Do you think Nikon should open up the Z mount to third party lens manufacturers?

[Jonathan F/2]

I was wondering what people think about Nikon opening up the Z mount to third party lens manufacturers? Do you think it would help Nikon's bottom line if they sold more camera bodies while allowing the 3rd party lens manufacturers pick up the slack, especially with stiff competition and fewer camera sales than before? I feel like companies like Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and Samyang can fill lens gaps in the Z line-up quickly, while allowing Nikon to focus on the pro and prosumer core lenses for the system. For example Samyang has a full line-up of compact 2.8, 1.8 and 1.4 prime AF lenses for the Sony E mount, which I'm sure could be optimized to work on Z cameras. Tamron has lenses like the 17-28mm and 28-75mm 2.8 lenses also for the E mount that can give quickly give the Z 2.8 zoom options. I'm sure sooner or later these companies will backwards engineer the mount, but it'd be nice if there was some corporate support for an open mount policy. The Z mount is the widest and potentially the most flexible mount of any mirrorless system. What do you think Nikon should do?

 

[Palouse]

I believe that is inevitable, or perhaps I should say, I hope that it is inevitable. I suspect all involved are waiting to see if/when a critical mass of buyers will exist.

I wonder what the effect of the different size mirrorless mounts will mean for 3rd party producers--are they all close enough in size that the optics will be able to cope once the mechanical adaptations are made.

 

[gryphon1911]

I think a licensing deal would be great. Let anyone willing to pay for licensing and then a royalty deal on what they sell. Not sure if this is done in the photo industry, but might be something for them to look into if not.

 

[Mike Buckley]

It's possible that licensing deals have already been done and that lens manufacturers are waiting to see if the Z system takes off a bit more before committing the financial resources to make everything happen. Do we know whether the F mount lenses being made by other manufacturers are the result of licensing agreements, reverse engineering or both?

 

[Jonathan F/2]

I believe that is inevitable, or perhaps I should say, I hope that it is inevitable. I suspect all involved are waiting to see if/when a critical mass of buyers will exist.

I wonder what the effect of the different size mirrorless mounts will mean for 3rd party producers--are they all close enough in size that the optics will be able to cope once the mechanical adaptations are made.

Most likely everything will be designed around the Sony E mount first (due to being the smallest diameter mount), and then adapted to other mounts. It's similar to how Sigma designs lenses based around the F-mount, and then ports the lenses to other systems.

 

[Walter Rowe]

Given the number of Z adapters on the market I believe the Z mount has already been figured out. Native third party lenses is only a matter of time.

 

[Martin Norden]

Not sure about anywhere else in the world but in the UK there are two dedicated Z mount lenses from Samyang for the Z series, both are manual focus but from the images of the lens there doesn't appear to be any electrical contacts on the lens to allow data transfer between lens and camera, so metering would be stop down using the aperture ring on the lens and in camera shutter speed dial.

The link for the 14mm lens is below, I think that the images of the lens make it look just like the F mount version with an FTZ welded on to the back of the lens. The other lens is an 85mm MF lens and again looks as though the FTZ is just an add-on to the lens rather than having a new lens design, again link below.

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/samyang-mf-14mm-f2-8-nikon-z-fit-1711681/

https://www.wexphotovideo.com/samyang-mf-85mm-f1-4-nikon-z-fit-1711682/

There were rumours floating around that Zeiss were going to release some MF Z lenses but haven't seen or heard anything yet.

At the launch of the Z cameras were Nikon not asked about working with the 3rd party lens manufacturers and Nikon stated that no details would be released to other parties. If I have this right then for a 3rd party to come up with a Z mount lens is incredibly difficult and expensive?

 

[ijm5012]

I think a licensing deal would be great. Let anyone willing to pay for licensing and then a royalty deal on what they sell. Not sure if this is done in the photo industry, but might be something for them to look into if not.

Isn't that how the F-mount was though as well? Manufacturers had to "license" the lens mount, to which Sigma and Tamron said "F off", and they simply reverse engineered the electronics and built the lenses anyways, avoiding the costs associated with licensing the technology from Nikon and therefore passing the savings on to the consumer?

At least that's what I've always read in regards to third-party lenses for Nikon F / Canon EF mounts.

 

[ijm5012]

Most likely everything will be designed around the Sony E mount first (due to being the smallest diameter mount), and then adapted to other mounts. It's similar to how Sigma designs lenses based around the F-mount, and then ports the lenses to other systems.

While that's certainly a possibility, it would be odd for Sigma to build a lens around the E mount as a third-party manufacturer, despite being a first-party manufacturer of the "L mount alliance" with Leica and Panasonic.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

While that's certainly a possibility, it would be odd for Sigma to build a lens around the E mount as a third-party manufacturer, despite being a first-party manufacturer of the "L mount alliance" with Leica and Panasonic.

Well that's what they're doing right now with lenses like the 35mm 1.2 Art lens. Sigma does whatever they feel like doing.

 

[ijm5012]

Well that's what they're doing right now with lenses like the 35mm 1.2 Art lens. Sigma does whatever they feel like doing.

I didn't even know such a lens existed.

Also, an 82mm filter thread, 1.1kg 35mm lens? LMAO, I'll pass. I got in to mirrorless to make my kit SMALLER and LIGHTER, not bigger and heavier... It makes the Zony 35/1.4 seems positively svelte!

 

[Jonathan F/2]

I didn't even know such a lens existed.

Also, an 82mm filter thread, 1.1kg 35mm lens? LMAO, I'll pass. I got in to mirrorless to make my kit SMALLER and LIGHTER, not bigger and heavier... It makes the Zony 35/1.4 seems positively svelte!

Sigma is also doing small 2.8 glass like the 45mm 2.8 Contemporary lens they just released: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/contemporary/c019_45_28/

Samyang also announced a compact 18mm 2.8 lens and they have a full 2.8 small prime lens lineup, plus a new 45mm 1.8 and their 1.4 glass all priced fairly affordable.

All these lenses can fill in FL gaps and price points for the Z versus waiting for Nikon to flesh out the system in five years.

 

[gryphon1911]

Isn't that how the F-mount was though as well? Manufacturers had to "license" the lens mount, to which Sigma and Tamron said "F off", and they simply reverse engineered the electronics and built the lenses anyways, avoiding the costs associated with licensing the technology from Nikon and therefore passing the savings on to the consumer?

At least that's what I've always read in regards to third-party lenses for Nikon F / Canon EF mounts.

Well, because sigma didn't license is one of the reasons I could never trust their lenses. Their reverse engineering for DSLR lenses has always been an issue for me. Every lens I've tried from then had had issues that were deal breakers for me.

Tamron less so.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Well, because sigma didn't license is one of the reasons I could never trust their lenses. Their reverse engineering for DSLR lenses has always been an issue for me. Every lens I've tried from then had had issues that were deal breakers for me.

Tamron less so.

Sigma was the first to issue FTZ firmware updates for their Sigma Global Vision line, while it took Tamron several weeks/months to issue firmware updates for their own lineup. Adapted Tamron lenses were notoriously spotty on the older Nikon 1 FT1 adapter, and Tamron never issued firmware updates leaving users SOL. Sigma lenses like their 120-300mm 2.8 Sport has had no equal until Nikon decided to copy it recently!

 

[ijm5012]

Sigma was the first to issue FTZ firmware updates for their Sigma Global Vision line, while it took Tamron several weeks/months to issue firmware updates for their own lineup. Adapted Tamron lenses were notoriously spotty on the older Nikon 1 FT1 adapter, and Tamron never issued firmware updates leaving users SOL. Sigma lenses like their 120-300mm 2.8 Sport has had no equal until Nikon decided to copy it recently!

FWIW, The only Sigma lens I ever owned/shot (35 1.4 ART) has severe focusing issues with anything but the center AF point on my D500. The Tamron 35 1.8 VC did not have those issue (but it suffered from some pretty severe CA). I ended up selling both and went with the Nikon 35/1.8 G ED. Smaller size, lighter weight, and no focusing issues.

While the focusing issues have been mitigated thanks to OSPDAF with the Z-bodies, the adapted ART lenses are still behemoths, especially when used on an FTZ. The 50 ART is gigantic, the 85 ART takes 86mm filters (lol, like *** Sigma), and the 105 ART is comical with its 105mm filter thread. Sigma makes some fantastic lenses from an optical perspective, but there's more to building a lens that people will want to own and shoot with than achieving record-level MTF values.

People like myself want sharp lenses that aren't gigantic and heavy. That's why I think Nikon made a smart move by launching with f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes. You get the benefits of a fantastic FF sensor, without the size and heft of f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 glass.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

FWIW, The only Sigma lens I ever owned/shot (35 1.4 ART) has severe focusing issues with anything but the center AF point on my D500. The Tamron 35 1.8 VC did not have those issue (but it suffered from some pretty severe CA). I ended up selling both and went with the Nikon 35/1.8 G ED. Smaller size, lighter weight, and no focusing issues.

While the focusing issues have been mitigated thanks to OSPDAF with the Z-bodies, the adapted ART lenses are still behemoths, especially when used on an FTZ. The 50 ART is gigantic, the 85 ART takes 86mm filters (lol, like *** Sigma), and the 105 ART is comical with its 105mm filter thread. Sigma makes some fantastic lenses from an optical perspective, but there's more to building a lens that people will want to own and shoot with than achieving record-level MTF values.

People like myself want sharp lenses that aren't gigantic and heavy. That's why I think Nikon made a smart move by launching with f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes. You get the benefits of a fantastic FF sensor, without the size and heft of f/1.4 primes and f/2.8 glass.

Yeah, but I just mentioned Sigma is starting to make smaller 2.8 lenses, plus focus issues are almost non-existent on OSPDAF. Mirrorless just reset the bar for everyone. Also it looks like everyone is going big now to match the optical qualities of the Sigma 1.4 Art lenses like Canon's new 50mm 1.2 RF.

Plus I wasn't really inferring Sigma with their DSLR converted lenses, but more of mirrorless designed lenses. Lenses like the 35mm 1.2 Art aren't meant for walking around anyways. For example Tamron's mirrorless zoom lenses are hitting a price and performance sweet spot. Their new 17-28mm 2.8 E mount lens only 420g and reports say it already works well with the Techart TZE-01 adapter. Had Nikon opened up the Z mount from introduction, we'd probably have a bunch of third party lenses released right now. Again, I keep mentioning Samyang, their new 18mm 2.8 lens they just announced weighs only 145g, how's that for lightweight? Honestly with Nikon's recently announced 24mm 1.8 S coming in at $1000 USD, it is still quite expensive. At least with third party options, people have choices at every price bracket.

I don't see why anyone would be against more lens options. Nikon should just get as many Z bodies out there. People will always buy 1st party glass, but I still think there's plenty of room other manufacturers when it comes to lenses.

 

[ijm5012]

Yeah, but I just mentioned Sigma is starting to make smaller 2.8 lenses, plus focus issues are almost non-existent on OSPDAF. Mirrorless just reset the bar for everyone. Also it looks like everyone is going big now to match the optical qualities of the Sigma 1.4 Art lenses like Canon's new 50mm 1.2 RF.

It may just be my opinion, but designing lenses so large and heavy in today's time when people are traveling and taking their camera with them more is a bit of a head-scratcher personally. I know that when I'm traveling and taking my camera gear with it, there's a "sweet spot" in terms of size and portability. Going beyond that tends to mean the gear stays at home more often, at which point I begin to question why I purchased it.

It's one thing for reviewers to get a lens and say "Wow, look at how sharp this lens is! INCREDIBLE!". It's another thing for them to live with that lens over the course of months or years, and shoot with it regularly.

Canon's RF 50mm 1.2 L is a great lens. It's also massively expensive at $2,100 USD, and weighs nearly 1kg. Personally, I wouldn't want to be lugging something like that around with me, whereas the Nikon 50/1.8 S comes in at $600 and just over 400g. Sure, you give up a stop of light, but given how excellent the sensors are in the Z6 & Z7, I'll gladly give up a bit of speed and bump up that ISO if it means shaving kg's of weight out of my bag (when you factor in that you'll likely be traveling with multiple lenses).

Plus I wasn't really inferring Sigma with their DSLR converted lenses, but more of mirrorless designed lenses. Lenses like the 35mm 1.2 Art aren't meant for walking around anyways. For example Tamron's mirrorless zoom lenses are hitting a price and performance sweet spot. Their new 17-28mm 2.8 E mount lens only 420g and reports say it already works well with the Techart TZE-01 adapter.

Yes, Tamron definitely has a hit on their hands with the 17-28 and 28-75 f/2.8 lenses for Sony. It's a great lens, at affordable prices, that isn't gigantic and heavy.

Had Nikon opened up the Z mount from introduction, we'd probably have a bunch of third party lenses released right now.

Let's not forget that Sony's FE mount has been around for SIX years now (A7 was released in Oct of 2013). The Tamron 28-75 was released in May of 2018, 4.5 years after the first Sony FE camera was released.

Let's check back in March of 2023 (4.5 years after the Z7 went on sale) to see if there are any third party lenses available (I'm guessing there will be).

I don't see why anyone would be against more lens options. Nikon should just get as many Z bodies out there. People will always buy 1st party glass, but I still think there's plenty of room other manufacturers when it comes to lenses.

Who is saying they're against 3rd party glass? I'm certainly not. I don't have the budget (nor the desire) to buy Nikon's f/2.8 zooms for the Z mount. Given the pricing of the f/1.8 primes, when the f/1.4 (or faster) primes make their way to market, they too will be far beyond my reach. I'm all for 3rd party lenses for the Z mount, it's simply a matter of time before they make their way to market.

 

[Hylander]

Third-party lenses with AF functionality might help sell the Z cameras, given the slow pace of offerings of native Z lenses. Sure, the FTZ adapter can be used, but it adds to the weight of the system.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

It may just be my opinion, but designing lenses so large and heavy in today's time when people are traveling and taking their camera with them more is a bit of a head-scratcher personally. I know that when I'm traveling and taking my camera gear with it, there's a "sweet spot" in terms of size and portability. Going beyond that tends to mean the gear stays at home more often, at which point I begin to question why I purchased it.

It's one thing for reviewers to get a lens and say "Wow, look at how sharp this lens is! INCREDIBLE!". It's another thing for them to live with that lens over the course of months or years, and shoot with it regularly.

Canon's RF 50mm 1.2 L is a great lens. It's also massively expensive at $2,100 USD, and weighs nearly 1kg. Personally, I wouldn't want to be lugging something like that around with me, whereas the Nikon 50/1.8 S comes in at $600 and just over 400g. Sure, you give up a stop of light, but given how excellent the sensors are in the Z6 & Z7, I'll gladly give up a bit of speed and bump up that ISO if it means shaving kg's of weight out of my bag (when you factor in that you'll likely be traveling with multiple lenses).

Yeah, but this is why we've always had different lenses for different uses. The 35mm 1.8 ED is great for your usage, but 1.8 at 35mm doesn't give enough subject separation (for my use), and I'd rather have an f2-2.8 lens to have an even smaller foot print when wanting to go lightweight. Third party can fill those gaps in, without Nikon tying up resources having to redo every single focal length and aperture range.

It doesn't matter how long the E-mount has been around, third party manufacturers are already capable of retooling mounts for various camera systems. For example, if Nikon announced open mount support back in August 2018, it's very well possible we could of had Voigtlander MF glass with electronic contacts and/or mirrorless Tamron lenses made for the Z. Sigma for example has no problem building lenses for different mounts and releasing them back-to-back within a month or two months time frame.

It's yet to be seen how Nikon approaches third party, without any official assurances.

 

[ijm5012]

Yeah, but this is why we've always had different lenses for different uses. The 35mm 1.8 ED is great for your usage, but 1.8 at 35mm doesn't give enough subject separation (for my use), and I'd rather have an f2-2.8 lens to have an even smaller foot print when wanting to go lightweight. Third party can fill those gaps in, without Nikon tying up resources having to redo every single focal length and aperture range.

It doesn't matter how long the E-mount has been around, third party manufacturers are already capable of retooling mounts for various camera systems. For example, if Nikon announced open mount support back in August 2018, it's very well possible we could of had Voigtlander MF glass with electronic contacts and/or mirrorless Tamron lenses made for the Z. Sigma for example has no problem building lenses for different mounts and releasing them back-to-back within a month or two months time frame.

It's yet to be seen how Nikon approaches third party, without any official assurances.

I agree with you regarding 3rd party options filling in the voids. Nikon is taking their sweet time in releasing lenses for the Z mount, which can be frustrating for those that lack an extensive F-mount catalog. Fortunately for me, I'm pleased with how the F-mount lenses behave on the Z6.

However, it appears that Nikon (and Canon) have retained their closed-mount, pay-to-play mentality from their DSLR line. Sony is a big innovator in the industry, and making their lens mount an open standard has certainly allowed more lenses to be created for the system. Canon and Nikon are seemingly old dogs that are attempting to learn new tricks, but are possibly making some mistakes along the way.