Feeling betrayed by Nikon.

[Maccam]

In the market for new camera. I want more power video features and the Z6 with Prores RAW coming down the pipeline makes it look like good option. I originally started in photo and over the years I handed my money to Nikon for their glass the FTZ mount it should be a relatively smooth transition, along with the potential to mount just about anything on the Z mount.  One thing I did notice when testing the Z6 at my local camera store I discovered something I had overlooked, and that is the Nikon set a limit of only 3 axis IBIS with f mount lenses. I found this to be the case even my Nikon 70-200 2.8G VR2. I tried it both ways VR in lens on and off checked the the various in the camera for IBIS. The results were not good. In fact just hand holding it I thought the VR would be smoother on a Nikon DSLR Body. Last few years my main video camera has been the A7sii and with a dummy metabones e to f mount I get full 5 axis IBIS. My first thought is there should be no engineering reason for Nikon to not allow full 5 axis with anything mounted on the camera. I know they want to sell their new Z mount lenses but this is kind of a uncool way to go about this. Maybe I did something wrong or if you have any idea please tell. I would very much like to be proved wrong.

Also did anyone notice how the new Z mount Nikon 24-70 2.8 is $100 more then the F mount and that one has VR in the lens and it less. I would think the 24-70 Z would be few hundred cheaper with no VR in lens. 

[BTM_Pix]

Yeah, anything on the FTZ adapter gets 3 axis so you only get 5 axis with the native Z mount lenses.

So its a big win if you have non-VR lenses (especially for the 14-24mm f2.8 or Sigma ARTs for example) but not as exciting as it could be for your already VR equipped lenses.

It raises the question of whether a 3rd party could make a version of it that got around that.

[David Bowgett]

Don't Panasonic's and Olympus's IBIS systems also drop down to a lower degree of stabilization if you have a lens from another manufacturer attached?

[mercer]

4 minutes ago, David Bowgett said:

Don't Panasonic's and Olympus's IBIS systems also drop down to a lower degree of stabilization if you have a lens from another manufacturer attached?

Well Panasonic has Dual IS which is a combination of 5-axis IBIS and OIS from their lenses. I think Olympus may have something similar but since they were/are on the forefront of IBIS, most of their lenses do not have any OIS. With both Panasonic and Olympus you get 5-axis IBIS with any adapted lens.

I am really intrigued by the Z6 and the potential Raw output but I am one possible customer that is kinda annoyed by the Z Mount when Nikon already has such a plethora of legendary lenses in their catalog. With that being said, times change as does technology, so if they felt the Z-Mount was a better option going forward, who am I to say but as a potential Z6 customer, the fact that I can only get 3-axis stabilization with my Nikkor 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 ai-s lenses makes the entire purchase a little less desirable. I guess it’s better than nothing but 3-axis on a fast 85mm relegates it to monopod use instead of the handheld possibility of 5-axis. 

[Snowbro]

They also apparently didnt put an AF motor in their adapter like Canon did

[Nikkor]

18 minutes ago, Snowbro said:

They also apparently didnt put an AF motor in their adapter like Canon did

Bullshit as Canon ef lenses have their own Motor. 

[BTM_Pix]

25 minutes ago, mercer said:

I am really intrigued by the Z6 and the potential Raw output but I am one possible customer that is kinda annoyed by the Z Mount when Nikon already has such a plethora of legendary lenses in their catalog. With that being said, times change as does technology, so if they felt the Z-Mount was a better option going forward, who am I to say but as a potential Z6 customer, the fact that I can only get 3-axis stabilization with my Nikkor 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4 ai-s lenses makes the entire purchase a little less desirable. I guess it’s better than nothing but 3-axis on a fast 85mm relegates it to monopod use instead of the handheld possibility of 5-axis. 

Its swings and roundabouts with the new mount I suppose.

In one way they are obviously keen on "encouraging" people to swap their old vinyl for CD as it were but there will be long term benefits to making that change.

On the other hand, for those of us who don't want to re-buy our entire collections (even should they exist in this new mount, which they don't) do still gain a lot from the mount change.

As I mentioned above, getting the option of stabilisation for my Nikkor 14-24mm or Sigma ART 35mm is a big win let alone getting it for my older manual primes but its the extra possibilities of the shallow mount that are arguably as exciting.

Medium Format speedboosters and F mount adapter with electronic ND are two obvious possibilities.

The other one though is the TechART E adapter so that you can use their TechART Pro adapter to get AF and IS for all of that legacy MF glass in pretty much every mount worth talking about. Not to mention it also meaning you being able to then use the Sigma MC11 on it to bring EF lenses into the equation.

That is a huge win as far as I'm concerned.

[Snowbro]

26 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

Bullshit as Canon ef lenses have their own Motor. 

I just remember hearing that in a nikon users YT video reviewing the z7. He was calling for nikon to do the same as canon with their adapter. I then read it on a forum. I havent researched it, only heard that from people not happy with the nikon adapters performance. 

[mercer]

12 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its swings and roundabouts with the new mount I suppose.

In one way they are obviously keen on "encouraging" people to swap their old vinyl for CD as it were but there will be long term benefits to making that change.

On the other hand, for those of us who don't want to re-buy our entire collections (even should they exist in this new mount, which they don't) do still gain a lot from the mount change.

As I mentioned above, getting the option of stabilisation for my Nikkor 14-24mm or Sigma ART 35mm is a big win let alone getting it for my older manual primes but its the extra possibilities of the shallow mount that are arguably as exciting.

Medium Format speedboosters and F mount adapter with electronic ND are two obvious possibilities.

The other one though is the TechART E adapter so that you can use their TechART Pro adapter to get AF and IS for all of that legacy MF glass in pretty much every mount worth talking about. Not to mention it also meaning you being able to then use the Sigma MC11 on it to bring EF lenses into the equation.

That is a huge win as far as I'm concerned.

That’s true, something is better than nothing but you can get 5-axis with those lenses on a Sony. So if the a7s iii has the goods, then why even mess around with a Nikon camera for my Nikon lenses...?

[BTM_Pix]

I've attached Nikon's compatibility spreadsheet for all of their lenses.

To determine which ones won't work AF wise with the FTZ then the quickest thing to do is click on a camera which doesn't have an integrated focus motor (such as the D40 or D3200) as it will be the same as those.

Oddly enough though, via the wonders of the TechART adapter, you will still be able to have AF with quite a few of them via a more circuitous route of not using the FTZ adapter 

LCC_En-2.xlsx

12 minutes ago, mercer said:

Why even mess around with a Nikon camera for my Nikon lenses...?

Because we hate Sony ?

If you are going to use MF lenses then possibly not but is there a viable adapter to use Nikon AF lenses on E mount ?

 

[Maccam]

8 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its swings and roundabouts with the new mount I suppose.

In one way they are obviously keen on "encouraging" people to swap their old vinyl for CD as it were but there will be long term benefits to making that change.

On the other hand, for those of us who don't want to re-buy our entire collections (even should they exist in this new mount, which they don't) do still gain a lot from the mount change.

As I mentioned above, getting the option of stabilisation for my Nikkor 14-24mm or Sigma ART 35mm is a big win let alone getting it for my older manual primes but its the extra possibilities of the shallow mount that are arguably as exciting.

Medium Format speedboosters and F mount adapter with electronic ND are two obvious possibilities.

The other one though is the TechART E adapter so that you can use their TechART Pro adapter to get AF and IS for all of that legacy MF glass in pretty much every mount worth talking about. Not to mention it also meaning you being able to then use the Sigma MC11 on it to bring EF lenses into the equation.

That is a huge win as far as I'm concerned.

I agree. Its always good to look new glass for the tech improvements and if there substantial and lineup with what our individual needs that is great. 

As for stabilization no matter what it can make the difference, but I've used the 5 axis on the A7sii and it far outshined the 3 axis in the Z6 with the same F mount lens. Nikon themselves made some of the most legendary glass and Nikon stripped away the full capability of IBIS.      

[Snowbro]

1 minute ago, Maccam said:

Nikon stripped away the full capability of IBIS.      

Still more than an eos r ?

[BTM_Pix]

12 minutes ago, Maccam said:

I agree. Its always good to look new glass for the tech improvements and if there substantial and lineup with what our individual needs that is great. 

I was playing devil's advocate really as no way am I going to be re-buying my F mount lineup in Z mount in this lifetime. Even if they were available today, my mind boggles at how much it would cost me for a 300 f2.8 and 400 f2.8 in Z mount. 

13 minutes ago, Maccam said:

As for stabilization no matter what it can make the difference, but I've used the 5 axis on the A7sii and it far outshined the 3 axis in the Z6 with the same F mount lens. Nikon themselves made some of the most legendary glass and Nikon stripped away the full capability of IBIS.      

I'd be curious to know if it is possible for a 3rd party to make an adapter that rectified that.

If its a deliberate artificial restriction by Nikon to persuade you to buy native Z mounts (which is a bit daft as they have such a meagre range) rather than something more fundamental then the answer might well be yes.

I'm wondering whether 3rd parties are even looking at as they might think there is no market for an FTZ adapter if Nikon do one that is more or less bundled with the camera purchase but if it did add the extra stabilisation then it would be a hit even at £200-300 .

[Mokara]

4 hours ago, Maccam said:

In the market for new camera. I want more power video features and the Z6 with Prores RAW coming down the pipeline makes it look like good option. I originally started in photo and over the years I handed my money to Nikon for their glass the FTZ mount it should be a relatively smooth transition, along with the potential to mount just about anything on the Z mount.  One thing I did notice when testing the Z6 at my local camera store I discovered something I had overlooked, and that is the Nikon set a limit of only 3 axis IBIS with f mount lenses. I found this to be the case even my Nikon 70-200 2.8G VR2. I tried it both ways VR in lens on and off checked the the various in the camera for IBIS. The results were not good. In fact just hand holding it I thought the VR would be smoother on a Nikon DSLR Body. Last few years my main video camera has been the A7sii and with a dummy metabones e to f mount I get full 5 axis IBIS. My first thought is there should be no engineering reason for Nikon to not allow full 5 axis with anything mounted on the camera. I know they want to sell their new Z mount lenses but this is kind of a uncool way to go about this. Maybe I did something wrong or if you have any idea please tell. I would very much like to be proved wrong.

Also did anyone notice how the new Z mount Nikon 24-70 2.8 is $100 more then the F mount and that one has VR in the lens and it less. I would think the 24-70 Z would be few hundred cheaper with no VR in lens. 

The Sony is doing 5 axis stabilization in the body, it doesn't care much what lens you have attached. The stabilization on the Nikon however happens through interactions with the lens, so if your lens is not fully compatible with the body it is not surprising that it does not offer full levels of stabilization with older lenses.

[thebrothersthre3]

Doesn't the Z6 IBIS work sort of like the GH5 Dual IS, where it combines lens stabilization and internal stabilization? or no?

[Maccam]

1 hour ago, Mokara said:

The Sony is doing 5 axis stabilization in the body, it doesn't care much what lens you have attached. The stabilization on the Nikon however happens through interactions with the lens, so if your lens is not fully compatible with the body it is not surprising that it does not offer full levels of stabilization with older lenses.

I didn't think of it in that way. If its the case I hope it shows a real benefit of setting it up in that way. Still a shame. I love having 5 axis IS with any lens I mount on Sony.

[kye]

5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

In one way they are obviously keen on "encouraging" people to swap their old vinyl for CD as it were but there will be long term benefits to making that change.

Yeah, that swap had some great long-term benefits:

1. You could listen to CDs in your car
2. Plus, as a special bonus, you'd be happy with how they sounded in your car because the CDs would make your high-end hifi setup at home sound as good as the stereo in your car

[Geoff_L]

I use with my Z6 an adapted 50mm 1.8G  via FTZ, along with the new 24-70 f4, and I found the stabilization quite good with the 50, when compared with the 24-70. I have yet to further test it, but I think that 3 axis is better than 0. Also, given the rather new Nikon's propensity to give more features through firmware updates, we can hope for future enhancements. I'm also curious to see how it will work with the adapters from Kipon and Techart, as I have got an eye on Canon long lenses (like the 200f2.8 and 400 f5.6).

13 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

The other one though is the TechART E adapter so that you can use their TechART Pro adapter to get AF and IS for all of that legacy MF glass in pretty much every mount worth talking about. Not to mention it also meaning you being able to then use the Sigma MC11 on it to bring EF lenses into the equation.

That is a huge win as far as I'm concerned.

What are those MF glasses you are thinking about ? Since the last time we talk in the lenses forum post, I have expanded my "interesting lenses to buy" list somewhere near the infinity ?. I did not buy any lens given all the new opportunities appearing with the soon to be released adapters.  So, why not add 1 or 2 more items on that list ahah !

[BTM_Pix]

51 minutes ago, Geoff_L said:

What are those MF glasses you are thinking about ? Since the last time we talk in the lenses forum post, I have expanded my "interesting lenses to buy" list somewhere near the infinity ?. I did not buy any lens given all the new opportunities appearing with the soon to be released adapters.  So, why not add 1 or 2 more items on that list ahah !

When TechArt release their E mount adapter, you will then be able to put their TechART Pro adapter on it.

The basic premise of the TechART Pro is that it is a Leica M to Sony E adapter that enables you to have autofocus of the very not autofocus M mount lenses. 

When you activate the AF on the camera, the adapter physically moves the lens to achieve focus (you set the lens to infinity focus and leave it there).

So far so very good as there are obviously a world of very fine M mount lenses available for you to bankrupt yourself with as well as some very fine ones from Voigtlander and 7Artisans that will hurt far less.

The bonus though is via very cheap adapters to the M mount, you can do the same trick for manual focus lenses with Nikon F, Contax Zeiss C/Y, Canon FD, M42, Leica R, Minolta MD mounts and so on.

There are some caveats regarding the weight of the lens so I wouldn't recommend you hanging an old 300mm f2.8 off it (although if you use a monopod and let the camera move rather than the lens then it is possible  ) but it offers some great possibilities for getting more out of old lenses.  Another bonus is that you if you set the focus on the lens to minimum rather than infinity you can actually reduce the minimum focus distance by quite a large amount because you are varying its distance to the sensor which you can't do with regular adapters.

 

[TheRealOG]

Y'all should be grateful Nikon even bothered to compete with anyone. Out of the Canikon duo, they are the only legacy company that threw all of its resources to mirrorless. They added IBIS, better EVF, 4k 30, 120FPS slow motion, 10-bit externally, possibly raw, they even built an adapter. If it wasn't for the X-T3, they would be in the same league as the A7iii. People pine over the EOS R, but they don't give a flying spaghetti monster of reaching their potential at that price point. Canon is crippled city!