Nikon 70-200mm 2.8, Z -vs- FL (2024)

I currently own the FL E version of the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 lens, and have used it with both my DSLRs and with my Z9. Now, with the Z version on sale, and with another nifty discount I can get if I order it within the next ten days, I can save about $500 US on the lens.

So, I have to ask those who have used both of these lenses on the Z X cameras, is the Z version really better than the FL? Is it worth getting the Z, image wise?

Granted, I also want to be able to use it with a 1.4 TC, as well, on my Z9. So if you've also used the Z version with the Z TC 1.4, please also provide your opinions and feedback.

ksh*tijsharma said:

Would be interesting to know the difference between 70-200 FL and 70-180 Z as well if someone has any insights.

Click to expand...

See Also

Z - Nikon Z 70-200mm f2.8 S + Telekonverter 2.0Z 70-180 F2.8 vs FTZ + F 70-200 F2.8 VR II: Nikon Z Mirrorless Talk Forum: Digital Photography ReviewTestbericht: Nikon Z 70-200 mm F2.8 VR SAnwendungsfälle 70-200mm - Fotografie Forum

Thom Hogan just posted his review of the 70-180mm lens. You might find it to be worth reading.

i loved my 70-200e and i think the s is a bit better and also doesn’t need the ftz

must upgrade? no. but like the others i have no regets

I shoot the FL, compared to the AF speed I’m used to on the D750 and 810, the FL on the Z9 is a revelation. I love the IQ and while it’s one of the most used lenses in the arsenal, I have no desire to replace it with the current Z mount. The resale prices are already low, further incremental reductions are not going to hurt that much more, it delivers fantastic results and I’d rather prioritise a 14-24 and a wildlife tele zoom/prime to round out the Z system.

If I needed to use it with a TC I think I’d rather buy the 100-400; as good as the results of the Z70-200 with TC are, I can’t see the combo performing better than a 100-400.

leoparker said:

The NIKKOR Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S is a remarkable lens for all type of videography or shoots. Capture the moments of events Smoothly, silent AF with virtually no focus of breathing.

Click to expand...

Yes to all those, but it's not parfocal, which would have made it perfect.

Nimi said:

... but it's not parfocal, which would have made it perfect.

Click to expand...

I've had access or owned a camera for a long time, and taken many photography classes, as well as an engineering optics class many years ago. I don't recall ever hearing the term parfocal before your use. Now that I have, and looked up its definition, I'm better for it.

And now I'm wishing that my zoom lenses all had this feature, although I likely wouldn't want to pay for it!

Whiskeyman said:

Well, I'm now waiting on the delivery of the S version. When It arrives and I can use it, I'll be able to add my own answer to all of yours. I just hope my experience with this lens is the same as yours!

Click to expand...

Good for you - Seriously, you will LOVE it.

I'll mention, I bought this for my 70-200 2.8 S, it will also fitment for the 400 4.5. It is top quality, very much recommended. (Admins -delete if not appropriate). I bought it from a friends recommendation.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08NJLGCPW/?tag=backcogaller-20

Nimi said:

Yes. I tested the entire Trinity side by side, went to Z on the 70-200 and 14-24, but kept the 24-70 f-mount. The 70-200 is my most used outdoors stills lens and the S outperformed it on AF speed and overall IQ. The latter is only discernable when put side by side. My guess is they are indistinguishable in a blind test, certainly on print.

Click to expand...

I know this thread is about the two versions of the 70-200, but was interested to see you kept the 24-70 f-mount version?
I ask because I’m in the market for a 24-70 but have seen some great reviews regarding the f-mount version on the Z9.
How are you finding it?

markymark said:

I know this thread is about the two versions of the 70-200, but was interested to see you kept the 24-70 f-mount version?
I ask because I’m in the market for a 24-70 but have seen some great reviews regarding the f-mount version on the Z9.
How are you finding it?

Click to expand...

I could not discern a difference between the F and Z so I kept the F. I still use an F-mount camera (F5) and while I shoot mostly primes on it, this is an important zoom for it as well. The shorter and longer zooms in the 2.8 Trinity were noticeably better, which is mind-blowing given how good the Fs are. I also own the 24-120 S, which while not as good as the 24-70, is very versatile. And I have pretty much all the primes in the range in Fs and Zs, so I'm well covered.

Nimi said:

I could not discern a difference between the F and Z so I kept the F. I still use an F-mount camera (F5) and while I shoot mostly primes on it, this is an important zoom for it as well. The shorter and longer zooms in the 2.8 Trinity were noticeably better, which is mind-blowing given how good the Fs are. I also own the 24-120 S, which while not as good as the 24-70, is very versatile. And I have pretty much all the primes in the range in Fs and Zs, so I'm well covered.

Click to expand...