Is a Nikon Z body a good fit for Leica M lenses?

With the current sale prices for the Z bodies, I am considering whether one of them would be a good host for my M lenses.

 

I am not terribly interested in a Leica body due to their high prices and alleged reliability/repair issues. (I used Nikon F and Leica M film cameras for many years, with zero problems.)

 

I own AI/AI-S lenses, which I have been using on a D7200, with decent results. My M lenses have not been used for a while since I do not have the time for B&W film, and the cost/logistics of 35mm transparencies is, in my opinion, ridiculous.

 

A Z body sounds like an attractive way to have the best of both worlds - using the legacy Nikon and Leica lenses.

 

Would you please share your recommendations/experiences (especially M lens adapters) to aid me in making a buying decision? BTW, not buying is a valid decision for me, especially if I wouldn't be able to get good results with the M lenses.

 

Many thanks,

especially M lens adapters

I have no experience using M-mount lenses on Nikon Z bodies. When I was adapting M-mount lenses to Sony A7-series bodies, I learned to stay away from the cheap adapters and eventually settled for the one made by Voigtlander. Here's the equivalent one for Leica M to Nikon Z: https://www.adorama.com/vtvmz.html (I was using the one without the close-focus capabilites simply because it arrived on the market after I had already purchased mine - since many Leica lenses don't focus that close, the close-focus capabilities are something I would want to have). Another brand I'd trust is Novoflex: https://www.adorama.com/nvnikzlem.html

 

With wide-angle M-mount lenses on a Sony A7/A7II, the main issue was peripheral color shift and smearing - mainly caused by the thick sensor cover glass used in the Sony cameras and the non-telecentric design of many Leica M-mount lenses. From what I've read, the issue is less pronounced on Nikon Z cameras - but one needs to check each lens for those issues. I don't know how thick the sensor cover glass on a Nikon Z body is - only that it supposedly isn't as thick as what Sony uses - but not by much so I expect Leica M-mount lenses that have issues on a Sony A7-Series body might only do marginally better on Nikon Z.

 

Kolari Vision (and maybe others) can modified A7-Series and Nikon Z bodies by replacing the sensor cover glass with a thinner one.

You might want to read some similar questions and answers on the Leica Forum in the international section, which has a wide base of Leica users, located here - Leica Forum. I've been using Leica M and Leica LTM lenses on digital bodies for a couple of years now, and only about 2 months on the Sony system, no experience with the Nikon Z, though. From what I've seen discussed on the use of Leica M lenses on the Z system, the issues seem to be lens specific, rather than broad generalizations, which is why I suggested you might want to familiarize yourself with a broad spectrum of comments.

If I were going to buy a new camera system, I would NOT be worrying about how to adapt old lenses to it... I'd be worrying about how to afford new lenses made for the new system (e.g., NIKKOR Z Mirrorless Lenses | Nikon).

 

I own much more than a hundred old lenses. I love to use them on my newer cameras FOR FUN. But for serious work, the inconvenience of an adapted item is a pain in the ass.

 

It's fun to contemplate the quality and fun of old techniques and old equipment, but there has really been progress from the time of wet-plate photography, although I have known a person who still did it up to a couple of years ago when I lost track of him...

 

I confess, I wish I could still get printing-out paper and platinum papers for a reasonable price:rolleyes:

I have used several M-mount lenses with my Nikon Z6 since 2019 and I think the Nikon Z is actually the best platform for using M-mount lenses. The Nikon Z has a thinner cover glass than the Sony cameras, and I've yet to see any color fringing issues even with M-mount lenses as wide as 15mm, and as you say is more reasonably priced that Leica bodies. I've set up my Z6 so the [AF-ON] button results in a 200% magnified view, making manual focusing a snap. Size-wise, M-mount lenses balance well on the Z6 (better than F-mount lenses, IMO) and of course you don't have rangefinder coupling or finder blockage issues.

 

If you get a manual adapter, I recommend the $47.99 one on eBay under "LM-NZ/M Close Focus For Leica M VM ZM Lens to Nikon Z6 Z7 Camera Adapter Macro." That's what I have been using and it has no play, and the focusing helical feels great. I was nervous given the low price, but figured if it doesn't work well I'd just throw it away and get a more expensive one. But it's great. No matter what adapter you get I recommend one with a focusing helical to allow M-mount lenses to focus even closer (often with good results). Here is where the one downside of using M-mount lenses on the Z system with a manual adapter comes into play though: even if you sent a focal length and aperture for a non-CPU lens in the Nikon Z body, it won't record the focal length or aperture in the EXIF header. This only works if you are using a non-CPU lens with the Nikon FTZ adapter, and it's a maddening change from the D700 days.

 

Finally, I will say that I have just recently purchased (but it hasn't arrived yet) a Megadap Leica M Lens to Nikon Z-Mount Autofocus Adapter, which should allow autofocus on Nikon Z cameras with M-mount lenses as well as focal length recording in the EXIF header (albeit through a kludgey method).

@dieter: Thank you for the tip on the voigtlander adapter; I was only aware of the Novoflex. I have read various figures about the thickness of the cover glass on the Z sensors. I am not keen on having the covers changed out since they are more or less an integral part of the optical formula. On the other hand, if there was a modified one on offer at a low price, I could be tempted to experiment.

 

@SCL - Thank you for the link. I have been Googling the M->Z threads for the past year or two, and had seen some of the comments on that forum.

 

@JDMvW - Perhaps I am atypical, but I am lens centric; I view my "camera system" as the constellation of lenses which I already own, and whose capabilities I know how to exploit. Camera bodies are secondary. As such, I am considering whether adding a body to my existing system (of lenses) would allow me to increase my hit rate with the aid some of the Z's technical innovations (IBIS, focusing aids, etc.), while also allowing me to use the M lenses' unique optical qualities. If I can't, I don't see the value of purchasing a Z body; I get good results already with the D7200. I also miss platinum and palladium, as well as dye transfer, printing!

 

@samuel_lipoff - Thank you very much for the personal feedback! I'd be very interested in hearing about your experience with the Megadap adapter.

I have not done systematic testing with my Z6ii, but I have been positively surprised when mounting my M lenses.

If I have time over the upcoming weekend I could do a couple of shots for you to look at.

I have the following M mount lenses at hand:

Leica 50mm Summicron v3

Leica 50mm Elmar-M 2.8 (2007)

Leica 35mm Summicron v3

Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 SC v1

Voigtlander 28mm 2.0

 

Leica Elmar 5cm 3.5 LTM

Voigtlander 50mm 1.7 v1 LTM

Voigtlander 21/4 v1 LTM

Voigtlander 12/5.6 v1 LTM

 

let me know if you want to se a couple of these side by side.

Looks like the Leica L-Mount adaptor is the only way to fit the new Sigma macro onto a Nikon body...:(

 

I don't quite get the reasoning behind the 2 Leica mounts.

 

Is Leica M a legacy mount and Leica L for new lenses?

 

:D

@NHSN - Thank for for the offer to make some test photos. If possible, I would appreciate samples from the 21/4, 35 summicron, and 50 summicron.

Is Leica M a legacy mount and Leica L for new lenses?

Pretty much. M-mount has a small throat diameter and a rather long flange-to-sensor distance (44mm and 27.8mm, respectively). L-mount is 51.6 and 20mm. Not much space for electrical contacts on the M-mount either.

I have had good success with a Voigtlander 40/1.4 on a Z6, this is my minimalist/compact rig. A little bigger than a LTM body, but not bad. For smaller/lighter lenses, the cheap Ebay adaptors have been OK for me. I also have a close focus adaptor, the one I have is a little less elegant than it could be, but it does allow for closer focusing.

 

I have been surprised by some of the results. Some lenses that ought to be good disappoint. Others do very well. Since I now have two, can let the secret out without fear that a run on the Canon 100/3.5 LTM will drive the price up. The black aluminum version is tiny, light, performs well, definitely wins the tiny tele contest. The Nikon LTM 105/2.5 is better (actually very good IMO), but is much heavier. My older Elmarit 90's are not as good.

 

The early version Voigtlander 25mm snapshot Skopar I have had a while seems not nearly as good as the Z 14-30S at 25mm. The Voigtlander 21/1.8 seems pretty good, though.

The Voigtlander 21/1.8 seems pretty good, though.

Not surprisingly since it’s a new telecentric design - I got it to replace the 21/4 that didn’t want to play nice on the A7 at all.

I have used some leitz M lenses on my nikon Z7.

 

The advantage compared to using z optics is that one can avoid autofocus so that in the local forest one does not get just the nearest twig sharp.- Almost as bad is that The Z has too many buttons and a very unstable focus point so if you do not watch where it has moved, ghe focus will be off.

 

The results with summicron50, Elmar C-90 , minolta 40 and Voigtländer 25 are quite good. but normally I prefer the grip on the more voluminous R lenses or my similar Zeiss glass since the camera body is quite large and unwieldy. The stabilization works well and as long as gthe spot-metering point stays put the auto exposure is reasonably good.

 

p.

... Almost as bad is that The Z has too many buttons and a very unstable focus point so if you do not watch where it has moved, ghe focus will be off.

...

p.

 

I normally prefer a direct button over a menu item, but the moving AF point drives me nuts- it appears to have a mind of its own. There must be a way to lock it down? At least I hope someone can enlighten about something I have overlooked!?

Ugh, the moving focus point drives me nuts. I think it's because it's easy to bump the four-way controller. My D700 has a simple solution: an optional lock switch concentric with the four-way controller. They removed that on the Z6, much to its detriment. (Of course, you can always switch the Z body into MF mode and MF with native Z-mount lenses too).

The spirit of Luddism long live!

 

MFmode does not prevent the idiotic movement of focus point AND spot metering point

 

The menu ought to have a "do nothing" option for all potentially pernicious buttons .

 

In this mornings`walk in the local forest to picture the spring, the movie switch happened to be switched on when I took the camera out of my rucksack and "nothing worked" . I discovered the offenidng switch when I was home again, sat down and fiddlled with the menus.

 

In the days of analogue apparatus Leitz at least added a locking button to their too easily misadjusted control wheel on the R8 (and after some more changes renamed it R9)

 

Nikon is almost as bad as Olympus. It cannot just be some peculiar Japanese button fetish. Some ancient mechanical cameras were devoid of buttonry An uncluttered ideal is the Zeiss Werra 1,but the Leica Ms are not far behind;

 

The many opptions that digital allows must have had a bad influence on designers. When I recently tried a Leitz TL instead of my M6, Its combination of inscrutable touch menus and control wheels turning without clear references to shutter speeds was quite frustrating even if its focus point remained centered .

 

p.

@NHSN - Thank for for the offer to make some test photos. If possible, I would appreciate samples from the 21/4, 35 summicron, and 50 summicron.

I have posted the samples in this thread.

I'll post the mapping of lens # to Pic X Sunday'ish.

The spirit of Luddism long live!

 

MFmode does not prevent the idiotic movement of focus point AND spot metering point

 

The menu ought to have a "do nothing" option for all potentially pernicious buttons .

 

In this mornings`walk in the local forest to picture the spring, the movie switch happened to be switched on when I took the camera out of my rucksack and "nothing worked" . I discovered the offenidng switch when I was home again, sat down and fiddlled with the menus.

 

In the days of analogue apparatus Leitz at least added a locking button to their too easily misadjusted control wheel on the R8 (and after some more changes renamed it R9)

 

Nikon is almost as bad as Olympus. It cannot just be some peculiar Japanese button fetish. Some ancient mechanical cameras were devoid of buttonry An uncluttered ideal is the Zeiss Werra 1,but the Leica Ms are not far behind;

 

The many opptions that digital allows must have had a bad influence on designers. When I recently tried a Leitz TL instead of my M6, Its combination of inscrutable touch menus and control wheels turning without clear references to shutter speeds was quite frustrating even if its focus point remained centered .

 

p.

I don't know about the Nikon Z bodies, but I have my D750 and D3 set up so they have a single focus point smack in the middle. It never wanders around and I focus exactly the same as I do with a rangefinder camera which is what i grew up with. A Luddite approach to things, but it works for me and I never get any surprise out-of-focus images.

I have done the same with my D7200. I will focus and reframe. It seems only natural to me since my background is film, and I only own a single autofocus lens. Everything else is AI.

I don't know about the Nikon Z bodies, but I have my D750 and D3 set up so they have a single focus point smack in the middle. It never wanders around and I focus exactly the same as I do with a rangefinder camera which is what i grew up with. A Luddite approach to things, but it works for me and I never get any surprise out-of-focus images.

Wish someone would tell me how to do that on the Z. That is in principle what I would do, but I then remove a lens and put another on, and it is somewhere in a corner. I don't even think I am touching the joystick in the process.

I just want it to be in the center forever!!

superglue is normally a good solution for useless and annoying buttons, but the focus displacement button can actually be useful. so this solution is out.

 

p.

Why they removed to rotary LOCK on the joy-pads is a mystery. I bet the lock is back on the Z9......:)

 

The D5300 was unusually inclined to roam around, seemingly all by itself....:(

 

With the cameras with the Sub-Selector as-well as the Multi-Selector (joypad), what's the point of duplication in AF point moving?

 

Can you deactivate/disable AF point movement with the Multi-Selector?

One advantage to focusing on off centered desired focus points at taking aperture with mirrorless such as Z cameras is that both the effects of curvature of field and focus shift stopping down are accounted for.

 

Realistically, those errors are not a big deal most of the time but still possible.

Not relevant with the very flat field Zeiss and Leitz optics I use , especially with the z where one can easily focus with the actual expposure aperture

 

p.

I always thought that with the electronic viewfinder, you could have different camera model modes and displays - including Fresnel effect. You could also have some classic SLR focus modes. Like F501 for single point, in the middle, always.