Benjamin Marks
Mentor
I think this is the year for me to take the FF mirrorless plunge. The main factor is that prices of used Z gear, the 7Ii for instance, have come down into my comfort-zone (sort of). My question for you brave souls who have trodden this path already: are your Nikon AI-S lenses from the 1980's good enough to use with the high resolution sensor?
Like many of you, I acquired most of the lenses I lusted after in the early 1980's in the 2000's when the price of used gear put them within reach. I probably have two dozen of these primes (no zooms), which perform brilliantly on my D3. I wonder though whether tripling the sensor resolution is going to expose the limits of 1980's tech .
I'm interested in any practical experience RFF'ers have.
Along with the (hoped for) Z camera, I expect I will get one Z-mount lens, probably a 35mm - my most used focal length. The rest of my work will be with an adapter and older lenses.
FYI, I do use a Pentax K1 and Pentax-A lenses and have found them to do fine, assuming I hit the focus.
Like many of you, I acquired most of the lenses I lusted after in the early 1980's in the 2000's when the price of used gear put them within reach. I probably have two dozen of these primes (no zooms), which perform brilliantly on my D3. I wonder though whether tripling the sensor resolution is going to expose the limits of 1980's tech .
I'm interested in any practical experience RFF'ers have.
Along with the (hoped for) Z camera, I expect I will get one Z-mount lens, probably a 35mm - my most used focal length. The rest of my work will be with an adapter and older lenses.
FYI, I do use a Pentax K1 and Pentax-A lenses and have found them to do fine, assuming I hit the focus.
Michalm
Well-known
I would recommend you to visit phillipreeve.net , they have covered this topic better than any other website I have seen , They are mostly using Sony mirrorless full frame cameras but results on Nikon Z cameras should be only better due to thinner sensor cover glass.
If you want "Matched Optics" where the resolution of the lens matches the high-resolution sensor, figure the Micro-Nikkor AIS and Micro-Nikkor AF-D lenses are the ones to get. For most AIs lenses, the lens itself is the anti-aliasing filter for sensors with 32MPixels and above. 24MPixels on the Z5, Z6, and Zf is fine for most manual focus Nikkor lenses made for film cameras.
Luke_Miller
Established
I'm in the same situation. Been acquiring Nikon primes since 1964 when I got my first Nikon SLR (FTn). My current bodies are the D5 and D850, plus recently added Z8. I've read all the posts about how the new, high-resolution sensors will "out resolve" the old lenses from the film days making them unusable. I've also read the posts saying that is nonsense and if you liked the lenses on the old bodies, you will be happy with them on the new ones. Put me in the later camp. My old glass works just fine on my 45 mpx D850 and Z8. It also works beautifully adapted to my 47 mpx Leica SL2. Now the new Nikon Z-Mount primes are clearly better, but the old glass works as well as it ever did on the new Z bodies, with the addition of almost never missing focus due to the magnification feature. I rarely shot my 58mm f1.2 Noct-Nikkor wide open due to the challenge of nailing focus. On the Z or SL2 I stand amazed it its sharpness wide open and its "look" that is found in few other lenses regardless of age.
If maximum image quality is your goal, by all means get the modern Z lenses. But if you like what you are getting now with your D3 I think you will still be happy with them on a Z.
If maximum image quality is your goal, by all means get the modern Z lenses. But if you like what you are getting now with your D3 I think you will still be happy with them on a Z.
I was surprised by how much sharper my Canon 50/0.95 looked on the Z5 compared with on film. Then realized the thickness of the emulsion was more than the depth of the formed image- so it was going to look a bit blurry. Probably true of lenses F1.2 and faster. Nailing focus for these fast lenses is easier with focus peaking than with an RF or SLR.
sojournerphoto
Mentor
Paraphrasing the earlier replies - you will obtain more resolution on high res digital from your lenses than you would have done on (typical) film. You will also be able to focus more reliably with mirrorless than previously. Just because the sensor has more resolution than the lens doesn’t lead to a disaster - even if it looks a bit soft at 100% on screen, in any normal print the overall rendering is more important.
You’ll be fine
There’s an awful lot of nonsense talked about this stuff out on the internet - try it and see and then change if it doesn’t work for you. Most people suggesting that modern sensors make old lenses unusable don’t even realise/acknowledge that a Bayer sensor can’t resolve the numerical resolution anyway…
You’ll be fine
There’s an awful lot of nonsense talked about this stuff out on the internet - try it and see and then change if it doesn’t work for you. Most people suggesting that modern sensors make old lenses unusable don’t even realise/acknowledge that a Bayer sensor can’t resolve the numerical resolution anyway…
Lens test Extreme! Miserable day, finally did this test. I've been using my S-Mount lenses on the Z5. Had to try the Zeiss 21/4.5 Biogon, Contax RF mount.
Vignetting corrected using "ART", corners pulled up. The .NEF file has lots of dynamic range.
The rear element extends into the body, but not as much as the pre-war 3.5cm F2.8 Biogon and J-12.
Vignetting corrected using "ART", corners pulled up. The .NEF file has lots of dynamic range.
The rear element extends into the body, but not as much as the pre-war 3.5cm F2.8 Biogon and J-12.
Dean Cho
Member
I think much of the discussion about using legacy glass with high resolution sensors has been distorted. The tone of the discussions could easily lead one to believe that legacy lenses look like crap on high resolution sensors. The fact is that high legacy sensors can make legacy glass look better than on older sensors (especially where critical focus via image magnification, tripods and/or vibration reduction bodies are used). The more accurate takeaway is that legacy glass on high resolution sensors will tend not to be quite as contrasty and will tend to have more aberrations than more modern lenses on high resolution sensors. This is not necessarily a bad thing depending on the subject matter and mood the photographer wants to achieve. I use a bunch of older OM Zuiko lenses on a 42mp Sony A7RIII and the images can be great.
Love this combo !
Nikkor-S 5.8cm F1.4, wide-open on the Z5. Focus is right where I want it, the face. Fast moving skater.
You will be able to use classic Manual Focus lenses in lighting conditions that can not be handled by the cameras they were made to be used on.
The performance of these lenses will surprise you. I'm not big on "sharpness is everything", and find 24MPixels enough- but do not crop much.
I'm buying into the Z-Mount system to use a lot of classic lenses, so far- the oldest is from 1932.
That's all I use on my Z6 (24mp), old Nikkors and Contax Zeiss. Can't comment about the higher megapixel Z7ii but can't see how there would be any 'issue' unless one wants to compare to the higher-end Z glass designed for such high res.
Nikkor 55/1.2 Ai, wide-open on the Zf. I get a very high hit rate with nailing focus where I want on fast moving subjects.
Better than the Df.
When I get the Zf, will get the 40mm Z lens that comes in the kit. I do not have any Z-mount lenses for it.
The Shutter Latency of the Z5 is low enough to get shots like this. An often overlooked requirement. My M9 and M Monochrom are also low-latency, I've used them for years at the Skating Rink.
Last edited:
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
When I first got the Z7 I bought a couple older Nikon lenses, one was an older 70-300. The fellow I bought it from thought that it wasn't very sharp but what can you expect from a lesser grade lens. I found it plenty sharp enough though I did add a bit of sharpening in post. This was taken hand held which is not a good thing for me as I'm old and feeble.
My old nikor lenses consist of ..
50mm 1.2
28mm 2.8
105mm 2.5
Nothing else needed. They are the pinnacle of ais.
Well, maybe a 180 2.8 ED AIs.
50mm 1.2
28mm 2.8
105mm 2.5
Nothing else needed. They are the pinnacle of ais.
Well, maybe a 180 2.8 ED AIs.
pvdhaar
Peter
I've got the FTZ adapter to re-use my SLR glass. But in practive, it never comes to that.
For starters, the balance is odd with the FTZ/SLR glass combo; it appears overly front heavy on the Z50. The SLR lenses (both autofocus and manual) seem so much better at home on an SLR, analog and digital. I can imagine that on a heavier Z camera, that may be different.
Then, even though the FTZ supports AF-S, I find that the auto focus sometimes decides to hit one of the extremes and get stuck there, needing a turn of the AF ring to convince it to focus differently; that never happens on the D750.
Finally, there's the Z 40mm/f2 to compete with; most SLR lenses I have in that range don't render nearly as nice.
For starters, the balance is odd with the FTZ/SLR glass combo; it appears overly front heavy on the Z50. The SLR lenses (both autofocus and manual) seem so much better at home on an SLR, analog and digital. I can imagine that on a heavier Z camera, that may be different.
Then, even though the FTZ supports AF-S, I find that the auto focus sometimes decides to hit one of the extremes and get stuck there, needing a turn of the AF ring to convince it to focus differently; that never happens on the D750.
Finally, there's the Z 40mm/f2 to compete with; most SLR lenses I have in that range don't render nearly as nice.
AlwaysOnAuto
Well-known
Pardon the Sony camera, this is what I've been using Nikon lens wise without any problems.
If Nikon hadn't been so late to the mirrorless party I might own a Zf today.
Benjamin Marks
Mentor
Thanks, all. Very interesting. Part of the appeal of getting a camera like this is to use it as a "universal platform." I have a nice selection of MF lenses from Leica (M, R, screw-mount), Pentax (screw-mount, K-mount), Konica, Nikon etc. LOL. If there is a picture I cannot take, it isn't because the optical glass isn't in the cabinet. Some of these lenses (particularly the Konica and Pentax screw-mount) are (or have been) priced so low that picking one up has been essentially a zero expense. But the lenses are very, very capable.
I thought about the Sony's and the Leicas, but they are a little too expensive for me -- particularly given the relatively small differences in image quality between the current top tier cameras. And the Pentax I have is very, very nice -- but it is an SLR, with limited ability to use lenses from other platforms. So the used Nikons are in a sweet spot for me.
I thought about the Sony's and the Leicas, but they are a little too expensive for me -- particularly given the relatively small differences in image quality between the current top tier cameras. And the Pentax I have is very, very nice -- but it is an SLR, with limited ability to use lenses from other platforms. So the used Nikons are in a sweet spot for me.
Michalm
Well-known
And how about performance of Sonnar lenses on Z5 compared to Leica M ? ie field curvature at mid to landscape focus distance, on Sony Sonnars show some evident reverse field curvature this should be less obvious on Nikon Z or maybe even non issue, I could not find much about it on the internet .
regards
I have been using mostly lenses that cannot be used with the Rangefinder cameras. Sonnars: I've used the post-war CZJ 8.5cm F2, Jupiter-9 85/2, Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5 S-Mount. They do quite well, have not noticed an issue.
I will make a point to use with a 5cm F1.5 uncoated Sonnar.
These are with the post-war 8.5cm F2 CZJ Sonnar.
Close-up- wide-open, tried to find a shot to judge field curvature.
I will make a point to use with a 5cm F1.5 uncoated Sonnar.
These are with the post-war 8.5cm F2 CZJ Sonnar.
Close-up- wide-open, tried to find a shot to judge field curvature.
Last edited:
CP93
Member
I bought an F-to-Z adapter (not the Nikkor) so I have more lenses than I can use, from a weird Russian (?) Peleng 8mm fisheye through primes and zooms in F mount, plus a set of Z lenses as well. Good thing I still have my Nikkormat so I can split the load.
Last edited: