[JJ_SO]

"The plan" looks fairly reasonable to me.
I'm a bit puzzled that both Canon and Nikon have time for releasing exotics though (RF 28-70mm f/2, 58mm f/0.95).
While I get the idea behind the S 85mm f/1.8, I'm not so sure about the sex-appeal of a 20mm f/1.8.
The S 24-70mm f/4 was also a bit of an odd decision (vs the planned 24-105mm f/4).

Showcase lenses are needed as proof of concept or as unique units to make customers buy into a new system. I just can't see many customers to burn 8000 $ (just slightly under 10 k francs or €) for... Something like the 18-35/1.8, the 24-50/2 or the 50-100/1.8 Sigma offers for DSLRs, would have been a bigger magnet than a 58/0.95 - to me, so it's rather insignificant.

The whole Z series of lenses can be named as a series of odd decisions: Why so many f/1.8, why no f/1.4, why so many FLs in the same range (3× 50ish, plus 2× 50 ciovered by zoom...)? To me it appears Nikon wants to avoid the problems faster lenses bring with and at the same time make a lot of money out of medium fast primes - all of them are more expensive than their DSLR twins, "now imagine how much we'd ask for an f/1.4!" The 24-70/2.8 S is the most expensive Nikkor you can get in this class...

So far I still can't recognize a good reason why ML lenses have to be more expensive than their often more complicated to make DSLR counterparts. I mean, else than normal "greed". The ML lenses feel cheaper, are made cheaper, all lack of a decent distance scale, filter thread was selected with the idea to bring a new one for each lens... It is fun to shoot with it, but I still raise my eyebrows about some new fashions...