The FTZ Adapter

On the Z6, Custom Setting d8 is about applying the color and brightness settings to live view.

So not the same as the setting on the Sony. Thanks for checking and reporting.

but I think someone is OIS. Ah, remembered, Panasonic. (Although their FAQ entry says "optimal image stabiliser"

Yup, I gather they weren't allowed to make O(Optical)IS a proprietary term as it's in generic usage, a bit like IBIS.

What is an Optimal Image Stabiliser (OIS)? - Panasonic Corporation

....is a bit flexible with their usage!

Without having to link to the obvious source (their initials are NR ;)), apparently Kipon is making a screwdrive F > Z AF adapter!

.....amongst many others inc T&S and Focal Reducer.

apparently Kipon is making a screwdrive F > Z AF adapter!

That's not how I read it.

Fair enough, the terminology used is a bit vague/ambiguous.

"Manual lens to Nikon Z autofocus adapter with built-in motor"

Errr, so how do you read it...;)

Errr, so how do you read it...

Same way Ilkka did :cool:

The AF works by moving the lens forward and back, by changing the length of the adapter, and not by turning the screw in the lens.

In that case you are moving a lot more mass than just some elements inside a lens. In case of bigger lenses, most likely you would be holding the lens, and this adapter would focus by moving a Z camera body (6 or 7, or something in the future) back and forth. Think about it, if you have your right hand on the grip of the body and your left hand holding the bottom of the lens, you will be adjusting your hand positions according to the focusing.

I have no doubt that all sorts of third-party adapters will be available for the Nikon Z system. Some of those adapters will be better manufactured than others, and some will be more practical than others. Nikon's first FTZ definitely has some compromises in it. Clearly I don't like the lump sticking out from the bottom, but I think as a first try, Nikon is making some very reasonable compromises.

Nikon may be the only one to possibly provide an adapter with an internal AF motor for its screwdriver F-mount lenses because I doubt we'll see one soon from third parties. It took years before the first AF Nikon-to-Sony-E-mount adapter arrived on the scene - and they only work with AF-S lenses (and not that well at all). No one has bothered to come up with one that enables AF with the older screw-driven lenses. Such an adapter would necessarily be big and certainly more expensive than AF adapters that only need electronic contacts. And if there's already issues with properly controlling the AF behavior when AF-S and AF-P lenses are mounted (something Nikon seems to have a very good go at with the current FTZ adapter), then one can only imagine that things won't be easier when the AF is screw-driven. In addition, the inevitable noise caused by the operation of such an adapter runs counter to the silent operation mirrorless is capable of.

Those manual-focus-lens-to-AF adapters that work by moving the entire lens have another drawback - any correction the lens designers put into the lenses to change performance with focus distance (think CRC or IF designs) will be defied.

Like the old AF TC-16A?

Same principle, but the adapter generally allows to focus over the entire range from MFD to infinity.

Yes; I just had a bit more of a rummage through the Z7 manual. "Electronic VR" is the video one. The other one is described as "in-camera VR", and in the specs as having "5-axis image sensor shift" (although presumably three of the "shifts" are actually rotations). I don't mind following Nikon's convention (I can never remember which of Nikon or Canon mis-spell flashgun), I just want to know what we mean!

I see that each manufacturer uses a different term for image stabilization or vibration reduction. More of them use the the term stabilization than vibration reduction. None uses the term IBIS so I think IBIS is a good generic term for that. Besides it can be pronounced as a word.

I suppose we could have IBIS and ILIS?

........and the Z6/7 manages CBLIS, and no I couldn't easily make Chablis!

Nikon may be the only one to possibly provide an adapter with an internal AF motor for its screwdriver F-mount lenses because I doubt we'll see one soon from third parties.

If Nikon really wants to provide AF with screwdriver AF lenses, they can always put the AF motor inside a (flagship) Z body. There needs to be a special FTZ adapter that has some gear to transfer the screwdriver from the Z body to the AF/AF-D lens. That body will be bigger and even more expensive, but if Nikon is charging D5 type money, I would imagine that is doable. The problem is that everybody who buys that body will be paying for this feature, and that has always been the case on higher-end Nikon DSLRs that support screwdriver AF, a feature that I personally no longer need.

AF-I had been available since 1992 and AF-S since 1996. AF-S lenses have been popular since early part of this century. I am afraid that the argument to support AF lenses that require screwdriver AF is not that strong.

If we put the AF motor as part of an FTZ adapter, it will be quite bulky.

This could breath new life into my AF-S AF-dead 600mm f4!

It doesn't have a screw-drive but an AF motor in the adapter....moving what exactly?? It weighs nearly 5 KG!

In a way I don't mind slowish, but it would have to be accurate. I'm thinking bird on post rather than bird in flight.

If Nikon really wants to provide AF with screwdriver AF lenses, they can always put the AF motor inside a (flagship) Z body. There needs to be a special FTZ adapter that has some gear to transfer the screwdriver from the Z body to the AF/AF-D lens. That body will be bigger and even more expensive, but if Nikon is charging D5 type money, I would imagine that is doable. The problem is that everybody who buys that body will be paying for this feature, and that has always been the case on higher-end Nikon DSLRs that support screwdriver AF, a feature that I personally no longer need.

 

AF-I had been available since 1992 and AF-S since 1996. AF-S lenses have been popular since early part of this century. I am afraid that the argument to support AF lenses that require screwdriver AF is not that strong.

 

If we put the AF motor as part of an FTZ adapter, it will be quite bulky.

I don't think they would change. As you say putting the screw driver motor in the adapter is too bulky. Putting it in the camera they ended up having expensive features that few would need. It also allows people to hang on to old lenses and not buying new lenses. Trying to be too much backward compatible would cost them and prevent them to be competitive. Since Canon put the motor in the lenses back in 1987 they now have the advantage that their adapter is an easy one.

I am afraid that the argument to support AF lenses that require screwdriver AF is not that strong.

The more I think about it, the more I feel I have to agree. I no longer own screwdriver lenses and have no plans on acquiring any. If there's no option to use them with AF on a mirrorless body (be it via adaptor or on a special purpose-made body), people sure will complain. If the option is provided, people likely will complain that it doesn't work well enough, is too big and too heavy, drains the battery, and that it is too expensive for what it does.

The more I think about it, the more I feel I have to agree. I no longer own screwdriver lenses and have no plans on acquiring any. If there's no option to use them with AF on a mirrorless body (be it via adaptor or on a special purpose-made body), people sure will complain. If the option is provided, people likely will complain that it doesn't work well enough, is too big and too heavy, drains the battery, and that it is too expensive for what it does.

I still have a few screwdriver AF lenses: 24mm/f2.8 AF-D, 105mm/f2.8 AF macro (but I also have the 105mm/f2.8 AF-S macro), and a 200mm/f4 AF-D macro. I keep them around so that if I need to test for example the FTZ adapter here, I have all sorts of Nikkor lenses from different vintage to test.

Otherwise, I prefer to have all AF-S lenses, especially the E type. However, in another decade or two, all of those will be gradually phased out and most people will use Z-mount lenses exclusively. In fact, I might not be around any more. Nothing will last forever.

I see that each manufacturer uses a different term for image stabilization or vibration reduction. More of them use the the term stabilization than vibration reduction. None uses the term IBIS so I think IBIS is a good generic term for that. Besides it can be pronounced as a word.

Which "that", or both? I've got to say I'd been mentally translating "IB" to "image-based" (As as some other contexts) rather than "in-body", which caused me further confusion (because if it applies to either, it's the video one). So long as I avoid that brain fade, I'm happy with the term, I just want to ensure I'm using it the way others do!

Andrew, you seem to directly connect 'In Body with video only?

Surely, the 'mechanical' sensor shift tech works with a non-VR lens in stills mode aswell?

...and with a VR lens both IBIS and Lens VR combine.

I'm still curious to hear about Shun's 300mm 2.8 AFS (non VR) on the Z6, via the FTZ, regarding stabilization....:)

Finally it was sunny on Saturday afternoon and I put the Z6 on the 600mm f4 to capture some birds in flight. AF on the Z6 is probably not as excellent as on the D5 and D500, but it does a fine job. I tend to use a very high shutter speed when I use super teles, such that I pay little attention to VR.

IBIS seems to do a fine job when I use the 24-70 S at low light with high ISO and 1/30 second.

600mm f4

Is yours' the VR version? Did it 'co-operate' with the Z6's IBIS or did you switch all stabilization off?

I guess you were monopoded or gimbaled? How was the balance with the FTZ?

Andrew, you seem to directly connect 'In Body with video only?

No, I connect "image-based" with video, and I'm overloading my acronyms. "in-body" is both - I'd almost argue more for the sensor-shift, since "in-body" implies mechanics to me.

Surely, the 'mechanical' sensor shift tech works with a non-VR lens in stills mode aswell?

 

...and with a VR lens both IBIS and Lens VR combine.

That's my understanding as well. (It appears you can't pick one and not the other.)

To Quote from Nikon.

Steadier than ever.

On a Z camera, every lens has VR.

For the first time, you can experience fast aperture NIKKOR primes like the AF-S NIKKOR 105mm f/1.4E ED or AF-S NIKKOR 24mm f/1.4G ED with up to 5 stops of 3-axis VR image stabilization. NIKKOR lenses that already have VR, like the AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR, get the added benefit of roll axis for a total of 3-axis VR. Just add the optional Mount Adapter FTZ and you're good to go.

NOTE: Many non-CPU lenses can also benefit from in-camera VR when registering the focal length into the camera.