woodstork
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.13 #3 · p.13 #3 · Megadap ETZ21 just announced: will it be a game changer? | |
I think the bot response stating reasons for adapting E lenses to Z cams is hilarious, listing three zooms that Nikon produces their own outstanding native comparatives. I wanted to like Sony glass on Z cameras, because the used market is indeed larger.
My experience with this adapter is with two lenses Nikon doesn’t currently offer (35/1.4 GM and 135/1.8 GM). I had high hopes as these are often cited as benchmark lenses. I found these performed very well adapted, but slightly better on a Sony A7r3 than on a Z7, with better micro-contrast natively. Focus was reasonable, but slightly less reliable than when using native glass on either system. Based on this outcome, and the fact both of these lens types are not essential for my needs, I did not purchase either.
Regarding whether they are industry benchmarks, I can’t endorse that. Both are indeed excellent, but there are better. In side by side comparisons, the Leica SL 35mm APO f2 on a S1R is notably sharper across the frame and at all common apertures. It has a more dimensional render with terrific microcontrast. Loved the a Sony output but in direct comparison the Leica was simply more impressive. But can’t adapt it to Z. For Z, I also love the render of the Z mount Voigtlander 35/2 APO Lanthar. Waiting on the Z 35/1.2 to compare before buying either.
I think the Canon 135mm TSE produced results adapted to the Nikon Z7 that were as good at common aperture’s versus Sony. To be fair, I did not have both lenses at the same time and this is a subjective opinion. I’d rent either of those for adapting depending on session needs (movements versus AF and/or larger aperture). IQ is a wash. Both of these 135 lenses lose just a hair of their native contrast adapted to Z, but are outstanding anyway.
|
