Mirrorless wide angle lenses are going to be sharper in the corners than any F-mount lens. The Nikkor 14-30mm f4 is a good option, and less expensive. It's got loads of distortion but corrected in camera.

When comparing the two lenses, one of the main differences comes in terms of size and weight. The Nikon Z 14-24mm f2.8 is significantly more compact than its predecessor, making it an ideal option for travel photography or other situations where you don't want to be weighed down by bulky gear. It also offers a greater level of portability for those that prefer a smaller camera setup.

In terms of its performance, the Nikon Z 14-24mm f2.8 offers improved optics and autofocus capabilities in comparison to its predecessor. The lenses are also designed to be dust and moisture resistant, so you can feel more confident shooting in challenging conditions. Additionally, the zoom lens is equipped with a Nano Crystal Coat that helps to reduce ghosting and flare.

Finally, the Nikon Z 14-24mm f2.8 offers improved compatibility with the newest Nikon cameras and lenses. This means that you can take advantage of features such as Eye AF and animal detection autofocus, as well as Night Vision mode and other features that are only available on newer models.

Overall, the Nikon Z 14-24mm f2.8 is a great upgrade from the older Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 lens, with improved performance, size and weight advantages, and more advanced compatibility with newer cameras and lenses. It is an ideal choice for those who need a versatile zoom lens that can handle challenging lighting conditions and get the most out of their camera's features.

I'm contemplating purchasing one of these lenses. I can acquire the older lens for around 1k from KEH.com, while the newer lens is over 2k. I don't mind using the adapter but I'm wondering if I'm sacrificing quality. There's also the older 14mm. With the zoom lenses I find that I'm always using the 14mm focal length and never zooming, so a fixed prime might make more sense.