term, it doesn’t make sense for me as a hobbyist to maintain two full ILC systems.
My goal is to keep the Nikon kit small (both in number of lenses and size of lenses). I’m not interested in Nikon’s big f/1.2 primes, so I’m looking for a small, consumer‑friendly set of lenses that pair well with the Zf. Here’s what I’m considering:
Nikon 40mm f/2 SE (default everyday lens)
Nikon 24–120mm f/4 (family events and kid trips)
Viltrox 50mm f/2 Air (very affordable, and I’m loving the sample images on the forum)
TTArtisan 75mm f/2 (portraits and extra compression; a companion to the 40mm when I leave the zoom at home)
Viltrox 14mm f/4 Air (I rarely shoot this wide, but at this size and price, it’s easy to keep in the bag)
I’m also thinking about picking up the Megadap adapter so I can try some of my Sony lenses on the Zf, especially the Loxia primes and the Tamron 35–150. It would be fun to see how they handle on the Nikon body, and it might help me decide what to keep long‑term.
I’d also love to hear your favorite accessories for the Zf. I know I’ll need a grip for sure, but if there’s anything else that really improves the experience, I’m open to suggestions.
The 24-120mm f/4 S is a very solid choice and the 40mm f/2 is a great lightweight everyday carry. Viltrox will be releasing 35 and 55mm f/1.8 EVO APO lenses soon that you may also want to consider. I assume these will be great on the Zf as well.
I would definitely focus on native and third party Z options before dipping down the megadap path.
I think you have a great starting point with the lenses you have listed out, though the 40 and 50 are sort of focal length redundant to me. You could also consider the Voigtlander 50/2 APO for that space for a different type of experience (if you find the 50/1 too bulky).
Obviously the 24-120 is the must-buy no-brainer on your list.
For the record, I'm finding the 35 EVO (previously mentioned) just a tad large for the Zf as an everyday 35, just as I found the 85 EVO. Perfectly fine if you have something in mind you want to shoot with them, but overall just a bit large for the body. Much prefer having those on the Z9.
I don't have the zf but my compact set up for the z5ii/z7ii are:
26 2.8 (I'm a huge fan but some people bemoan the lack of sharp corners, which I don't care about when just on a walk about)
40mm 2 love
tt 75 f2 good, picture quality is fine, but build quality worries me some
Non compact set up is the 14-30, 24-120 and megadap adapted Tamron 50-300. also have the 40 1.2, Sigma 65 f2, and 24 1.4 in Sony mount that I'll adapt on occasion.
unless you already have Sony lenses I agree on skipping the megadap just for the sake of adding them.
Seabassius wrote:
I don't have the zf but my compact set up for the z5ii/z7ii are:
26 2.8 (I'm a huge fan but some people bemoan the lack of sharp corners, which I don't care about when just on a walk about)
40mm 2 love
tt 75 f2 good, picture quality is fine, but build quality worries me some
Non compact set up is the 14-30, 24-120 and megadap adapted Tamron 50-300. also have the 40 1.2, Sigma 65 f2, and 24 1.4 in Sony mount that I'll adapt on occasion.
unless you already have Sony lenses I agree on skipping the megadap just for the sake of adding them. ...Show more →
I have a lot of Sony lenses already. I own the Loxia series except for the 21, along with the 20 to 70G, 100 to 400 GM, 50 GM, 35 ZA, Tamron 35 to 150, and the Viltrox 14. I really like my Sony gear, and I am not moving back to Nikon because Sony is missing anything. The only thing Sony does not give me is the retro design aesthetic, which I am a complete sucker for, and that is what pulled me toward the Zf. A lot of videos on YouTube claim that the Megadap adapter gets pretty close to a native autofocus experience, but I also know that YouTube can be full of exaggerated takes designed to get views.
I feel that it's tricky to build a really compact kit with Z-mount as the mount itself is so large it makes all the lenses chunky.
I'd probably lean towards the Viltrox EVO 35mm + 85mm for consistent ergonomics and aperture rings. And/or Voigtländer 28mm + 50mm APO.
The Nikon 40mm f2 and Viltrox 50mm f2 seem redundant.
The 14mm seems too specialized, I'd switch that for a UWA zoom that you only bring when you know you might be shooting wide - either the 14-30mm or 16-30mm.
You may not need a grip. I never liked one on my Zf and always preferred the camera bare. My only must-have accessories were a soft touch shutter release and a rope strap. Played around with a lot of lenses, but never seriously took to anything other than the CV 40 f/1.2 and later the 28 f/1.5.
The Nikon 40 was almost there, but it was fat and slick if you hold the camera by the lens. It's a practical lens and I really like it on my Z8, but I always ended up going back to the CV's on the Zf. The Viltrox lenses with narrower barrels do look like they'd be more comfortable to hang onto as well.
I agree that 40 and 50 feels redundant, absent any significant character or use case differences. 40mm isn't 50mm and vice versa, I get it, but unless you're planning to do a 40/75 combo or a 50 on its own, you might want to just pick one. Or change up the character of one or the other. But I have tons of lenses that overlap unreasonably just because I like both lenses, so I'm in no position to talk about efficiency
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
I have a lot of Sony lenses already. I own the Loxia series except for the 21, along with the 20 to 70G, 100 to 400 GM, 50 GM, 35 ZA, Tamron 35 to 150, and the Viltrox 14. I really like my Sony gear, and I am not moving back to Nikon because Sony is missing anything. The only thing Sony does not give me is the retro design aesthetic, which I am a complete sucker for, and that is what pulled me toward the Zf. A lot of videos on YouTube claim that the Megadap adapter gets pretty close to a native autofocus experience, but I also know that YouTube can be full of exaggerated takes designed to get views....Show more →
I would agree with the close to native and say I never notice a difference, but I'm not a birder.
If you're interested in super portability, it might be worth checking out voigtlander M lenses adapted with a 6 bit ttartisan or techart adapter. The adapter adds some weight, but the z-axis/depth size of the lenses is so tiny compared to native lenses.
I think I’m thinking along similar lines to you about potential lenses, although I don’t consider full-frame Nikon to be particularly compact. That’s okay, though, since I like its other qualities. (For compactness, look at crop sensor systems.)
In my head I’m considering the Nikon 24-120/4 for family events, just as you are, but I might equally get the Tamron 35-100/2.8 instead. You may want to consider that as well.
Either of those lenses plus your 50mm Voigtländer would be a great small kit, I think, unless you find yourself wanting to go a lot wider or a lot longer for any reason, or you want a small autofocus prime. (I’ve found the Nikon 40/2 to be a great lens with good autofocus and pleasing rendering for my tastes.)
Is the 24-70mm f/4 S basically a smaller, lighter version of the 24-120mm f/4 S with shorter range? I mean in terms of IQ and rendering. I have heard very positive things about 24-120.
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Is the 24-70mm f/4 S basically a smaller, lighter version of the 24-120mm f/4 S with shorter range? I mean in terms of IQ and rendering. I have heard very positive things about 24-120.
The 24-120mm is slightly better but both are really good. I'd say the differences don't matter in real world scenarios, except for the shorter range. Maybe also the nicer sunstars from the 24-120mm in some scenes.
A few folks have already mentioned Voigtlander lenses as an option, but along those lines....
Since you are not afraid of manual focus and don't require faster lenses than f/2 or f/4 as you indicate, may I suggest that you at least research and consider some vintage lines of lenses. Now, you may not want "character" lenses and may prefer a more modern rendering a la Sony, but it may be worth a look.
I'm thinking Pentax, Olympus, Minolta. Many primes and zooms are a fraction of the cost of modern lenses. It will require an adapter, but many of the lenses are so small compared to modern "do everything" zooms that they are still petite in comparison..with the adapter.
I have a TTArtisan lens that I mix into my kit so I would certainly not be afraid to start down that road as well.
I've built a kit from one of those legacy manufacturers. Not only are the renderings and color consistent, but the look and feel of the lenses share the same or similar characteristics that you may not get mixing Nikon, Viltrox, TTArtisan and Voigtlander.
ZF
Viltrox 20/2.8
Nikon 40/2Z
Pick your 75/85 and that's it.
The 14 is wider than you're likely to use frequently. The Viltrox 50/2 is redundant and boring, compared to the smaller and honestly better 40/2Z.
As much as I love the 40Z, the 35/1.4 and 50/1.4 are sooooooo good I have all three. I hate having 3 native primes with such a short spread, but they are all so damn good, and give me exactly what I'd want in each respective focal length.
It was tempted by its small design but I think 24-120 is a better single “Do It All” lens. 24-70 is so much cheaper though. It can be found easily for $350 to $400. Literally half the price of a used 24-120.
fjablo wrote:
The 24-120mm is slightly better but both are really good. I'd say the differences don't matter in real world scenarios, except for the shorter range. Maybe also the nicer sunstars from the 24-120mm in some scenes.
Not everyone likes the collapsing design that the 24-70mm f4 and 14-30mm have.
---------------------------------------------
For now I am okay with the Voigtlander 50 f/1 I purchased with the camera. I might adapt my Loxia lenses. Not a huge desire to buy more manual lenses at the moment. I am very interested in trying new Chinese lenses though that also bring a lot of character and are so affordable.
Masshippie wrote:
A few folks have already mentioned Voigtlander lenses as an option, but along those lines....
Since you are not afraid of manual focus and don't require faster lenses than f/2 or f/4 as you indicate, may I suggest that you at least research and consider some vintage lines of lenses. Now, you may not want "character" lenses and may prefer a more modern rendering a la Sony, but it may be worth a look.
I'm thinking Pentax, Olympus, Minolta. Many primes and zooms are a fraction of the cost of modern lenses. It will require an adapter, but many of the lenses are so small compared to modern "do everything" zooms that they are still petite in comparison..with the adapter.
I have a TTArtisan lens that I mix into my kit so I would certainly not be afraid to start down that road as well.
I've built a kit from one of those legacy manufacturers. Not only are the renderings and color consistent, but the look and feel of the lenses share the same or similar characteristics that you may not get mixing Nikon, Viltrox, TTArtisan and Voigtlander.
ZF
Viltrox 20/2.8
Nikon 40/2Z
Pick your 75/85 and that's it.
The 14 is wider than you're likely to use frequently. The Viltrox 50/2 is redundant and boring, compared to the smaller and honestly better 40/2Z.
As much as I love the 40Z, the 35/1.4 and 50/1.4 are sooooooo good I have all three. I hate having 3 native primes with such a short spread, but they are all so damn good, and give me exactly what I'd want in each respective focal length.
Thanks for the suggestion. I think TTartisan 75mm matches the design of ZF well so I am probably going to get that. I will also look into Viltrox 20. Honestly even 20mm is too wide for me. I am usually happy with 35mm and above.
Please share how the Sony lenses work with the Zf sensor! The sensor filter thickness is a little less on Z, so I'm curious if it helps or hurts the lens performance. Particularly the 40/1.2.
I enjoy my CY 28/2.8 and CV 35/1.7 and think they would compliment your lenses. Just got back from a vacation where the CY 28/2.8 served as a great all-purpose lens, for family as well as landscapes. Great mix of color, sharpness, handling, and brightness for the semi-wide focal length.
On the less portable side, a 105/1.4E makes for an excellent portrait lens.
RoamingScott wrote:
For the record, I'm finding the 35 EVO (previously mentioned) just a tad large for the Zf as an everyday 35, just as I found the 85 EVO. Perfectly fine if you have something in mind you want to shoot with them, but overall just a bit large for the body. Much prefer having those on the Z9.
Interesting, I was bouncing back and force between the Zf and Z5II and decided for the Z5II primarily because of the grip.
The Viltrox 85 2.0 EVO is just fine on Z5II. Feels perfectly balanced. Same with the 24-120.
