Nikon F > Z DX Adapter.... (only for Z-50 and Z-fc so far!)

Interesting fully manual focal reducer.

(New) Mitakon Lens Turbo Adapter Mark II For Nikon Z Cameras (APS-C) | Mitakon - ZY Optics

I wonder how good the glass is?

Nikon could, of course, make their own one of these. A kinda FTZii-DX, and make it fully automatic for E lenses.

Equally, I wonder if Nikon will make a Z500?

Interesting fully manual focal reducer.

 

(New) Mitakon Lens Turbo Adapter Mark II For Nikon Z Cameras (APS-C) | Mitakon - ZY Optics

 

I wonder how good the glass is?

 

Nikon could, of course, make their own one of these. A kinda FTZii-DX, and make it fully automatic for E lenses

Equally, I wonder if Nikon will make a Z500?

I think Nikon should make one. They had experience with that. Their E2 and E3 digital SLR has such an adapter built in so that the angle of view of the F lenses stay the same and there is a big gain light intensity for their tiny sensor.

I think i'd missed these entirely...!

Nikon E series - Wikipedia

E Bodies, NOT Series E lenses....;)

I wonder how good the glass is?

I imagine that it will be identical to all other versions of the Lens Turbo II.

I have the Fuji version and performance depends heavily on the lens used, lenses in the 80-135mm range seem to work well, 50's are more mixed, not really tried it yet with anything wide.

Lenses with rear elements that get very close to the speedbooster elements seem to be more likely to fall apart at infinity, but can work well for close focus, based on my limited testing...

Got anything longer?

I was thinking of my AF dead 600mm f4 on Z50....:cool:

Got anything longer?

 

I was thinking of my AF dead 600mm f4 on Z50....:cool:

A focal reducer on a super telephoto seems to rather defeat the point...

You gain a stop of light for the same focal length, so it would behave like a 600mm f2.8

I do not think it would.

If I read the specifications correctly, it would widen the field of view by 0.726 giving a full frame equivalent of approximately a 435mm full frame equivalent focal length and increasing the aperture. Then when you mount it on a DX camera the crop reduces the field of view and you are back to a 600mm f/4 equivalent. Think of it as a reverse teleconverter.

This was designed for a crop sensor camera only. If you mount it on a full frame camera you would have a severe vignette - a black circle around the reduced image. It was also designed for wide angle lenses. I suspect the use with a telephoto lens would leave something to be desired.

Humm, I thought what this does is effectively 'concentrate' the FX image circle to fit DX, thus gaining more light.

If I fill the frame with a birdie on FX, beak to tail, with this gizmo I now get the same AOV (ie 600mm) and fill the frame on DX.

...and gain +1EV of light.

Humm, I thought what this does is effectively 'concentrate' the FX image circle to fit DX, thus gaining more light.

 

If I fill the frame with a birdie on FX, beak to tail, with this gizmo I now get the same AOV (ie 600mm) and fill the frame on DX.

 

...and gain +1EV of light.

You do gain 1EV of light. I think bgelfand is talking Tony Northrup reasoning is that because the DX camera has more noise so it needs extra stop of light to shoot at 1 stop slower ISO in order to be equal to the FX camera.

I think it's completely dumb.

No connections what-so-ever.