jaredangle
Photojournalist
Hey everyone,
I am looking at starting a mirrorless system at some point and want to take advantage of the shorter flange distance that the Nikon Z and Sony E mounts offer. I'm not particularly set on any particular lens from either system, so my focus is primarily 1) best sensor quality on full-frame for still photos, 2) the option to have high-quality 4k video at 24/30fps with limited rolling shutter or other issues, and 3) compatibility (via adapters) with Leica M lenses, Contax G lenses, C/Y mount lenses, and Nikon F lenses (manual focus specifically).
I'm specifically looking at the Nikon Zf, Z6, and Z7, as well as the Sony A7 and FX3 models.
Does anyone have experience with any of these with those three lens mounts?
Best regards,
Jared
I am looking at starting a mirrorless system at some point and want to take advantage of the shorter flange distance that the Nikon Z and Sony E mounts offer. I'm not particularly set on any particular lens from either system, so my focus is primarily 1) best sensor quality on full-frame for still photos, 2) the option to have high-quality 4k video at 24/30fps with limited rolling shutter or other issues, and 3) compatibility (via adapters) with Leica M lenses, Contax G lenses, C/Y mount lenses, and Nikon F lenses (manual focus specifically).
I'm specifically looking at the Nikon Zf, Z6, and Z7, as well as the Sony A7 and FX3 models.
Does anyone have experience with any of these with those three lens mounts?
Best regards,
Jared
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
I have recently gotten a Nikon Z8 and have been testing out my legacy lenses on the new camera with adapters. For telephoto and normal lenses, the brand or design doesn't seem to matter so much as the light rays from the lens are hitting the sensor pretty much straight-on. Some CA for faster lenses shot a against the light. So far SLR-designed lenses have worked best for wide-angles. The Contax G series wides (e.g. 28/2.8) have done worst in my tests at the corners. Leica M-mount lenses to 24mm have done fine with a little Photoshop adjustment. Have a look at this thread here for some examples:
Nikon Z8 w/Adapted Lenses (Leica M+R, Pentax, Konica etc.)
It is still early days, so there are plenty of lenses in the cabinet that haven't had a day out with the Nikon. But overall, I have been very pleased with the results.
Edit:Nikons AF lenses Nikons from the AF-I/AF-S/AF-P series of lenses auto-focus with the Nikon adapter, which is a plus. Nikon AF and AF-D lenses do not [Thanks to Oren Grad below for this timely correction]. Leica lenses can be made to auto-focus with TechArtPro TZM-02 adapter (currently testing. . . jury's out over here whether there is any speed advantage).
Edit No.2: I have just taken a boring picture of a fruit bowel with a Contax 100/2.8 Macro-Planar and a Pentax 50-1.4 M42 screw mount lens. At f:8 it is very hard to tell the difference between the performance on the Z8 - in each case I am counting hairs on the kiwi in the bowl, if you know what I mean.
Edit No.3 I know that folks on the Internet say that older lenses exhibit so much CA that they can't make use of modern sensors. I have a lot of colorful words to describe that claim, but the polite way to say it is that some lenses exhibit this when shot against the light. But mostly I will be playing with my lens library without worrying about this too much.
Nikon Z8 w/Adapted Lenses (Leica M+R, Pentax, Konica etc.)
It is still early days, so there are plenty of lenses in the cabinet that haven't had a day out with the Nikon. But overall, I have been very pleased with the results.
Edit:
Edit No.2: I have just taken a boring picture of a fruit bowel with a Contax 100/2.8 Macro-Planar and a Pentax 50-1.4 M42 screw mount lens. At f:8 it is very hard to tell the difference between the performance on the Z8 - in each case I am counting hairs on the kiwi in the bowl, if you know what I mean.
Edit No.3 I know that folks on the Internet say that older lenses exhibit so much CA that they can't make use of modern sensors. I have a lot of colorful words to describe that claim, but the polite way to say it is that some lenses exhibit this when shot against the light. But mostly I will be playing with my lens library without worrying about this too much.
Last edited:
leolab
Member
Jared
I don't do video so I can't really address that part of the question
I have used both the Sony E-system (A7RII, A7RIII...) and now used Nikon Z for adapted lenses. I also have a small Leica M kit to compare to.
First off, the wide angle rangefinder lenses (not all but majority of film-designed WA) suffer in the corners compared to shooting on the Leica M, my Contax G (m-mount converted) look best on Leica cameras (film and digital). The Nikon Z7 looks marginally better than the Sony In my experience, but still not great (the 21mm and 28mm Contax G suffer on these sensors).
As far as other SLR lenses go, they mostly look fine on the digital mirrorless bodies.
My move to Nikon came after a long comparison between my A7RIII and the Nikon Z7, I found the Nikon to have a better EVF, better ergonomics for me, I liked the sensor a little more, and I found the IBIS to be better, and menus were more to my taste. Manual focus aids on the Z7 are also better in my view. I find the Z7 to offer a lot for the money when considering its used price.
I don't do video so I can't really address that part of the question
I have used both the Sony E-system (A7RII, A7RIII...) and now used Nikon Z for adapted lenses. I also have a small Leica M kit to compare to.
First off, the wide angle rangefinder lenses (not all but majority of film-designed WA) suffer in the corners compared to shooting on the Leica M, my Contax G (m-mount converted) look best on Leica cameras (film and digital). The Nikon Z7 looks marginally better than the Sony In my experience, but still not great (the 21mm and 28mm Contax G suffer on these sensors).
As far as other SLR lenses go, they mostly look fine on the digital mirrorless bodies.
My move to Nikon came after a long comparison between my A7RIII and the Nikon Z7, I found the Nikon to have a better EVF, better ergonomics for me, I liked the sensor a little more, and I found the IBIS to be better, and menus were more to my taste. Manual focus aids on the Z7 are also better in my view. I find the Z7 to offer a lot for the money when considering its used price.
SWB
Member
I use my Z7 with M mount lenses and it couldn't be better. I get IBIS for each lens and manual focusing is easy. I use a dumb M to Z adapter but with a Techart M to Z adapter you'd even get AF. Likewise the FZ adapter is used for my Nikon lenses and if you do get a Z mount camera I recommend getting the 24-70mm f/4 lens in a kit price deal, it is very, very good as a walk around zoom.
Oren Grad
Well-known
The AF-I/AF-S/AF-P lenses do, but the earlier screw-drive AF and AF-D lenses don't.
johnsonjj22
Analog Enlightenment
I run a Z8 and Z9, also produce short video/film as part of my business. Have adapted Nikkor F and Leica M lenses to my Z, but haven't used for video yet. The Z glass is pretty phenomenal on its own. The upside of the Z-mount is that it's the widest and shortest flange distance which means you can adapt everything to it. The upside of the Sony is a wider selection of cinema lenses and actual cinema cameras in the lineup.
Now that Nikon bought RED, I'm very curious to see if RED releases a cine camera with a Z-mount knowing that you can adapt everything to it. Also wouldn't be surprised to see RED raw show up in the Z9 or Z8, some rumors suggesting Nikon may drop N-RAW now that they own RED.
I haven't run through a lot of testing on adapted lenses, but as others have mentioned, the wider you go the worse it gets in the corners. Imagine the photo receptors in digital as being buckets and the light rays hitting them at an oblique angle. Leica compensates for this in their digital cameras by introducing "lenses" on top of the photo receptors. Being the original "mirrorless", the rear element could throw light at odd angles from a very short distance into the corners and the emulsion was flat enough that it didn't matter. The further your rear element gets from the sensor (read: longer glass), the better it gets.
Now that Nikon bought RED, I'm very curious to see if RED releases a cine camera with a Z-mount knowing that you can adapt everything to it. Also wouldn't be surprised to see RED raw show up in the Z9 or Z8, some rumors suggesting Nikon may drop N-RAW now that they own RED.
I haven't run through a lot of testing on adapted lenses, but as others have mentioned, the wider you go the worse it gets in the corners. Imagine the photo receptors in digital as being buckets and the light rays hitting them at an oblique angle. Leica compensates for this in their digital cameras by introducing "lenses" on top of the photo receptors. Being the original "mirrorless", the rear element could throw light at odd angles from a very short distance into the corners and the emulsion was flat enough that it didn't matter. The further your rear element gets from the sensor (read: longer glass), the better it gets.