F Mount Lenses on Z Camera

[ckqualls]

I'm looking to upgrade to a Z6III, and have F mount glass. Am also looking for f2.8 24-70 and 70-300. I've found F mount that is more reasonably priced than Z mount.

Question is, are there any issues using F mount on Z. I know I'll need FTZ II adapter. Issues related to focus, image quality, etc?

Thanks.

 

[BF Hammer]

No real issues other than the published limitations of the FTZ adapter. I did have a Tamron 90mm that had a documented problem with AF. But that apparently is a rare kind of thing and Tamron can replace a circuit board in their lens to address it. I decided to upgrade to a 105mm Nikon Z lens.

Basically as long as the lens is the type with a AF motor built-in, you are good to go. Adapter has no optics inside so there is no change to the image quality.

I currently am using many F-mount lenses on my Z5, but I am working slowly toward replacing them with Z-mount.

 

[Clovishound]

I've never had an issue with my F mount lens on my Z5 and Z7ii. I would say that if you are looking to buy new lenses, look hard at the Nikon Z mount versions. They are definitely a cut above. The biggest gaps I see are the lack of some of the more popular focal lengths in affordable models. For example, the only 70-200 they have is the pricey 70-200 F2.8.

When I first bought my Z5 the least expensive long tele they had was the 100-400. An excellent lens, but more than I could justify spending at the time. I ended up with the F mount 200-500. Now they have a 180-600 that I could possibly justify, if I hadn't already bought the 200-500. From everything I see and hear, the 180-600 is worth the extra money over the F mount at new prices, but not to sell mine for around half the original price and then purchase the Z mount.

The Z 24-70 F4 is an excellent value IMO. It is sharp and well built and can be had for a very good price, especially if purchased along with a new body as a bundle deal.

 

[ckqualls]

Yes, I looked at that 70-200. Too much for me. I've always bought Nikon glass but finances making me look at Tamron F mount 70-200 f2.8.

 

[BF Hammer]

. The biggest gaps I see are the lack of some of the more popular focal lengths in affordable models. For example, the only 70-200 they have is the pricey 70-200 F2.8.

.

The Z 70-180 f/2.8 is supposed to be the budget model. Really it's a rebranded Tamron lens.

 

[ckqualls]

The Z 70-180 f/2.8 is supposed to be the budget model. Really it's a rebranded Tamron lens.

Yes, I looked into it, decided agaist it. Thanks.

 

[Blue439]

I have used F-mount lenses on a Z7, then a Z7 II, without any optical, mechanical or electric/electronic problem. I did because for some time, there were no Z-mount equivalents on the market. In fact, I still do use my three F-mount tilt-shifts, as Nikon hasn’t seen fit to offer such lenses in the new mount.

Of course, the optical quality is not the same, I see this now that I’m using Z-mounts (and I used to use top-notch F-mounts), but if you’re used to the IQ of your F-mounts, and happy with it, you will find it again using a mirrorless camera.

The tilt-shifts are a breed of their own, of course. For reasons linked to their shifting capabilities, they had to be optically designed for an image circle much larger than the 24 × 36 mm sensor, and of course they retain their exceptional optical qualities on a mirrorless’ sensor. As a downside, their performance is mediocre in terms of chromatic aberrations and resistance to flare, especially the older ones (45 and 85mm).