Which "F" mount lenses offer performance versus purchasing a similar Z lens?

[Calson]

The Nikon AF-S prime lenses are what are as good as but may be larger and heavier than their Z counterparts. With the f-mount zoom lenses their image quality has been greatly improved with the much newer Z lenses. The 24-120mm f-mount was soft on a DSLR and not going to be sharper on a Z camera. Same goes for the 80-400mm lens that was marginal.

A separate consideration for me was having to carry 4 teleconverters and the FTZ adapter in my kit. I only us the FTZ with my prime tilt shift lenses and my Sigma 60-600mm that is primarily for video where IQ is less important.

 

[ssheipel]

I've got and am unlikely to replace with Z versions these F mount lenses that I'll continue to use: 500 pf; 180-400 tc; 85 1.4; (tho it's always been an iffy lens tho I've shot thousands upon thousands of shots through it) 70-200 VR (the first one); 105 macro VR version. A couple of f mount lenses I won't likely use again much if ever as they won't AF on mirrorless -- my beloved (couple hundred dollars new) 50 1.4 and the non VR 105 macro. Having the f mount 85 was saving me from spending ridiculous amounts on the new Z 85 1.2, but then the Plena arrived and I'm lusting for that lens for portrait work All of my f mount lenses continue to make having my D6 as back up (or second camera) make sense.

 

[Doug]

Hi Doug, et al… I wanted to respond to your post so I went out this morning (38deg) w/Z8+FTZii and an old ai-s manual focus lens. I decided on a lens in the middle of my on-hand focal range; the 85mm f/1.4 ai-s. It’s a well built beast…
View attachment 80857

View attachment 80858

I didn’t do any comparison shots, just an assessment by a hobbyist of an older lens for use with the Nikon Z8/9 cameras. Not to leave anyone out, this is worth exploring for Canon, Sony, Pentax and others with their older SLR lenses. I selected the marsh grass area of our shoreline (1st pic) to use as a baseline for “depth of field” and rendering of detail. Disregard the EXIF data as being shot @1.4, all were at f/8, 125sec, iso auto. I initially tried “focus peaking” but found it useless for this situation. The areas outlined in color were too broad and confusing. I focused the old fashioned way, clarity to my eye….



View attachment 80865



This is a full frame shot of the marsh grass for my test. It‘s a JPEG large/fine*, no cropping or tinkering with image.
View attachment 80866


This is a huge 60-70% crop of the above image to assess detail. Looks good to me…these shots had to be reduced in size to post on the forum. They’re pretty darn sharp on my 27” iMac.
View attachment 80867


My takeaway from this is that ai-s manual focus lenses are very suitable for landscapes and stationary subjects. Animals, birds, or other moving things will be a big challenge to overcome. The AF (auto focus) lenses from the later SLR and DSLR era are going to be better options…

Seems like you have found a combination of the right gear to achieve great results. The old saying "A good craftsman doesn't blame his tools." confirms your photography skills, thanks, Larry.

 

[Larry S]

Seems like you have found a combination of the right gear to achieve great results. The old saying "A good craftsman doesn't blame his tools." confirms your photography skills, thanks, Larry.

Stay tuned Doug….. I have the 180mm ai-s f/2.8 hooked up to the Z8 for a run at some stationary or slow wildlife. This lens was a favorite of Joel Satore, a noted Nat Geo photographer, author, speaker, Nikon Ambassador….. yatta yatta…. when he shot film. Gotta see what it will do with the mirrorless Z8. And… I want to see what is possible in “DX” mode…?

 

[StefanSC]

I don't think there is an F-mount lens that is better than it's Z-mount counterpart. That being said, with people dropping F-mount in favor of Z-mount, I think there are some lenses out there that have out of this world value for money compared to Z-mount counterparts. My short-ish list:

Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 - you can get one for less than 130$, it's quite sharp and well behaved for astrophoto and landscape. Not so much for architecture due to complex distortion.

Nikon AF-S 18-35mm G - the wide-angle lens for people who don't usually need wide angles. It's a steal at under 300$ that is going lately.

Nikon 85mm f1.8G - I've seen it go for about 300$ and it's still solid portrait lens.

Nikon 105mm f2.8 macro VR - takes TCs for extra magnification/working distance (which the Z 105mm macro doesn't AFAIK).

Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f2.0 - a bit of a sleeper portrait lens. Extremely sharp and beautiful rendering, it is actually much nicer to use on a Z-system camera with an EVF and IBIS.

Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro - Nothing like it in mirrorless world currently.

Nikon 70-200mm f4 - Always surprised to see how well behaved this lens is. Lately has been around the 500$ mark (at least where I live) which IMO makes it a steal, even compared to the Tamrikon 70-180mm f2.8.

Nikon 200-500mm f5.6 - Around 600$ for this lens? Really?

 

[Whiskeyman]

So far, I've not replaced a single lens in my Nikon/Nikkor F-mount stable for its line-up replacement in the Z-mount line. (I have given a few lenses away to my kids lately.)

I doubt that I'll ever have the funds to replace my AF-S G 600mm f/4, and it sounds as though Nikon has no plans to ever replicate the AF-S G 200mm f/2 in the Z-mount lens line, so those two are likely not going any where until I no longer shoot, and have no control over my affairs at all.

I'm still of the opinion that the really good F-mount lenses that I own, from both Nikon and Sigma, are far better than I am truly capable of handling.

 

[Nimi]

Stay tuned Doug….. I have the 180mm ai-s f/2.8 hooked up to the Z8 for a run at some stationary or slow wildlife. This lens was a favorite of Joel Satore, a noted Nat Geo photographer, author, speaker, Nikon Ambassador….. yatta yatta…. when he shot film. Gotta see what it will do with the mirrorless Z8. And… I want to see what is possible in “DX” mode…?

All Ai-S lenses I've tested, including beautiful, fast glass are soft on the Z9, especially when you look past 1/2 distance from center. Wide open, the are useless to me, especially since I have the Z equivalent sitting nearby so I can compare. Those lenses were designed for a far smaller "sensor" which is probably equivalent to 12mp. They simply don't resolve. Might not matter on some subject matter, but I have no use for them except for video. They are inferior, but fine on the Zf sensor.

 

[Doug]

I don't think there is an F-mount lens that is better than it's Z-mount counterpart. That being said, with people dropping F-mount in favor of Z-mount, I think there are some lenses out there that have out of this world value for money compared to Z-mount counterparts. My short-ish list:

Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f2.8 - you can get one for less than 130$, it's quite sharp and well behaved for astrophoto and landscape. Not so much for architecture due to complex distortion.

Nikon AF-S 18-35mm G - the wide-angle lens for people who don't usually need wide angles. It's a steal at under 300$ that is going lately.

Nikon 85mm f1.8G - I've seen it go for about 300$ and it's still solid portrait lens.

Nikon 105mm f2.8 macro VR - takes TCs for extra magnification/working distance (which the Z 105mm macro doesn't AFAIK).

Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f2.0 - a bit of a sleeper portrait lens. Extremely sharp and beautiful rendering, it is actually much nicer to use on a Z-system camera with an EVF and IBIS.

Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro - Nothing like it in mirrorless world currently.

Nikon 70-200mm f4 - Always surprised to see how well behaved this lens is. Lately has been around the 500$ mark (at least where I live) which IMO makes it a steal, even compared to the Tamrikon 70-180mm f2.8.

Nikon 200-500mm f5.6 - Around 600$ for this lens? Really?

Thanks for your input Sepfan. Sharing this knowledge and experience is extremely what forums like this need. Very few photographers I know have the coin to replace lenses unless the delta between image quality vs total cost of the latest and greatest is worth the difference of buying new and selling old. Older lens will keep going down faster than new Z lens used. My humble 2cent opinion.

 

[fcotterill]

In addition to the 19mm Tilt Shift which @EricBowles listed above, there are 3 earlier T/S F Mounts, all E type aperture.

And 2 other excellent Nikkors unique to F-mount are the 105 f1.4E and 8-15mm f3.5-4.5E Fisheye

 

[dabhand16]

My takeaway from this is that ai-s manual focus lenses are very suitable for landscapes and stationary subjects. Animals, birds, or other moving things will be a big challenge to overcome. The AF (auto focus) lenses from the later SLR and DSLR era are going to be better options…

This was taken with my vintage manual focus Tamron SP 500 f8 mirror lens on my Fuji XT-4, so effectively a 750mm lens. Used on a monopd. Admittedly not moving fast - but is moving!! This lens has a huge throw on the focus ring presumably to allow fine focus control so it was not easy following this swan.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Larry S]

This was taken with my vintage manual focus Tamron SP 500 f8 mirror lens on my Fuji XT-4, so effectively a 750mm lens. Used on a monopd. Admittedly not moving fast - but is moving!! This lens has a huge throw on the focus ring presumably to allow fine focus control so it was not easy following this swan.

View attachment 80907

Excellent! Really sharp….

 

[Woodpecker]

I am using an AF-S 500 F4 G solo and with TC on a Z8.
It works great and - to be honest - it works even better than with my D850 before.
It workls so well that I wil try to do something which in DSLR times was regarded as no-go:
Combining the f4 lens with a TC-17E II, giving me a 850mm f6.7 combo that is on par or even better in resolution than the Z 180-600 solo at 600mm and for sure far better than this lens combined with a TC-1,4x giving you 840mm with f9 to start with.
It 's certainly worth the experiment, because it costs virtually nothing compared with a similar quality Z system alternative.

Yes, it's a heavy combo, but this is something I only need for stationary work with tripod anyway. For the agile and flexible walkaround work the Z 180-600 is perfect.

Especially the F-mount 500 f4 (G and E) were so sharp that getting a good one used should be a temptimg alternative for any Z user needing long lenses and if I didn't have the G already I would go for the E, because is significantly lighter and much less front heavy due to the FL elements.

And another example from another world could have been the Micro AF 200mm f4 D, which is a top notch macro lens of a kind that simply doesn't eyxist on the market these days. The bad news is however: I can't get mine working on a Z8 - no way ! So, it has to go and find a new home, where it can live together with a D850 again ...

IMO the only downsides could be:

1. Potential risks of additional connections because of the FTZ needed
2. Lack of configurable user elements, especially the ring(s)
3. Potential risk in terms of compatibility / flexibility with configurable user elements on F-mount lenses (i.e. buttons)
   E.g. with my AF-S 500 f4 G assigning the buttons on the lens to functions procvided by the Z8 doesn't work correctly or not at all

But in the end, my dreams are not far apart from those of many others: Z 400 f2.8 TC with an additional TC-2.0x and off you go

 

[Calson]

The f-mount zooms with very few exceptions were much improved with the S ones. Most of the f-mount lenses date back 5-20 years in their designs. The 80-400mm dates back to 2013 and so not surprising that the much newer 100-400mm lens design is a big improvement in every way. Same is true for the 24-120mm that in the f-mount version I briefly owned was very soft and not usable for my needs. The S-mount version is a big improvement in every respect.

 

[Waldo3]

This is a spinoff topic from "Are You Sentimental About Your Gear?" Backcountry members like myself have an extensive collection of F-mount lenses. Considering the cost of buying a new Z-mount vs the performance of a similar F series. My thanks in advance for saving me and others bucks, if possible.

Z8 with 500 PF is outstanding and also with the 1.4 III TC

 

[erickdavidum]

I currently use the 500mm pf and the 600mm f4g both including the tc 1.4III, with my Z8, I have obtained great results.

 

[dabhand16]

Excellent! Really sharp….

Thank you very much!

 

[Johan Schmidt]

I find the 200-400 f4 much sharper on my Z9 than it was on the D4

 

[Larry S]

All Ai-S lenses I've tested, including beautiful, fast glass are soft on the Z9, especially when you look past 1/2 distance from center. Wide open, the are useless to me, especially since I have the Z equivalent sitting nearby so I can compare. Those lenses were designed for a far smaller "sensor" which is probably equivalent to 12mp. They simply don't resolve. Might not matter on some subject matter, but I have no use for them except for video. They are inferior, but fine on the Zf sensor.

Hi Nimi! I really appreciate your knowledge here, specifically for the inability of “some” older ai-s manual focus lenses to perform well w/45mp “Z” platforms. But they might work well on lower mp cameras like the Zf. That didn’t make sense….So, I had to put your statement to the test…

So…I attached the FTZii and 180mm f/2.8 ai-s lens to my Z8 for a test. I picked a section of marsh grass and took two shots. One in “FX” (45mp) and one in “DX” (19mp) as this would approximate the MPs of the Zf. The difference was very noticeable. The FX image was out of focus but the DX shot was incredibly sharp.

The top image is FX and the bottom is DX…. BOTH HAD TO BE REDUCED IN SIZE for posting and wouldn’t upload at full size. The DX image at full size is amazing in captured detail and sharpness. Can you explain this phenomena? All I can conclude is the inability of the EVF at 45MP to give accurate manual focus. You were right but I don’t understand why…..?

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Larry S]

Here’s a cropped (60-70%) of the DX shot…

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Nimi]

Here’s a cropped (60-70%) of the DX shot…
View attachment 81044

Can you send me the NEF through Google drive link? Can't make judgement on these. Thanks!

 

[Larry S]

Can you send me the NEF through Google drive link? Can't make judgement on these. Thanks!

Don’t know how to do any of that or what it is. The images are JPEG/large/fine*.

 

[Nimi]

Don’t know how to do any of that or what it is. The images are JPEG/large/fine*.

In that case the images are processed and it's impossible to discern lens sharpness. It's "fine for phone viewing" but doesn't say anything about sharpness which now far exceeds display like that.

 

[MMoretti]

I am using an AF-S 500 F4 G solo and with TC on a Z8.
It works great and - to be honest - it works even better than with my D850 before.
It workls so well that I wil try to do something which in DSLR times was regarded as no-go:
Combining the f4 lens with a TC-17E II, giving me a 850mm f6.7 combo that is on par or even better in resolution than the Z 180-600 solo at 600mm and for sure far better than this lens combined with a TC-1,4x giving you 840mm with f9 to start with.
It 's certainly worth the experiment, because it costs virtually nothing compared with a similar quality Z system alternative.

Yes, it's a heavy combo, but this is something I only need for stationary work with tripod anyway. For the agile and flexible walkaround work the Z 180-600 is perfect.

Especially the F-mount 500 f4 (G and E) were so sharp that getting a good one used should be a temptimg alternative for any Z user needing long lenses and if I didn't have the G already I would go for the E, because is significantly lighter and much less front heavy due to the FL elements.

And another example from another world could have been the Micro AF 200mm f4 D, which is a top notch macro lens of a kind that simply doesn't eyxist on the market these days. The bad news is however: I can't get mine working on a Z8 - no way ! So, it has to go and find a new home, where it can live together with a D850 again ...

IMO the only downsides could be:

1. Potential risks of additional connections because of the FTZ needed
2. Lack of configurable user elements, especially the ring(s)
3. Potential risk in terms of compatibility / flexibility with configurable user elements on F-mount lenses (i.e. buttons)
   E.g. with my AF-S 500 f4 G assigning the buttons on the lens to functions procvided by the Z8 doesn't work correctly or not at all

But in the end, my dreams are not far apart from those of many others: Z 400 f2.8 TC with an additional TC-2.0x and off you go

Currently shopping for a 500/4E for all of those reasons you observe.

 

[Lance B]

I have replaced all my F mount lenses with Z mount lenses except for the 500 pf and the 400 f2.8E FL VR. I have kept the 500 pf due to there being no replacement and it is still a brilliant lens and takes the 1.4x TCIII with excellent results. I have kept the 400 f2.8E FL VR because the new Z 400 f2.8 + TC is twice the price as what I paid for the f2.8E! I do not think the new Z 400 + TC would much if any sharper, but it does have the TC added, is much lighter and would likely have a small bit better edge to edge sharpness. Every Z lens replacement I have has been a step up in performance, some a small step, some a major leap in performance.

 

[Doug]

Currently shopping for a 500/4E for all of those reasons you observe.

Makes sense considering the close performance difference vs after-tax dollars kept in your pocket. Thanks.