why no focus motor in an FTZ adapter?

[dieselnutjob]

I'm still annoyed that Nikon hasn't made an FTZ with a focus motor to drive the screw drive on AF/AF-D lenses.
It's one of the road blocks that's stopping me going from an F mount body to a Z mount.
I found out yesterday that there is a Megadap adapter (MTZ11) that converts Leica M to Z, and it includes a focus motor.
This works by telescoping the entire Leica lens in and out to focus it.
I have even seen a video of a guy who converted Z to Leica M and then Leica M to F mount, and we able to autofocus any F mount lense that way. The video of that is here

So if Megadap can make a Z adapter that has a motor why can't they can't they just slap an F mount on the front and connect the motor to a screw drive instead of the their telescope mechanism?
There have clearly already cracked the electronics.
I think that we should somehow be lobbying Megadap to make an FTZ with a screw drive if Nikon won't.
What do people think?

 

[BF Hammer]

I too think it could have been implemented if Nikon wanted. Actually the first generation FTZ had that extended squared-off bottom that I strongly suspect contained the autofocus servo motor in prototype stage and was deleted as it was developed.

But looking at the prices of things, it appears the profits are in the lenses more so than bodies. So why discourage upgrading to those expensive new Z lenses by giving us the ability to use every old lens easily? However the mirrorless Z is still the best experience for manual-focus of lenses. Focus peaking is a fantastic tool for those lenses, even better than having the old split-prism viewfinder.

But my personal experience with using older screw-drive autofocus lenses on DSLR cameras was not as great as I thought it would be most of the time. For starters, most of the lenses just take forever to find focus compared to new lenses with internal motors. And something that nobody ever brings up is that the old lenses were made for film. Film that is normally a flat, not-reflective material so there is not much need for anti-reflective coating on the inside lens element. But digital sensors are all glossy and shiny, and they cause all kind of reflection inside those older lenses if more direct light gets inside. I used to be confused by green and magenta flares in my outdoor photos until I realized it was my sensor reflecting light back at the rear of the lens. I had more than one screw-drive vintage lens that did that.

And everybody who only has owned the lower-end DSLR models are scratching their heads because they never had autofocus screw drives to play with all-along.

 

[Fred Kingston]

If you're going to go to a mirrorless camera, you need to get your mind right and start dumping those old D lenses and start buying the new S lenses... Why would you buy a jet engine airplane and then cry because you can't use your old propellers????? That's about the equivalency of what you're wanting...

 

[Clovishound]

I would mention that the C-130s do pretty well with turbine engines and and props, but the point is well taken. I used the Pup's FX 105mm micro for a while, adapted to my Z5. It worked fine, but when it died, I got myself the Z mount 105mm micro, and couldn't be happier with it. I am tempted to trade in my excellent 200-500 F5.6 on the new 180-600mm. I just can't justify the money right now.

I understand having older lenses you want to be able to use on the new Z cameras, but the native Z mount lenses definitely spoil you. Sort of like the 6 Million Dollar Man. Stronger, sharper, better.

 

[Fred Kingston]

There are just so many improvements in the Z camera's focusing, stabilization and sensor resolution designs, that it's really silly trying to make older lenses work other than some nostalgic desire for a particular film type look with lens flare and old-timey color contrasts... Nikon should have gone to the Z (shorter) mount years ago just to allow their lens engineers to re-engineer their lens formulas... The F mount was very limiting in what they could do...

 

[dieselnutjob]

So if you all think that F mount lenses are so rubbish then why did Nikon make an FTZ adapter at all?

 

[Fred Kingston]

I didn't say they were rubbish. I use an FTZ II with a couple of F mount lenses... The Z mount opened a new opportunity for newer lens designs that take advantage of higher resolution sensors... Sony has been eating Nikon's lunch in the "sharp image" category for a long time...

 

[lightcapture]

When I study the masters work, with now vintage gear, I find no reason to complain about my F mount lenses.

 

[dieselnutjob]

If Nikon wants us to use F mount lenses but only manually focus them maybe they should implement a split prism viewfinder in software.

 

[BF Hammer]

I didn't say they were rubbish. I use an FTZ II with a couple of F mount lenses... The Z mount opened a new opportunity for newer lens designs that take advantage of higher resolution sensors... Sony has been eating Nikon's lunch in the "sharp image" category for a long time...

Not only Sony but Canon also upped their lens sharpness game with RF mount.

 

[BF Hammer]

If Nikon wants us to use F mount lenses but only manually focus them maybe they should implement a split prism viewfinder in software.

They do it better with focus peaking. It literally draws a color highlight around the items in focus in the frame. In the middle or out in the corners.

 

[dieselnutjob]

Quite a lot of peoples replies are slightly annoying.

I didn't ask whether Z mount lenses are better or sharper than F mount.
I didn't ask whether I should adapt F mount to Z body or not.
I didn't ask whether F mount lenses are good or not.

The question is quite specific and it's about autofocusing screw drive focus AF/AF-D lenses with an adapter and whether that possible (I think it is) and whether people want such a thing.

If no one is interested well fair enough. But people telling me that I'm wrong for wanting such a thing because Z mount lenses are just better and I should just replace all my F mount. That's not what I asked and I can't afford to do that. Not every F mount photographer has £8k or $8k sat in a bank account so that they can just junk everything and start again.

 

[BF Hammer]

Fair enough. You were complaining to Nikon about something they undoubtedly considered and rejected years ago. I too did think it could have been done. But the signs have been there to read that Nikon wanted to move on from the old screw drive autofocus lenses.

This is a question that will require a reverse-engineered third-party answer.

 

[Fred Kingston]

Fair enough. You were complaining to Nikon about something they undoubtedly considered and rejected years ago. I too did think it could have been done. But the signs have been there to read that Nikon wanted to move on from the old screw drive autofocus lenses.

This is a question that will require a reverse-engineered third-party answer.

It can't be ignored that Nikon, until the most recent quarter, has lost money (a lot of money) for the last couple of years. Whether we like it or not, their decision process is prioritized by what they can produce and sell... NOT by what might seem feasible to a few.

 

[TwistedThrottle]

I kinda think it’s something they’ll still come out with but their focus has been filling the z mount road map. Now that there’s just the 35 f1.2(I think) to go, the roadmap is complete and they can focus on other things, (like an ftziii for example). I really doubt it’d be setup specifically for screwdrive lenses, it’d probably be similar to the megadap adapter where the adapter moves in and out to focus. I don’t think it makes sense to make something that’d focus af-d lenses but not ai-s lenses when they could make it for both. Maybe it’d be different if the z bodies had a focus motor.

 

[BF Hammer]

It is just my speculation, but I think the first FTG has that squared-off bottom because that is exactly where they put the AF servo motor in the D80-D7xxx series DSLR. I suspect they tried it in prototype and had a reason to delete the motor. It may have been an imposed price limit, it may have been a technical problem. Perhaps some lenses were drawing too much current through the Z-mount electrical contacts in testing.

 

[Needa]

It is just my speculation, but I think the first FTG has that squared-off bottom because that is exactly where they put the AF servo motor in the D80-D7xxx series DSLR. I suspect they tried it in prototype and had a reason to delete the motor. It may have been an imposed price limit, it may have been a technical problem. Perhaps some lenses were drawing too much current through the Z-mount electrical contacts in testing.

Or perhaps the torque of the motor distorted the lens mount because it was not mounted in the frame.