Nikon FTZ for D lenses (Page 5): :sm23: :sm23: :sm23: :sm24: And the far superiority of Canon 100% compatibility. And now ALL your old FD, FL and other Canon lenses work beautifully in...

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

CHG_CANON wrote:

So much for Nikon's much vaulted F-mount and upward compatibility.

And the far superiority of Canon 100% compatibility.
And now ALL your old FD, FL and other Canon lenses work beautifully in their manual mode on R cameras.
Talk about compatibility clear to the old M39 mount.
Way to go Canon.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

You can put new Canon and Sony lenses on Nikon.

Nikon wins cuz it’s the shallowest. The adapters ain’t cheap, so I don’t have one. But my experience with other very thin adapters is that the adapter can only be unlatched from the lens when the lens plus adapter combo is off of the body.

IOW, in practice, you’re not converting the body, you’re converting the lens. If you wanna use three lenses safely and conveniently, you really want three rather expensive adapters :-(

In my experience, the sole exception is the Pentax M42 to K-mount ring. But even one exception is a seed of hope !

Acoarst one adapter is enough for an all-in-one zoom, or a singular specialty lens thaz unavailable in native Z-mount.

Fortunately the Leica to Z adapter is NOT thin (9mm fat), see 1st pic below. The 2nd pic shows (barely shows) a thin 2mm adapter. It adapts the lens, not the body. It has no external latch release button.
.

Metabones Leica to Nikon adapter.

(Download)

Silvery serrated ring is 2mm adapter.

(Download)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

SuperflyTNT wrote:

You can put new Canon and Sony lenses on Nikon.

Why and who would want to?
I do not know of any such adapter for Canon RF but it might be possible.
EF can be adapted to any mirrorless camera.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

therwol wrote:

I think that this thread has used up its usefulness. The main points are that Nikon doesn't make an adaptor that works with autofocus on Nikon's screw drive lenses and neither does anyone else.

Also noted here was that some of the older lenses are quite good. If one switches to the Z system, they won't be fully functional (loss of autofocus), and an individual has to decide if it's worth the expense to switch to Z and buy replacements. The end.

What wasn’t noted is that it’s really not a big deal. The last new Nikon AF lens without a focus motor was released in 1998. Most of the people that have much of an investment in that old AF glass are the fossils from here that rail about the superiority of their DSLR’s and aren’t gonna go mirrorless anyway.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Architect1776 wrote:

Why and who would want to?
I do not know of any such adapter for Canon RF but it might be possible.
EF can be adapted to any mirrorless camera.

I wouldn’t want to. I just stick to Nikon glass, and everything new I buy is Z mount, but apparels someone wants to mount RF glass on their Z bodies because there is an adapter.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

What wasn’t noted is that it’s really not a big deal. The last new Nikon AF lens without a focus motor was released in 1998. Most of the people that have much of an investment in that old AF glass are the fossils from here that rail about the superiority of their DSLR’s and aren’t gonna go mirrorless anyway.

Amen. Check the galleries. Not much point in updating or upgrading.

User ID

SuperflyTNT wrote:

I wouldn’t want to. I just stick to Nikon glass, and everything new I buy is Z mount, but apparels someone wants to mount RF glass on their Z bodies because there is an adapter.

Or Canon might offer specialty lenses unavailable from Nikon. And specialty lenses can be so expensive that the adapter cost is nearly negligible.

therwol Loc: USA

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Most of the people that have much of an investment in that old AF glass are the fossils

FYI Nikon USA lists 9 examples of that "old" AF glass that you can buy brand new on their website. I don't know for how long, but in the three years after buying my D810 in 2015, I bought three of these D lenses, all brand new, 50mm f/1.4, 35mm f/2 and 24mm f/2.8. I have 3 others from an earlier time. The issue of these lenses not being compatible with future technology was not known until the first Z cameras came out. I don't consider myself at fault for investing in the older technology. In fact it was a conscious decision to keep my lenses compatible with some of my Nikon film cameras. Anyway, I'm getting older, but I still have a few neurons firing in my brain. I don't profess that DSLR technology is the best any longer, but it isn't in my best interest to invest thousands in retirement to replace what I'm using.

User ID

therwol wrote:

FYI Nikon USA lists 9 examples of that "old&q... (show quote)

Better that you should take it with you.
Thaz what I plan. Or maybe I’ll hire a marching band instead.

wide2tele Loc: Australia

SuperflyTNT wrote:

Most of the people that have much of an investment in that old AF glass are the fossils from here that rail about the superiority of their DSLR’s and aren’t gonna go mirrorless anyway.

You're likely more fossil than me. The ones younger than me are going back even further than DSLR, to film!
The old men need the modern aids. The photographers need the challenge.

I have more AF-S lenses than D lenses btw.

Bill_de Loc: US

therwol wrote:

I think that this thread has used up its usefulness.

Then why in the world did you add to it?

---

JD750 Loc: SoCal

therwol wrote:

I think that this thread has used up its usefulness. The main points are that Nikon doesn't make an adaptor that works with autofocus on Nikon's screw drive lenses and neither does anyone else.

Also noted here was that some of the older lenses are quite good. If one switches to the Z system, they won't be fully functional (loss of autofocus), and an individual has to decide if it's worth the expense to switch to Z and buy replacements. The end.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

SuperflyTNT wrote:

What wasn’t noted is that it’s really not a big deal. The last new Nikon AF lens without a focus motor was released in 1998. Most of the people that have much of an investment in that old AF glass are the fossils from here that rail about the superiority of their DSLR’s and aren’t gonna go mirrorless anyway.

So now your stooping to name calling? i thought you were above that. Is it really necessary?

User ID

wide2tele wrote:

You're likely more fossil than me. The ones younger than me are going back even further than DSLR, to film!
The old men need the modern aids. The photographers need the challenge.

I have more AF-S lenses than D lenses btw.

I have an equal mix of AF-D and AF-S. The oldies will accompany the SLRs out the door. I can clearly recall my original need or rationale for scraping together the price of my first SLR.

The SLR filled that need to a degree that nothing else could even approach. Over decades various glitches in the SLR were minimized so its benefits were increased. IOW the SLR kept evolving. The full time liveview camera is just the logical further evolution of the SLR when you consider the SLRs reason for being (and evolving).

The full time LV cameras are not the opposition to the SLR. They are just the latest improvement to the SLR.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

User ID wrote:

I have an equal mix of AF-D and AF-S. The oldies w... (show quote)

I would say mirrorless technology is further example of the evolution of the camera. The restrictions of the SLR design have been shed.

Good riddance to that mirror flapping around vibrating the camera, making noise and stirring up dust and flinging tiny drops of oil everywhere!

But there is an old saying: “camera bodies come and go but find a lens you love and keep it forever”.