Today, I’ll share a few thoughts on the Nikon Z 35mm f/1.2 S lens after getting a chance to use it on a real-world test.
First, a couple of caveats. One, this lens has been out a couple of months already, so this is not a hot take. Rather, I wanted a chance to use this lens in the real world in a real scenario rather than just rushing to give my thoughts on the specs. Second caveat: this lens poses a bit of a quandary to review for someone like me. For one, this is a prime lens, and I am almost exclusively a zoom shooter. The reason I’m primarily a zoom shooter is purely practical. When I’m working at speed, I want to be able to adjust as quickly as possible. And while zooming with my feet is still an option, few things are as quick as the flick of a zoom barrel in or out. The second reason this lens poses an interesting quandary for me personally is that, quiet as it’s kept, I’ve never been a huge fan of the 35mm focal length. I understand its utility on a practical level: wide enough to capture a scene, not so wide as to cause significant distortion—a solid all-around focal length. It’s just that I’m one of those people who tends to shoot my 24-70mm at either 24 or 70 and rarely stop in between. I actually like a little wide angle distortion. That’s not an objective statement—simply an acknowledgment of a subjective fact that I brought with me into my evaluation. So, the Z 35mm f/1.2 S had an extra burden in trying to win me over.
The other question one must ask when opting for this lens would be whether the lens quality justifies the cost. After all, at $2796.95, it’s almost three times as expensive as the f/1.8 version ($846.95) and almost $800 more than my trusty Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S ($1996.95). Now, of course, there are some very obvious differences. The Z 35mm f/1.2 S lets in more light than the f/1.8 S and a lot more light than the 24-70mm f/2.8 S. So if you are going to need to shoot natural light in low-light scenarios, that difference alone could easily be worth the added costs.
In terms of sharpness, I don’t have the f/1.8 to directly compare it to, but I definitely noticed a sharpness about the f/1.2 S. I’m not a lab test guy, but I did do the standard brick wall test, and all results were sharp and well resolved. But even without that test, I can say from a strictly feel standpoint that the images rolling off did have a certain elevated quality to them. Again, not something I can prove in a mathematical sense—just something that, coming from shooting with my 24-70mm most of the time and comparing my own experience side by side, the 35mm f/1.2 S’s quality was tangible.
The third thing about this lens that one must take into consideration is the size. Usually, if I do go for a prime lens, it’s less likely to be because of sharpness and more likely to be because I don’t feel like lugging around a zoom. But the Z 35mm f/1.2 S is actually larger than my zoom. So I’d be choosing it over my zooms on a basis other than weight. Nikon does have a number of lightweight primes to choose from. The 35mm f/1.8, for instance, only comes in at 370 grams. The 35mm Z f/1.2 S comes in at 1,060 grams. My Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S comes in at 805 grams. So clearly, Nikon has prioritized quality over portability. But as my old professor used to say, there’s a reason why high-quality lenses tend to weigh more. The 17 elements in 15 groups that form the optical design of the Z 35mm f/1.2 S versus the 11 elements in 9 groups that make up the Z 35mm f/1.8 S also account for the variation in heft.
I could, of course, quote you specs all day, but the real question is whether or not the lens is worth the extra weight (and costs). Simply put, the Z 35mm f/1.2 S (and its fellow master primes like the equally girthy Z 50mm f/1.2 S and Z 85mm f/1.2 S) are the type of lenses you use because you definitely want to use those specific lenses over other choices. I know that sounds simple, but let me elaborate. There are certain lenses that live rent-free in my photo kit despite the fact that they haven’t actually been mounted to my camera since they arrived in the box. They were cheap enough, light enough, and useful enough to take a risk on an impulse buy and didn’t require much more thought than that. They may not be the winners in the lab lens tests, but they don’t have to be. They are just there because they are convenient.
Conversely, a lens like the Z 35mm f/1.2 S is something that you pick up because it is going to be your workhorse. You are a prime shooter who loves the 35mm focal length (or at least finds it most practical), and you are willing to invest in the best piece of glass you can to achieve optimal results because the images taken with it are going to account for a significant portion of your output. And if it’s optimal results you are after, this lens does a great job of delivering the goods.
Taking it into the field to do a recent shoot with an actor friend of mine, I set myself a goal. Despite my tendencies to reach for my zoom at every moment, I would instead confine myself to using only the Z 35mm f/1.2 S. This proved a challenge, as I found myself in every situation from being crammed in the back of a car to trying to capture a large swimming pool surrounded by high walls with a fixed limit to how far I could back up. But aside from one shot where I really wished I had a longer focal length to choose from, the lens delivered in every scenario.
In terms of ergonomics, I definitely did notice the added weight. My wrists aren’t as strong as they used to be. But the lens balanced well on my Z9 body. Obviously, mounting it to a smaller body like the Z6III would make the full unit all the more front-heavy. Which fit is right for you will depend on your own personal preferences. One thing I do appreciate about having the larger-body Z9 with these top-of-the-line lenses is that the body vs. lens ratio feels more balanced. But again, that’s a subjective opinion, and your feelings may differ.
Focus speed was fast and accurate. I mentioned it earlier, but there was a sharp quality about the images that I felt added a bit to the sense of image quality. The rubber ribbing around the barrel of the lens makes for a comfortable hold. The focus and custom rings are well spaced, as are the customizable function buttons you’ve grown accustomed to with the Z line of lenses.
The 35mm focal length has long been a favorite for photojournalists and event photographers. And while I am neither, I can easily see how this lens would be one that could be mounted to a photojournalist’s camera full-time.
Naturally, if you are paying more for an f/1.2 lens, there’s a good chance that you are doing so to take advantage of the bokeh. And this lens doesn’t disappoint. With a minimum focus distance of 11.8 inches, the lens provides plenty of beautiful depth-of-field options for you to take advantage of. And like all of Nikon’s recent line of lenses, the Z 35mm f/1.2 S is optimized to minimize focus breathing.
From another practical standpoint, I was personally pleased to see that the filter diameter on the lens is 82mm. I know this is a small thing. But because my 24-70mm has an 82mm filter diameter, as do the other top-tier primes in the Nikon Z universe—the 50mm and 85mm f/1.2—it makes for a convenient kit for a professional photographer that allows him or her to quickly change accessories across the product line.
Pros
-
Image quality
-
Bokeh
-
Great in low-light situations
-
Versatile
-
Low focus breathing
-
Constant filter sizes across the f/1.2 line
-
Balances well on larger camera bodies
Cons
- Weight
- Price
Conclusion
So, in the end, should you purchase the Z 35mm f/1.2 S? Well, only you can answer that question. What I can tell you from my hands-on tests is that you won’t be disappointed by image quality. In fact, it would be hard to do better at the same focal length. The only questions really to consider are whether or not you are a prime shooter who uses the 35mm on a frequent basis and whether the added stop of light is worth the bump in price versus the f/1.8 version. But clearly, if you prioritize image quality above all else, this could very well be the lens for you.
