Thanks Matt, you’ve definitely put the new 70-180 at the top of my wish list for lenses!

Wow this was a comprehensive episode! Amazing job! Thanks Matt!

This is great. Thanks so much for doing this. Definitely helps to convince me that the 70-180 is still a great option

Fascinating comparison, Matt. Thanks for doing the work to put this together. I own the Nikon Z 70-200mm f2.8 S and I love it, but the other 3 lenses are certainly capable of producing beautiful images as well.

I’ve been looking forward to this. :-) Great comparison Matt. 👍🏻 I will definitely be updating my G to the 70-180. Size is the most compelling reason. It’s small enough to have on me all the time.

Nikon has done phenomenally in focus breathing, where as Sony and Canon have issues with it. Sony's work around is "Breathing Compensation" which just crops the image. Well done Nikon

Great technical review of these lenses. I have the 70-200 f2.8 FL ED VR but fed up having to use the FTZ adapter to mount to my Z6ii. It was my favourite lens on the D750 and it's an absolute beast of a lens. This is also presents another issue, with weight and balance when attached to the Z6ii. I'm considering replacing it with the 70-180 f2.8 Z lens.

The 70-180 has got my attention but I would like to see it shot on Z6(ii)/Z7(ii) which are surely the cameras that most of us are shooting.

As a previous owner of the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 for Sony I would have really liked to see a bokeh smoothness test and some pictures of animals or humans with background, to judge the background separation differences at Z 180mm f2.8 & VR S 200mm f2.8. In case of Sony, the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 was almost equal to Sony 70-200 f4 in terms of background rendering but it was sharper than the Sony 70-200 f4 and also nowhere near as smooth as the Sony 70-200 f2.8 in terms of background separation. Sharpness will not be a deciding factor but the background separation and smoothness will be especially for Nikon because the price gap between the Nikon 70-180 f2.8 & Nikon VR S 70-200 f2.8 is not as much as the difference between Tamron 70-180 f2.8 & Sony 70-200 f2.8 GM II/ GM I (before the GM II arrived). Thank you 🙏🏽

Did anyone else think the new 70-180 performed way better than the 70-200 S lens at suppressing flare with the oncoming traffic videos?

I am still using the old VR G lens adapted to my Z6. It's always been sharp enough for me and my uses so I have never felt the need to buy the new one. Not anymore. LOL! Time to save my pennies for a new lens...

Hey Matt, what an interesting test. I think what it demonstrates is that if bought new, when each lens first appeared on the market, each would have been awesome. I’ve owned virtually every version of the NIKKOR 70/80-200mm f/2.8 lens, going back to the early manual F Mount ones, and they’ve all been good. Of course, pre-digital, none were expected to be used with video and any shortcomings would not have been apparent. One of my favourite ones was the NIKKOR AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D - the first AF-S zoom that Nikon made I believe - and I used one up to the time I transitioned to the Z6 where it was still great with an FTZ adapter. I then finally swapped it for the AF-S 70-200mm f/4 so that I had a lightweight lens to match a lightweight body - and that was superb too! Now I’ve got the brilliant Z 70-200mm f/2.8S I can see the differences, but you’d expect that with almost a thirty year span. I guess that the new Z 70-180mm f/2.8 is the modern equivalent of the F mount AF-S 70-200mm f/4 in terms of compactness and portability, so I might also get one for the times that I have to pack light. That then leads to the problem of those times when I ‘should’ use the Z 70-200mm but, frankly, can’t be arsed to carry the extra weight! Age and laziness catches up to all of us eventually, so I’d be worried that I’ve a super and expensive lens that I seldom use - how silly! Certainly for stills use on pretty much any Z body any of those lenses, native Z or F mount, will still cut the mustard in real world scenarios. Bravo Nikon for quality, consistency and continued development, and bravo Matt for demonstrating why Nikon is still a leading light today 👏🏼👏🏼

Thank you so much for very Important comparison on old to recent lens !!! 👌👍👏🏻

I laughed pretty loud, when you zoomed out from 200%. I had the old one running up and running until last year and I loved it so much. Yes it's softer than the new ones but for the price it's unbeatable. Edit: the 400% made me also chuckle :-D

I was really disappointed with my old 70-200mm G lens after a recent event. Now I see why. Time to trade up. I considered the FL ED lens, but they want $1500 for a used one! So I guess it is the 70-180mm for me. I'll thank myself the next time I travel.

video of great value to me as I might get the 70-180 2.8 Z lens, I own the Fl version and am still on the fence about buying the newer version. My FL version is sharp with the FTZ and your video confirmed that. I accidentally dropped my Z9 at a baseball game few weeks ago. it came loose from the FTZ connector and just fell approx 4 ft. off the monopod and Nikon 400mm 2.8 lens to the concrete and bounced a few times. I locked the FTZ like I always do so am not sure why it "unscrewed". But I put it back on the Nikon 4.2.8 and it shot clear images at 12 fps, ? ibis. I sent to Nikon in New York and they examined it and found nothing broken and adjusted anything needing adjusting. I am not sure if the ibis could be damaged from a fall like that but I don't use stabilization at 1/1500 sec. there was however a big scratch and dent in the rear Rt lower corner just missing the control wheel. Ted in Sebastian, Fl.

Your great test just reinforces my decision not to replace my 70-200 FL ED with the Z equivalent for my Z9. Thanks!

I decided long ago that I wanted to keep my F mount trinity f2.8 lenses because I still shoot DSLRs. My plan for the Z system was to keep things light for travel…I love the Z 24-120mm f4 and a few fast Z primes for that use case. I must say, I am eager for the Z 35mm f1.2 and the 135mm f1.8, but if I did go with an f2.8 zoom, the light 70-180mm seems a great option.

I own the 70-200 f/2.8 S, or I would get the 70-180. The 70-200 G being 20 yrs old may be showing its age some but still has what it takes. Today with post processing you can correct those minor flaws due to age. And I think it just has that character lens persona! Wouldn’t be unhappy with it. Nikon has made some great glass throughout the years and continues to just get better.

Good reminder of how excellent the old ED lenses actually were and still are. Cheers.

I am happy with my FL ED and VR S, but if I had to buy a Z lens today I would choose the 70-180 - the differences were to minor to justify the price jump. The last picture showed me again that it was worth to spend a lot of money for the 1.2s - can't wait to complete the "real trinity" with the 1.2/35 - one of the main insights of this comparison from my point of view is, that it's always worth to spend the money for original lenses because the colour rendering over 20 years of improvement is so similar (it was maybe more important with the Kodakchrome 64 but still)

Excellent info, thanks Matt 👏🏻 Curious if these comparisons were made using UV or clear protective filters, and if so, were they all exactly the same? Longer lenses specifically can be affected by front filters, and sometimes even the expensive filters show visible differences in quality as I’m sure you know. Purely just curious / thanks!

Great effort Matt, Thanks :) I was curious to see how the new 70-180mm handle 1.4x and 2x tele converters. I have used Tamron 70-180mm and it was impressive. Would love to see the impact of 'Nikonification' on it in terms of the usage of lens coating, motors etc. Any chance of comparing both?

Says a heck of a lot for how Tamron (maker of the 70-180 optical unit) have improved over the past few years . way to go !! .

Love my 70-200mm FL. Tried the Z version as well, but it did not meet my expectations. FL it is for me.

Thanks for doing these tests! I have the 70-200 f2.8G VR2 which I think is newer than the F2.8G you have tested here. I might be staying with this old f mount lens since I don’t use it as much anymore instead of upgrading to Z mount version.

Great comparison

What I would like to see is the framing at maximum magnification at closest focus on the 70-180 and 70-200 at the long end of each, what is the actual focal length, given that at the 200mm setting most 70-200's are less than 200 at the closest focus setting

Thanks for comparison 😊😊

Great video! Thanks a lot!

Thats why i got the FL ED when it was $1000 off, adapted it's amazing on the Z6 and Z9 !!

Impressive how well the FL ED holds up to the newer lenses. Thanks for the comparison! Makes me thinking if it might be worth it to buy an used FL ED ... just to be able to use it together with my D700 ... Keep up the great work!

I have the G version but it is the VRII version that came after your 20 year old one. In my transition to mirrorless it is most likely to replaced with the 70-180. The VRII does quite well on the Z9 but it remains a bit on the heavy side. (1540 g versus 795g). I don’t want the new S version even though that is clearly very sharp. I think a lighter lens at the 70-180 range is a better choice as part of my lens line up. The size difference means i am much more likely to have space in my walk around bag for the smaller lens.

The VR2 AFS was missing in this set, great work Matt!

I own the Z mount 24-120 F4 and it is stunning. I have pre-ordered the 70-180 F2.8 because as a keen armature landscape photographer I could not justify the 70-200 f2.8 Z mount. I just hope you are right Matt.

well, that pretty much makes up my mind... I'm picking up the 70-180 for regular use and keep my 70-200 FLED for nostalgia and take it out once in awhile just for the sake of using it. I love that lens. 😁

Great video as usual but I love to know how the new Z 70-180mm compares with the Nikon 70-200mm f/4 AF-S with FTZ on a Z8/Z9

Did you have the UV filters mounted when you tested?

Is VR the deciding factor between the two Z lenses? ..Does in body stabilization work well at 180mm or does in lens VR make a noticeable difference?

I bought the 2.8G new when it was released and spent a great deal of time assuming I was a lousy photographer with anything longer than 105mm LOL Still have the lens, still use it, still routinely disappointed with the results generally (though I've produced hundred of 'keepers' with the lens over the years), but this video answers a question I've posed to myself for a couple of decades now -- should I replace the G lens. Now I have to figure out as I shoot with both F and Z systems if I grab the last 70-200 f mount or jump to the Z lens (meaning I would only have the mushy G lens for the D6). And of course the G lens is simply unusable with a TC I've found, while by all accounts the Z version is a star with extenders! Ah, decisions :) Thanks for the video, as always. Love your insights. Cheers!

Having half way adapting to Z series and half still in the F, I am kind of sold on the new 70-180. It seems to be the best all around general f2.8 option but on seeing this for my case the E FL ED looks to be the best for both my D850, soon perhaps the D780 and all my other older F bodies plus as adapted with the FTZ. With a slight CA correction in post the FL ED looks to be performing the best of all of them to my eyes... Thanks Matt for this comparison and field work, You Rock sir!

Hi! Thank you for your test! I'm considering Tamron 70-180 and Tamron 70-200G2+FTZ. How about the af performace with moving objects?

Very enjoyable video, both the tests and music. You've got me thinking I should get an M42>z-mount adapter to see how a 50 year old 80-200 lens compares to the Z 70-200 S. Actually might also see how a 25-30 year old 180ED compares to the zed zoom. Nikon really seems to be firing on all cylinders with the Z-series. Both the less expensive and superlative S-series, and of course the wonderful Z9. Never could have dreamt how far photography would advance when I was starting out with my Dad's old Argus C-3. Again, really like this video. Just the right mix of details and pace. 🙂

They all seem to do remarkably well, would a client notice the difference? I think the main thing I’m looking for these days is ease of use, joy of use and streamlining my processes over absolute image quality 🤔. I’ve just bought the 24-120 to replace my 70-200 VR-S in some circumstances and am loving it so far!

Thank you. I’ll happily keep my FL ED lens and use the money saved to buy a different S lens.

Using a model or even a static subject and comparing frames would have made a bit more sense. A 70-200 can be problematic at 200mm combined with their closest focus distance. Some older Nikon F versions were more like 165mm lenses at minimal focus distance. I was more curious about the 70-180 performing in that regard, because we're already missing 20mm. If it turns into a 140mm at minimal focus distance, it could be a deal breaker. Also interested in the quality of the bokeh and how it performs with a TC. Like most people, I'm not using it for landscapes nor focussing on infinity. And I was not expecting it to be NOT better than the old Nikon F 70-200. Maybe in a next video?

I love my z70-200 and the IQ remains pretty good with the 2x converter. It was my backup plan after selling the 200-500 with all my DSLR and F lenses to get into Z . an't wait to see what the 180-600 is like ! Looking to see your reviews there Matt... z180-600 vs z100-400 +1.4x or +2.0x vs 400 f4.5 and F 200-500 phew 😅

Just ordered the 70-180 purely for the size and weight. I own the G version and I only use the lens during wedding ceremonies because I'll never carry it with me. Looking forward to getting this focal length back in my bag!

Beautiful work ,Nikon Z 70-180 For an amateur photo could it be a good alternative to the splendid Z70-200 f2.8 S that I own? Congrats

After seeing this comparison, I don't think that I'd replace my 70-200 FL until a version 2 comes out for the S, however many years that may be from now. 70-180 I'd debate buying to have around as a lighter weight option for when the speed of internal zoom is not needed. The FL I can zoom with one finger and it's hard to beat that

Interesting, it would be intriguing to include the 180-600 & 24-200 within their overlapping ranges. How flexible or nitpicking can we operate?

Thanks for the great comparison Matt. I was very surprised by how well the non-S 70-180mm held up to even the new 70-200mm S lens. It looks to be just about as good even in the corners. I wasn’t expecting that. I think many will not need to wait for a Nikon 70-200mm f/4 S and will just go with this lens that has almost as much reach and you’re getting the benefit of f/2.8.

Would be interesting to have comparisons of the 70-180 with tekeconverters, both x1.4/2. Compared to Z 100-400 S and AF-P 70-200E.

Super video, thanks! The little new one seems almost as good as it’s Z S brother. Interesting that you did not mention the T word all video, especially since the E mount Tamron 70-180 has the matching lens elements and everything? Maybe Nikon has fine tuned the design and improved the package...anyway, if the images look good, it is good!

Matt, I feel Nikon opt to engage you full time for all their gear brother! Really ....because of you, it does affect Nikon sales overall

One point you did not mention is, that the 70-200 VR S has VR and the 70-180 has not, which obviously could make a difference when shooting handheld.

Hey Matt, do you have access to the f mount 70-200 f.4? I would love to see a comparison if so! I wouldn’t mind moving on to the 70-180 but if the f.4 is still better I won’t. Thanks!

Looking at the results of this test, I'm definitely holding on to my 70-200 E FL...in almost every shot, it had an edge in contrast and sharpness...small, but noticeable...and no focus breathing. Maybe less vignetting, too, though very slight. In the nighttime shot of the fence and containers, the E FL was obviously focused at infinity...you can see the distant building windows and into the rooms in perfect sharpness where the others are not at all. Very surprised in the street 4K/120 street scene that the 70-180 had zero ghosting and the Z lens had major ghosting from the vehicle headlights...is this a feature for you videographers??? :) If I didn't already own the E FL, I'd jump all over the 70-180...and might anyway, who knows! Great test Matt...thanks for doing this!

Great comparison. I’m waiting for the Z 135 to see if it takes teleconverters. If so, I may use that combo in my bag for extra reach. If not, maybe the 70-180.

I have the first grey one and it gets stuck when it gets to the nearest focus distance. Good thing it has a 2.5m limiter focus distance.

The only separation that stood out was when you zoomed to 400 and looked at the building shoot through the atmosphere. The 70-180 wasn't the best but I don't share pictured at this zoom factor ... once at 100% the 70-180 held its own. I would have no problem investing in the z70-200, but this convinced me my decision to go with the 70-180 over the 70-200 was a good one. Having a lighter lens at the focal range will be great. Thank you for this "shootout" presentation it was well thought out.

Just sold my 70-200 FL ED lens in mint condition and replaced it with 70-200 S lens to go with my Z8. If I had watched this review beforehand, I might just stick with the ED lens for some more years.

Very impressed with Nikon developments which some haters bashing Nikon is dead few years ago.

Hi Matt. Whats your recommendation between the FL version and the new 70-180. I use a z8 body and mostly for portraits, events and sports? Same price point for FL ED used vs new z 70-180?

Just to complete list of the f/2.8 line-up since 2003, the AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VRII is not in this test.

Do think that the original trilogy of lenses will go out of vogue with this set of newer lenses coming through?

I need some help before i can decide what lens I need: Z 24-120 F4 or Z 70-180 F2.8

You must be sweltering in that Yellow Outfit. it looks like it would be good for colder than -40 Anyway. Thanks for that Comparison. I am using the FL version on my Z9, and have been happy with the results. If I didn't have my current Lens, then the 70-180mm would certainly be given consideration, as it appears to be Good VFM @17:28, you mention that the G lens is letting in less light, but the Z Lens is getting 2 times the Exposure, of the rest, and isn't any brighter

⁠weight is not much of a concern. Great results and fast autofocusing is. Usage would be sports, wedding and events. I would keep the lens for the many years to come till i can afford the 70-200 f 2.8 z version. Sorry. It didnt let me reply to your text.

Now this is what I want to see>> Do I sell my Z 70-200 S and get this 70-180 NON S lens in order to afford the 180-600 >> No the 70-2oo is Staying Nothing better on the Planet this S line version. I will fund the 180-600 elsewhere

Just for kick it would have been interesting to see the 24-200 perform with these siblings at f/6.3

At 18:30 you mention “variable focus” lens. I know what you mean. I think some lenses need calibration in the camera to be sharp because they back focus. I have a sigma 35 F1.4 art and it was terrible at AF when at infinity at F1.4. I would focus and then have to ever so slightly nudge the focus ring back some and it would be in focus. AF focusing close it was perfect. Fortunately this was only a problem on my old D800 and on my Z9 it seems much better.

I really don't enjoy large lenses. The 105mm /2.8 macro is about as big as I'm willing to go, and the 70-180 looks like it's pretty much the same size as that lens. I think it might finally be time to upgrade my F-mount 80-200mm /2.8 push pull.

People don't want to accept it but the old. 70-200 E is better than the new S in terms of image quality. The issue is AF with Z cameras. The S is far better if you have a Z7 II or Z6 II and better with the Z9 or Z8. So if you are doing portraits and stuff you can re-shoot, my advice will be: keep your E and change other lenses first. Focus breathing: normally the issue is more apparent on closer subjects.

I wish you tested the VR ii

I've never liked the 70-200 2.8 G. It was softer than the Canon or even the Tamron A009 counterpart back then. The FL ED is slightly back-focused in the 70mm shot.

Great comparison but most of us own the Z6s and z7s.

Honestly, the Z mount lens is a bit disappointing, not because it's not great, but because it brought absolutely nothing to the table over the FL E version, which seems to have slightly better contrast and sharpness even though differences are minute. Most of the Z mount lenses have been good improvements over the F mount counterparts, but not this one. I'll be using my Sony 70-200 GM II on the Z9, lighter and far cheaper where I live and better close-focus ability.

I think z 70-180 is shopper. Lol

Hi Matt, thanks a lot for the great video. As a professional, I have the holy trinity, but your comparison shows once again that you can unreservedly recommend the alternative from Tamron to an amateur photographer. Btw, I don't think Z 8 / Z 9, Lightroom or C1 already know the 70-180 mm / f 2.8. Greetings from Bonn, Germany, Frank