Advice on FTZ II

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

B

bwest

Member
Member's gallery
I am replacing my D500 with a Z6III shortly and need some advice on the FTZ II.
Having a number of F-mount lenses, like AF-S 24-120 f/4G ED, AF-S 300 f/4D IF-ED, AF-S Micro 105 mm f/2.8G I would like to use.

Of course I could trade them in for new, but old technology is worth next to nothing.
Thinking of using the FTZ II and still be able to use my old lenses would be preferable - budget also taking into consideration.

But, what about the quality of the images ?
This is where I am in two minds of what to do.

Is there a noticeable difference from using the adaptor or is that acceptable.

Thank you for your help and advice.
 
Member's gallery
No loss of image quality - an FTZ optically replaces the space taken by the mirror box on an F mount removed on ML bodies so that F mount lenses are at the right distance relative to the sensor on an ML body

An original FTZ second hand can help with a budget issue and works OK on a Z6 III with the limitation of some potential issues with QR plates.
An FTZ II is definitely needed for a Z9 body.

I assume you know any AF F mount lens focused by a motor in the camera body does not AF on a Z mount body.

With manual focus or "screwdriver" AF lenses focus peaking with ML bodies can help considerably, though not as good as still having eyesight good enough to judge when an image is critical in focus in the viewfinder.
When working from a tripod, zooming in on the rear monitor to critically check focus (you can do this with recent DSLRs) combined with ML viewfinders being several stops brighter than with a DSLR can help a lot.
 
Member's gallery
As Len said, no loss in IQ. But for the most part, the Z-mount successors to their predecessors generally perform better and give better IQ. I have made the same transition that you are considering, and I would recommend using the lenses you have and slowly replacing them as you see fit and can afford. I picked up a number of my Z-mount lenses used, and have saved quite a bit. Most of them look and operate like they are brand new. And now that Nikon no longer gives five-year warranties, buying new is not quite what it used to be.

Good luck,

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
bwest said:
I am replacing my D500 with a Z6III shortly and need some advice on the FTZ II.
Having a number of F-mount lenses, like AF-S 24-120 f/4G ED, AF-S 300 f/4D IF-ED, AF-S Micro 105 mm f/2.8G I would like to use.

Of course I could trade them in for new, but old technology is worth next to nothing.
Thinking of using the FTZ II and still be able to use my old lenses would be preferable - budget also taking into consideration.

But, what about the quality of the images ?
This is where I am in two minds of what to do.

Is there a noticeable difference from using the adaptor or is that acceptable.

Thank you for your help and advice.
Click to expand...

I was waiting for the Z8 to replace my D850 but had the opportunity to get a really good price for the D850 set the ball rolling for me to get a Z camera. The obvious one was the Z7ii, but as I started looking into it I found that is was not a D850 equivalent and after further research I concluded that the Z7ii and the Z6ii were not two steps on the ladder, but more brothers with each having better qualities in different areas.

I'd been using Fuji cameras - I got my XT-1 in the same year I got the D850 - that had resolutions between 16MP and 26MP with the XT-4 I eventually got and I had a Sony a7ii exclusively for use with my vintage manual focus lenses (at the time could not stretch to a used Z6) , so 24MP was not anything new for me and was not a deterrent for my photography. So I opted for the better low light and high ISO performance and bought a Z6ii.

The first time out with it I used my AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G and the results were, as expected, excellent. However I found that with the FTZ adding about 30mm to the length of the lens, the handing and feel was awful. Now I have no doubt that had I persevered with it I would have got used to it, but after 20 odd years with the Nikon dSLRS and latterly a few years with my Fujis, I really felt it so decided to swap the 24-70f2.8 for a used Z24-70 f4S. Back then the Z24-120 was on back order (not that I could afford it) and there were no used ones in the country, but the Z24-70 f4S was widely available at ridiculously cheap prices. I guess that most of the people who had the kit Z24-70 f4S lenses had traded them in for the 24-120. The going rate was £420 v the new price of £1050. I got a mint boxed Z24-70 f4S with a 12 month warranty for £420.

Do I miss the f2.8? Yes - a bit, but the pluses in the handling make it up for me.

Funnily enough, my AF-S 14-24mm F2.8 G does not feel as bad as the 24-70G. Also my AF-S 70-200 f2.8 E FL I find OK on the FTZ. I've never had the 24-120 F4 G but it might be worth getting the Z version if you find the same as me, but I think you will be OK with the other lenses.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Yup, agree.

Generally spoken, if you use a Z6 III giving you 24+ MP resolution you should be fine using the AF-S lenses as a starter. With the 300 f4 D or other older lenses I am not so sure.
I had one of these Micro AF 200mm 1:4 D and I loved it. But it wasn't just that the AF wouldn't work because of the motor issue, it wasn't recognized as a lens by ma Z8 at all. The only thing I can say for sure that generation G lenses work on my Z8. At least I couldn't find one that doesn't up to now.

The devision whether or to replace F-mount lenses by Z lenses and -if yes- whoch one first depends on what lens is really working with your Z6 III and what your photography preferences are like.

The Z 24-120 as well as the Z MC 105 are definitely a big step forward in terms of IQ compared to the F-mount predecessors, although these are still really good lenses. In case of the Z 24-120 I would say, that also in terms of versatility there is a significant advantage. I had both F-mount lenses you mention and own their Z successors now. On a Z8 (45MP) it's a totally different story. However, I am not sure how much of the improvements compared to the F-mount sibblings with FTZ will materialize when shooting a 24MP sensor.

In case you have older tele lenses that might cause problems, depending on your preference and budget you can't go wrong with getting relatively cheap lenses for replacement like e.g. the 300PF, 500PF and such alike. There are numerous people here that proved these lenses to work excellently with Z bodies. I am using a 500 f4 G that was discontinued by Nikon about 9 years ago and it is still a breeeze to use - apart from the weight perhaps ;).

On the other hand - again depending on your way of working - you might find the additional control elements useful that most of the S-Line lenses provide.
 
Member's gallery
I find my F mount lenses seem a tad sharper with the FTZII on my Z9 than they are on my D850. Part of that is the body but with the FTZ on mirrorless you don't need AF fine tuning unless your lens is way out of spec. You have nothing to lose by trying it. If, after a good trial, you feel the Z lenses would be better then you can make your replacement gradually. I'm still using my F mount 24-120's as the Z mount version doesn't have VR. I find I need the VR and IBIS at some times.
 
Member's gallery
Woodpecker said:
I had one of these Micro AF 200mm 1:4 D and I loved it. But it wasn't just that the AF wouldn't work because of the motor issue, it wasn't recognized as a lens by ma Z8 at all.
Click to expand...

Have you tried using the lens with a dumb adaptor? I shoot a lot with vintage manual focus lenses none of which are recognised by the camera as they have no electrical contacts and have to have adaptors to fit the Z mount.

I have a Nikkor 50mm F2 from the mid 1970s on my Z6ii right now and my pre ai 10.5cm f2.5 Nikkor which pre-dates the 50mm works so well and is razor sharp. I don't use the FTZ with these lenses, I have a dumb adaptor.

In the USA you can get Fotasay adapoters from rainbow_imaging in New York. They are very good and very cheap. I can't get them anymore in the UK as they are now not on UK ebay and they won't ship outside of the USA on their website.
 
Member's gallery
dabhand16 said:
Have you tried using the lens with a dumb adaptor? I shoot a lot with vintage manual focus lenses none of which are recognised by the camera as they have no electrical contacts and have to have adaptors to fit the Z mount.

I have a Nikkor 50mm F2 from the mid 1970s on my Z6ii right now and my pre ai 10.5cm f2.5 Nikkor which pre-dates the 50mm works so well and is razor sharp. I don't use the FTZ with these lenses, I have a dumb adaptor.

In the USA you can get Fotasay adapoters from rainbow_imaging in New York. They are very good and very cheap. I can't get them anymore in the UK as they are now not on UK ebay and they won't ship outside of the USA on their website.
Click to expand...
Curious if you also have an FTZ adaptor? I have a number of older MF lenses that mount on the FTZ, but need the FL to be manually entered into the camera. Was there any advantage to the dumb adaptor, or was it just more affordable/available?

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
I sold all my F mount gear when I switched to Z. It meant I could only afford one lens at first (the outstanding Z 70-200 f2.8 ), but I slowly built up with a cheap used 24-70 f4 and used 2x converter, and so on. Others report F mount with FTZii adaptor work fine and I am sure they do. But I decided if I was going to switch I would go all in and take what I could get for my F mount gear. At this stage you won't get much, but the longer you wait the less you will get.
 
Member's gallery
Thank you all for your valuable input - I think I will be starting with the FTZ II and then consider new lenses.
The Nikon Z6III will most probably be my last digital camera after initially starting out with the D60 , a great camera - back then....
Thank you all again,
 
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
Curious if you also have an FTZ adaptor? I have a number of older MF lenses that mount on the FTZ, but need the FL to be manually entered into the camera. Was there any advantage to the dumb adaptor, or was it just more affordable/available?

--Ken
Click to expand...

Yes, I do have the FTZ and use it for my AF lenses. It does accept my vintage Nikkors, but I choose to use a dumb one, no advantages that I can think of but I keep the adaptors with the lenses in store and the FTZ is mostly on my AF-S 70-200 f2.8 E FL. If I get any mounting issues like stiffness I'd rather it happen on a cheap adaptor, just in case.... I have several dumb adaptors for Pentax, Canon, Olympus, Exacta, ,M42 (a few of these), Minolta, and Nikon F. I'm no longer shackled to the F mount and there are so many excellent lenses made by other makers like Olympus Zuiko and Pentax Takumar as well as the many third party lenses made on many mounts, so not tied to trying to find an F mount lens when there is an excellent lens but in (say) Canon FL mount available. I have a couple of 135mm f2,.8 branded Hanimex (cost 15GBP) and Hoya (cost 12 GBP),but they were made by Tomioka. Some lenses are hard to find in any mount, so being flexible is an advantage, if you find a good one in does not matter what the mount is.

Adaptors are cheap especially if you are in the USA and can access the great Fotasy ones from rainbow_imaging in New York and open up the many superb lenses made by other makers. I can get Fotasy ones in the UK but at inflated prices approaching double or more than I could buy them from rainbow_imaging even with the postage. Now they are not on UK ebay I can't buy them direct any more.

You will always have to enter the FL and aperture into the camera as there is no electrical contact between the lens and camera. My Z6ii has 20 slots and my Fujis only have six, but the Fujis allow the maker too. This is to inform the IBIS as I understand it., so not absolutely necessary if you are using short lenses. See the EXIF below my picture.

I now shoot mostly with vintage lenses and have about 32. I love my Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2, but have to say that the Helios 44s give similar images at a much cheaper cost. I have several versions of the Helios 44 and my favoutires are the preset 44 and 44-2. The Biotar is tiny and light though. I have a Tamron SP500 with a matching 2x TC that I got for under 100 GBP

This was taken in the evening with the Tamron SP500 f8 1/100 at ISO 4000 approaching the MFD and hand held:

I'VE GOT MY EYE ON YOU by Graham Owen.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
@dabhand16, You seem to be kind of what I would call a walking dictionary in terms of getting vintage glass to work on a modern cameras (y)👏.
However, for me this is not an issue any more after selling my older stuff. The oldest lens I still us is a Nikon 500mm f4 G VR and the G generation lenses generally seem to work fine with the Z series cameras and with full functionality available. The only thing I observed was a limitation in flexibility if it comes to using the buttons of a G lens as customizable control elements on a Z and that the VR cn only be controlled via the lens control elements of the lens while the Z camera is just able to display whether or not the VR is on or off. But this is something I can easily live with.

Years - or should I say decades ? - ago, I used a big Pentacon Six tele lens with a "dumb adapter" on a Fuji Finepix S5pro and at the time it was great as there was no budget for the fast long glass, but compared to today's range of possibilities this truly was another world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top