Nikon Nikon Introduces the Z5, lower cost entry into full-frame mirrorless.

MoonMind

Hall of Famer
Location
Switzerland
Real Name
Matt
Very interesting adapter- I suspect took a lot of looking at a logic analyzer to figure out.

Would be interesting to see how they deal with camera/lens firmware updates.
Don't be mistaken - it works only after a fashion, and each new lens is problematic. It doesn't work with most Samyang lenses at all. Even the Sony 55mm f/1.8 doesn't work nearly as well on the Z6 as on the Sony A7 II ... The Sigma 45mm f/2.8 works most of the time, but if it doesn't AF, it doesn't AF at all. And the adapter doesn't work as a dumb adapter either, so it's really only useful with native E/FE mount lenses - and here was I hoping it would work as a base for my E mount adapters on the Nikon Z6 ...

It's a crutch - not the worst as these things go, but still a crutch.

M.
 
It does not matter to me. The only AF adapter I have is for the Nikon F3AF, from 1983.

I will state: that concept could be used, build a low-power Teleconverter to supply the AF function, and pass through the Aperture control.

It's not for me- I prefer manual focus and aperture control. A simple adapter works for me.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Quick Take: biggest downgrade is the use of standard CMOS sensor rather than BSI CMOS. The latter accommodates legacy lenses made for short flange distance, like RF lenses.
The Z6 would be better than the Z5 for shooting with RF lenses due to the BSI CMOS sensor. Plus I think the bigger Z mount and thinner sensor stack would result in better RF lens performance over other mounts. The only thing I don't like on Nikon Z bodies for manual lenses is the choppy magnify view. Sony bodies have always been smooth when using magnify.
BSI sensor handle wide angle corners much better with short flange lenses such as Leica-M mount glass. For example non-BSI sensors with RF glass might have color shifting in the corners, whereas the BSI sensor won't have that issue. Sensor stack thickness will also affect corner performance with RF lenses. Both Nikon and Canon have thinner stacks than Sony, plus I think the wider mounts in both those systems are more accommodating versus Sony's small mount diameter.
Appreciated observations here, if for no other reason than I can now resist the G.A.S on this camera (and most certainly at it's eye watering price here in Australia, the Canon R5).
 

mike3996

Hall of Famer
Location
Finland
SL might be better for adapted non-M lenses and good enough for M... M is best for M lenses, but again it depends on the lens, eg newer CV 15mm/21mm work great even with Sony sensors...

Jono has a test for Leica 28mm Summicron Asph which shows the differences:
Leica M resolution
" The new 28 Summicron shows considerable improvement over the old model, especially wide open, and especially with the Leica SL and the the Sony A7 mkii. The M240 also shows a noticeable improvement, but it’s micro-lens design and the thin sensor accommodate the older lens better, so the improvement isn’t nearly so obvious. I think it also shows that if you want to use this (and other) M lenses for landscape work, then the SL does a much better job than the Sony, but if you want the very best performance, then the Leica M is still the best camera to use with M lenses."
Yeah. I always keep reading something like this and get to thinking that SL is not the miracle maker I want it to be. :D

This is because the majority of my lens collection is M-mount and I am only casually fantasizing about other legacy SLR lenses to accompany.

This is why I keep yapping about Leica M live view capabilities. One Leica M to adapt them all, with the best possible support for M glass too. M11 perhaps... (Just lose all sanity when considering you can probably get 4 second-hand SL's for the probable price of a new M11.)
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Location
Lexington, VA
Real Name
Steve
I'll freely admit that the Z5 is a dangerous temptation for me. It's weakest for things I just don't use (burst and video) and have most of what I really want. Even that kit lens is almost exactly the range of FL with which I like to shoot. (I know this because I loved my old 20-35 f4 zoom on my old APS-C Pentax *ist D) I've never owned either a Nikon or a Canon ILC, and that also adds a certain irrational curiosity to the whole thing. Of course, this would mean selling either the X100V or the XH1 and I don't want to do that. The best part of all this is that I'm finishing a very satisfying month of daily shooting with my old 12 MP Pens. :doh: :doh:
 

gryphon1911

All-Pro
Location
Central Ohio, USA
Real Name
Andrew
I'll freely admit that the Z5 is a dangerous temptation for me. It's weakest for things I just don't use (burst and video) and have most of what I really want. Even that kit lens is almost exactly the range of FL with which I like to shoot. (I know this because I loved my old 20-35 f4 zoom on my old APS-C Pentax *ist D) I've never owned either a Nikon or a Canon ILC, and that also adds a certain irrational curiosity to the whole thing. Of course, this would mean selling either the X100V or the XH1 and I don't want to do that. The best part of all this is that I'm finishing a very satisfying month of daily shooting with my old 12 MP Pens. :doh: :doh:

Don't you just hate that. makes you wish that money was no object and you could just buy/try everything.
 

Biro

Hall of Famer
Location
Jersey Shore
Real Name
Steve
Don't you just hate that. makes you wish that money was no object and you could just buy/try everything.

I'm another one who has never owned a Nikon - except for the two days that I had a D200 that I brought back to Adorama because it weighed a ton, even by the standards of 2008. But my curiosity is piqued by the Z5 - even if the slowness of the new lenses annoys me a bit (yes, I know all about how modern cameras can work at higher ISOs). Perhaps when the price comes down or I can pick up a refurbished example. Refurbished by Nikon, of course.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom