Should I get an FTZ adapter with Z5?

Joined
Oct 28, 2017
Messages
10
I'm angling on getting a Z5 + Z24-200 as my "do everything" camera. But I'd also like to get one fast prime around the 35mm mark.

I could get the Z 35, but it's bigger and more $$$ than I'd like. I can wait for the rumored, future 40mm, too.

But (and I'm not a Nikonian, so I don't know the lenses), would it make sense to add the FTZ adapter to my Z5 bundle for $99 and get a legacy 35? If so, which version would work best on the Z5 and that could be had relatively affordably, as I'd sell it once the 40mm is available.

Thanks for any help/thoughts.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
913
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
The issue is, does the Z lens landscape have the lenses that YOU want?
If not, then yes, the FTZ is useful to be able to use the F lenses.

As you said, this transition period, where you are waiting on future lenses creates migration issues.
Do you get a F 35 now, or wait an unknown amount of time for a Z 40?
I would look at the F 35/1.8​
Similar situation for other lenses where there isn't a Z lens, right now.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
913
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Since I'm a cheapskate, and just for fun, sounds like picking up the adapter and horse trading in old lenses might be a side hobby? :)

If you are into manual focus lenses, the older manual focus AI and pre-AI lenses, focus smoother than the first autofocus mechanical D lenses. At least in my limited experience.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,540
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Up to you, but I find the FTZ way too bulky. Another option is to pick up a Canon EF to Nikon Z AF adapter (more expensive adapter), but get a Canon 40mm STM pancake. Smaller lens profile and from all accounts, seems to work as well as native. It would probably come out to the same price, if not cheaper compared to the FTZ + Nikon 35mm 1.8 ED lens. Either that or just get the FTZ with some manual Nikon glass.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
921
Location
MN, USA
You can probably always resell the FTZ for what you paid for it if bought as part of the kit. No one complained (too much :)) about the 35 1.8g until the S lens came out. But yes, the price is high compared to previous 35's (though the cost probably pretty much reflects the IQ). One other thought is, if you are looking a manual focussing glass, is the Voigtlander 40 1.4, or some of their 35's along with a reasonably low-cost adapter. There are caveats to using those (vignetting at wider apertures and often the corners don't clean up until a couple stops in) but they generally very sharp lenses with interesting character.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
295
Location
Colorado
I don’t love the FTZ. I think it looks really odd and of course results in a longer and heavier setup than using a native lens. Having said that, I do appreciate that it exists and I like knowing that I have it because it gives me access to a huge catalog of lenses that I could potentially use on my camera. My thinking is that if I were perusing Craigslist or eBay and came across a screaming deal on an excellent f-mount lens (and more and more will be hitting the used market), then I’ll be equipped to acquire that lens and use it. So I’d recommend getting the adapter.

On a related note, the 35 S lens is really nice. I found a barely used one for $620, which isn’t a lot more than the G lens, which I used to own. But like you, I’m also very curious about the 40.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
880
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
Are you able to pick up the adapter at a discounted price? If so, I would consider it since the discounts are often quite deep and you may want it at some point in the future to use some older glass.

--Ken
 
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
375
Location
Albuquerque, NM USA
Real Name
Don Roy
I got an FTZ free with the Z6 2 yrs ago as a new-to-Nikon user. I had no old glass. Since then I've learned to hate the FTZ way more than love it. It's just to bulky. The only thing I use the FTZ for is oddball manual lenses, like my totally manual 9mm. One good thing it did was get me to switch from RC2 to Arca Swiss mount system. You can't use an FTZ with a Manfrotto mount on the camera body.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
19,773
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
You can't use an FTZ with a Manfrotto mount on the camera body.

That's true, but you can use it with the device mounted onto the FTZ adapter, which accomplishes the same as if it was mounted onto the body.

The general problem is that Manfrotto heads aren't compatible with Arca-Swiss devices, or at least they weren't years ago the last time I checked.

The specific problem relating to the FTZ adapter is that the Manfrotto quick release device has to be put on the adapter after the adapter is mounted onto the camera body. Similarly, if the quick release device is on the camera body (because the FTZ adapter is not mounted onto the camera at the time), it has to be removed from the body to be able to mount the adapter onto the camera body. Then the quick release device can be mounted onto the adapter.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2019
Messages
2,510
Location
Jupiter, FL
Real Name
Andy
Since I'm a cheapskate, and just for fun, sounds like picking up the adapter and horse trading in old lenses might be a side hobby? :)
I have two FTZ adapters to accommodate various F-Mount lenses on my Z bodies. G and E lenses are fully functional when adapted to a Z body. As you noted, they are a bargain in that respect. Manual focus AI lenses work well with the FTZ too, particularly with the benefit of zooming in to get critical focus, exposure preview, etc.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2017
Messages
1,797
Location
Central Ohio
Real Name
Andrew
Where any legacy adapter has its benefit is giving you the ability to use lenses that are not available in native mount.

I use mine for adapting Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 and Nikon 70-300 f-mount lenses. It also gives those with less than deep pockets an alternative to the native mount lenses.

mirrorless generally will give you a weighty savings on the camera body, but not so much on the lenses for an FX sensor, especially if the camera maker decides to make better corrected glass. For example, m43 decided to do a combination of decent glass and software corrections for their f/1.8 options. This gives them the ability to do much smaller lenses compared to the size of the sensor. However, when they decided to go f/1.2 aperture lenses, the aperture size and their choice of having better corrected glass increase the size and weight, making the lenses much closer in size and weight to the FX sensor size equivalents.

generally, PDAF equipped sensors have less of an issue with focus shifts/accuracy issues. I’ve noticed that even older Nikon F-mount lenses on my Nikon z, the better AF accuracy tends to make those lenses look better than on some of the f-mount bodies.

the shorter flame distance gives you the ability to a adapt more lenses from more systems, of that of your thing.

these are just some of my thought of the top of my head. Hope they help.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
3,779
Location
Massachusetts
Real Name
David
If I were making the switch (or adding) I'd be tempted to get the adapter. For me the main reason would be for something like the 70-300. There is a 100-400 on the roadmap, but I haven't seen anything about a release date and it looks (based on the map graphic) like it's going to be about the size of the X70-200 f/2.8. So not really small and light.

Would the 24-200 meets your telephoto needs?

I did get a chance to try the FTZ with the 70-200 f/4 at one of our local Hunt's Photos. No I don't like adapters or TCs because of the added bulk and just that it's "another" connection point. But I was impressed with how well it functioned.
 
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
5,749
Location
los angeles
The FTZ is crucial in my kit right now.
I use the 35 and 85 1.8Gs, 70-300E and a 10-20 on my Z50.
All of these lenses are pretty lightweight, affordable and handle nicely.
All purchased used and will likely get swapped out for the Z equivalents eventually.
 
Last edited:

JLH

Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
217
I have the FTZ adapter. I got it with the "Deal" on my Z50 ($99). I use it with both my Z50 and Z5 so I can use all my collection of F-mount lenses on either body. I also have the Fringer Canon EF to Nikon Z adapter which allows me to make use of some of my favorite Canon lenses on my Z's. I am just a hobbyist who enjoys switching around gear and testing the results. My current setup gives me tremendous flexibility and loads of options with my gear collection.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
4,796
Location
USA-Today
I have a Z6 with the 24-200 and it does just about everything I need it to do (except BIF) I do use the FTZ with my 80-400 mounted on it when I use the Z6 to shoot video while I used another body to shoot. If you have non-Z glass, then the FTZ is a must have imo. If you dont have other nikon glass, and have the budget for the Z glass, then just get Z glass and not mess with the FTZ. But I enjoy the Z6 24-200 combo for a grab/light n go camera, hiking, etc and the IBIS is great..
 
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
18
Location
Columbia/Cowlitz confluence
My understanding is that the FTZ lacks a screwdrive motor, so all my AF lenses are just as adaptable to other brands. I really like the Z system but without a lens budget I'm esssentially shut out for autofocus. With my µ43 system I've gone with all manual primes and a few AF zooms, so that's how I personally would go with a Z body - and the FTZ makes good sense with elder primes.
 
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
47
Location
Long Island, NY
The FTZ leaves the door open for more/less expensive lens options. I use it with my 50mm 1.4G on my Z6ii and achieve phenomenal results while wandering around NYC.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom