I've been out of the hobby for quite a while (like 10+ years; so long that my FM account was deactivated and I had to make a new username, ). I shot with a D3 (great camera) and have a good amount of glass. I return now to see mirrorless seems to be the mainstream and Nikon has changed their mount after decades (*cry). I'm sure many of you have a lot of F-mount glass. I'm wondering why everyone didn't just use the FTZ adapter and save thousands, if not tens of thousands. I'll be honest, I'm not looking to get the exact same lens (like a 24-70mm 2.8) just with a different mount. Is there a significant difference, other than perhaps the weight?
And for those that have used the FTZ as well as just straight Z lenses, what differences did you notice?
I mostly had fast lenses: 17-35mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, etc., if that makes any difference.
Z glass has better optics and is usually substantially lighter. Z lenses also tend to have noticeably better AF than their F counterparts. These advantages have been worth it for many shooters.
In general, you will find that the auto focus of your F lenses works better when adapted to Z. Image quality will remain unaffected, with the caveat that you shouldn’t have to micro adjust your lenses any longer.
Been shooting Nikon since 1974 and have lots of F mount glass. I now have the Z8 and Z9 and use my F mount lenses with the FTZ. I bought a couple of Z mount lenses that did not overlap my F mount ones. All of my Z mount lenses are excellent and reviewers report the Z mount versions of my F mount lenses are better performers. I believe them. That said, I was happy with the performamce of my F mount lenses on my D850 and D5 and they work just as well on my Z8/Z9. As reported above autofocus performance is even better. In fact it is amazing. Some of my favorite lenses have no Z mount counterparts so I need the FTZ in order to use them on Z bodies. So buy Z mount glass if you need/want better. Keep what you have (and get the FTZ) if you are happy with your current lenses.
There is no need to rush out and change your glass. But the mirrorless cameras offer so many niceties and advantages over the DSLRs I would recommend getting one and trying what you have with an FTZII. The viewfinder in low light is great. It’s hard to go back to the dim DSLR in those situations once you’re used to mirrorless. Mirrorless elevates the performance of your F glass as far as AF accuracy and eliminating the fine tuning that was already mentioned. I don’t know if you have any manual focus glass but if so there are also a lot of tools that make that experience better as well.
You don’t necessarily have to match 1 to 1 on the DSLR lenses to mirrorless. I found the 24-70mm f/4 S lens to be a mainstay lens and didn’t buy the 24-70mm f/2.8. Bumping up the ISO a stop is no problem with the current noise reduction software.
I did buy the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR because it’s VR works with IBIS (in-body stabilization) of the mirrorless Nikons I have. Hand-holding for long focal length photos is a breeze!
The new Z lenses are a step up!
Luke_Miller wrote:
Been shooting Nikon since 1974 and have lots of F mount glass. I now have the Z8 and Z9 and use my F mount lenses with the FTZ. I bought a couple of Z mount lenses that did not overlap my F mount ones. All of my Z mount lenses are excellent and reviewers report the Z mount versions of my F mount lenses are better performers. I believe them. That said, I was happy with the performamce of my F mount lenses on my D850 and D5 and they work just as well on my Z8/Z9. As reported above autofocus performance is even better. In fact it is amazing. Some of my favorite lenses have no Z mount counterparts so I need the FTZ in order to use them on Z bodies. So buy Z mount glass if you need/want better. Keep what you have (and get the FTZ) if you are happy with your current lenses....Show more →
Thank you! Now THIS is what I wanted to hear! I was planning/hoping to do a similar thing, where I would keep my F glass and fill in the gaps with Z glass, or potentially upgrade some, but not all, of my glass. Aside from the $$$ invested, some of the lenses have a bit of sentimental value for me. And wow, you've been shooting Nikon for half a century!!
On a bit of a tangent, may I ask why you have both the Z8 and Z9? From everything I'm reading/watching, they are nearly identical except the battery/grip of course.
One thing not mentioned is that some of your lenses may not autofocus. Af-D lenses like your 17-35 2.8 will be manual focus only using the FTZ. AFS-G lenses will work fine with the FTZ.
Xysterz wrote:
And for those that have used the FTZ as well as just straight Z lenses, what differences did you notice?
I notice that Z lenses tend to be sharper and better corrected. But I also notice that there can be significant rendering differences between comparable F and Z lenses, and I tend to land on the F-mount side.
With a few exceptions, I've ended up back to F-mount for my Z8 kit. Exceptions are the 40 f/2, the 50 f/2.8 for film scanning, and some Z Voigtlanders. Think I'm also going to pick up the new 70-200 f/2.8.
The only caveat that I have with building an F-mount lens kit around a Z body is that some Z bodies don't get full AF speed from adapted AF-S lenses. The Z8/Z9 do, but I know the Z6II, Z7II, and Zf don't. Steve Perry demonstrated it with the Z6II or Z7II, I've seen it with the Zf. No idea on Z5II or Z6III, but my takeaway was basically to stick with an action body if you shoot action. Other than that, F-mount lenses are as good as they ever were.
Spectro wrote:
One thing not mentioned is that some of your lenses may not autofocus. Af-D lenses like your 17-35 2.8 will be manual focus only using the FTZ. AFS-G lenses will work fine with the FTZ.
The 17-35 will autofocus on the FTZ as it has an AF-S motor. Not many AF-D lenses got AF-S motors, but the 17-35 f/2.8, 28-70 f/2.8, one of the 80-200's, and a few teles did.
OffTrail wrote:
The 17-35 will autofocus on the FTZ as it has an AF-S motor. Not many AF-D lenses got AF-S motors, but the 17-35 f/2.8, 28-70 f/2.8, one of the 80-200's, and a few teles did.
Thank You OffTrail. I learned something new today.
I still own a 17-35 2.8 which I used for many years on DSLR and still very occasionally use on a D5.
Your correction to my comment caused me to attach it to my Z9 and test it. It worked fine.
It's highly unlikely I'll use it on the Z bodies but its good to know I have the option with autofocus so thank you.
I also have a 28-70 2.8 but it's AF motor failed before I went mirrorless.
Xysterz wrote:
And for those that have used the FTZ as well as just straight Z lenses, what differences did you notice?
At present I own Z6, Z5 II and D780. Two MILCs, one DSLR. All sharing the same (more or less) 24 Mpix sensor.
I have used/use the same AF-S lens on both DSLR and Z bodies w/FTZ. Differences? None.
I have used just one kind of lens with F- and Z-mount: the 105 macro. I used the AF-S ED 105/2.8G VR with both D780 and Z6, and now own the Nikkor Z 105/2.8 MC VR. The Z-mount lens is optically better, and its VR should work better (I mean in combination) with IBIS. But when I switched from the 105/2.8G to the Z 105 MC, I didn't notice the image stabilization improvements that Nikon claims... Things are better with the Z5II, but probably because that camera's IBIS is better than the Z6's.
AF-S VR lenses I used to have but sold: 105/2.8G, 300/4E PF
AF-S VR lens I still use: 70-200/4G.
P.S.: I own six MF lenses, two with Z-mount and four with F-mount; they are easier and more fun to use with Z bodies.
Unfortunately it is not as simple as using the adapter with older lenses. Some F mount lenses AF well with the best mirrorless cameras, some less so, but basically Z mount lenses will feel more balanced in the hand and they are generally optically superior to F-mount equivalents, though obviously not all F-mount lenses have Z equivalents yet.
I would recommend getting a few key lenses in Z mount and using other lenses from your F-mount collection via adapter for situations for which you don't want to get a new lens. Over time you will probably prefer native Z lenses as you notice the benefits. Obviously this is a major cost and not a happy matter but some benefits are worth the cost. The cameras are quieter or silent (Z8/9) and this is a major benefit. VR is much more effective due to the in-camera VR being available with all lenses and improving outcomes also when the lens has VR. Video features are much better as well.
Z 24-70/2.8 in itself is already a major benefit to the Z system; an outstanding lens.
Xysterz wrote:
I've been out of the hobby for quite a while (like 10+ years; so long that my FM account was deactivated and I had to make a new username, ). I shot with a D3 (great camera) and have a good amount of glass. I return now to see mirrorless seems to be the mainstream and Nikon has changed their mount after decades (*cry). I'm sure many of you have a lot of F-mount glass. I'm wondering why everyone didn't just use the FTZ adapter and save thousands, if not tens of thousands. I'll be honest, I'm not looking to get the exact same lens (like a 24-70mm 2.8) just with a different mount. Is there a significant difference, other than perhaps the weight?
And for those that have used the FTZ as well as just straight Z lenses, what differences did you notice?
I mostly had fast lenses: 17-35mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, etc., if that makes any difference.
You 10000000% can do everything you want and need with F glass and an FTZ! Is Z stuff super-nice? Heck yeah! Is it fun to use? Heck yeah! Is it going to revolutionize your photography? Heck no! Get Z lenses when you can responsibly afford them, and meanwhile, get crazy-more-affordable killer F glass and occasionally experience slightly less exhilaration at 200%.
I'm pretty much converted to Z, but still keeping the 500PF and Sigma 150 macro as well as a 300 f4 AFS (amazing on a Z). That being said, I did it cuz I wanted to...not cuz I needed to, and I just got another 300/2.8 VRll. If Nikon made a Z version, I would have had to pay 5x more...easily. If you're making your living with your gear...absolutely...compete. Otherwise...stay off the Internet, and you'll be amazed how much better your gear is. Just my opinion after decades of learning not to chase equipment for the wrong reasons.
OffTrail wrote:
The 17-35 will autofocus on the FTZ as it has an AF-S motor. Not many AF-D lenses got AF-S motors, but the 17-35 f/2.8, 28-70 f/2.8, one of the 80-200's, and a few teles did.
Spectro wrote:
Thank You OffTrail. I learned something new today.
I still own a 17-35 2.8 which I used for many years on DSLR and still very occasionally use on a D5.
Your correction to my comment caused me to attach it to my Z9 and test it. It worked fine.
It's highly unlikely I'll use it on the Z bodies but its good to know I have the option with autofocus so thank you.
I also have a 28-70 2.8 but it's AF motor failed before I went mirrorless.
Nice! Finding new compatibility is almost like finding a free lens.
I've had both the 17-35 and 28-70 on my radar for a long time. Always liked the output that I've seen from them, just haven't gotten around to trying them.
I have some Z and F glass i use on my z6ii/z7ii. I typically don’t like zooms, but the z 70-200 2.8 and 24-120 f4 are great. I also have a few Z primes. However, my favorite images have come from F mounts. The 28 1.4E, 58 1.4 and sigma art 135 1.8.
I didn’t get those F mounts until i moved to mirrorless and found those lenses used. I’ve read they focus more accurately on mirrorless, not necessarily as fast as DSLR.
I say all of this because your milage may vary on Z lenses versus F lenses. You might find that you prefer some of your existing F glass as you obtain Z glass.
). I shot with a D3 (great camera) and have a good amount of glass. I return now to see mirrorless seems to be the mainstream and Nikon has changed their mount after decades (*cry). I'm sure many of you have a lot of F-mount glass. I'm wondering why everyone didn't just use the FTZ adapter and save thousands, if not tens of thousands. I'll be honest, I'm not looking to get the exact same lens (like a 24-70mm 2.8) just with a different mount. Is there a significant difference, other than perhaps the weight?