Nikon Z7 compatible with M mount lenses

[Sharphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Read that Sony sensor thickness is a problem with M lenses.. Has anybody had experience with Z7ii and M lenses ? 

[jaeger]

there were a few posts about leica glass on nikon Z. 

[LarsHP]

I have Nikon Z7 and several M mount lenses. At one point I had both a Sony a7II and Nikon Z6 which I tested with my M mount lenses, and from that test I can tell you that there is not much difference between using a Sony and Nikon Z camera with "difficult" M mount lenses. The reason is the sensor glass thickness which is about 1mm in Leica M cameras and at least twice as much in Nikon Z cameras. Sony cameras allegedly have a thickness of about 2.5mm. The extra glass thickness is what causes problems with lenses that have a short exit pupil (and particularly the fast ones).

For this reason there is no or practically no issues with telephoto lenses. Normal and wide angle lenses, particularly fast ones, may cause outward (or reverse) field curvature towards the sides and corners. In addition there may be induced some smearing. 

Some M mount (wide angle) lenses will work fine on a stock Nikon Z camera, while others will not. For instance, the following Voigtländer lenses that are available in both M and E mount are optically identical: The 10mm, 15mm (v3), 21mm f/3.5 and 50mm f/1.2. Note that the Apo-Lanthar and 21mm Nokton have different optical formula in E and M mount version. 

Generally, the quite small 35mm and 28mm lenses will not perform well on non-Leica M cameras. 

I ended up sending my Z6 to Kolari Vision for their Ultra-Thin sensor glass conversion since I couldn't find a good 28mm M mount lens that will work well on a stock Nikon Z camera. 

[Sharphoto]

Ok so Kolari Vision does the sensor conversion..thank you

[spydrxx]

4 hours ago, Sharphoto said:

Read that Sony sensor thickness is a problem with M lenses.. Has anybody had experience with Z7ii and M lenses ? 

Only some lenses. Too much of a generalization.

[derleicaman]

6 hours ago, LarsHP said:

I have Nikon Z7 and several M mount lenses. At one point I had both a Sony a7II and Nikon Z6 which I tested with my M mount lenses, and from that test I can tell you that there is not much difference between using a Sony and Nikon Z camera with "difficult" M mount lenses. The reason is the sensor glass thickness which is about 1mm in Leica M cameras and at least twice as much in Nikon Z cameras. Sony cameras allegedly have a thickness of about 2.5mm. The extra glass thickness is what causes problems with lenses that have a short exit pupil (and particularly the fast ones).

For this reason there is no or practically no issues with telephoto lenses. Normal and wide angle lenses, particularly fast ones, may cause outward (or reverse) field curvature towards the sides and corners. In addition there may be induced some smearing. 

Some M mount (wide angle) lenses will work fine on a stock Nikon Z camera, while others will not. For instance, the following Voigtländer lenses that are available in both M and E mount are optically identical: The 10mm, 15mm (v3), 21mm f/3.5 and 50mm f/1.2. Note that the Apo-Lanthar and 21mm Nokton have different optical formula in E and M mount version. 

Generally, the quite small 35mm and 28mm lenses will not perform well on non-Leica M cameras. 

I ended up sending my Z6 to Kolari Vision for their Ultra-Thin sensor glass conversion since I couldn't find a good 28mm M mount lens that will work well on a stock Nikon Z camera. 

How well does the Z7 work after the Kolari conversion mod?

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 hours ago, LarsHP said:

I have Nikon Z7 and several M mount lenses. At one point I had both a Sony a7II and Nikon Z6 which I tested with my M mount lenses, and from that test I can tell you that there is not much difference between using a Sony and Nikon Z camera with "difficult" M mount lenses. The reason is the sensor glass thickness which is about 1mm in Leica M cameras and at least twice as much in Nikon Z cameras. Sony cameras allegedly have a thickness of about 2.5mm. The extra glass thickness is what causes problems with lenses that have a short exit pupil (and particularly the fast ones).

For this reason there is no or practically no issues with telephoto lenses. Normal and wide angle lenses, particularly fast ones, may cause outward (or reverse) field curvature towards the sides and corners. In addition there may be induced some smearing. 

Some M mount (wide angle) lenses will work fine on a stock Nikon Z camera, while others will not. For instance, the following Voigtländer lenses that are available in both M and E mount are optically identical: The 10mm, 15mm (v3), 21mm f/3.5 and 50mm f/1.2. Note that the Apo-Lanthar and 21mm Nokton have different optical formula in E and M mount version. 

Generally, the quite small 35mm and 28mm lenses will not perform well on non-Leica M cameras. 

I ended up sending my Z6 to Kolari Vision for their Ultra-Thin sensor glass conversion since I couldn't find a good 28mm M mount lens that will work well on a stock Nikon Z camera. 

Nikon Z7’s sensor glass thickness is only 1.1mmm, about half as thick as Sony.

https://kolarivision.com/nikon-z7-dissasembly-teardown/

 

[rramesh]

Many of the electronic features of mirrorless camera (Sony, Nikon) are superfluous for manual M lenses. 

If you already have Leica M lenses, then just buy a Leica M camera.

On the other hand, if your gear is predominately Sony or Nikon and you wish to dabble with manual M lenses, then the newer ones from Voigtlander seem to work better on mirrorless camera.

Fujifilm cameras (X Series) would also be a better choice as they are APS-C.

[LarsHP]

12 hours ago, SrMi said:

Nikon Z7’s sensor glass thickness is only 1.1mmm, about half as thick as Sony.

https://kolarivision.com/nikon-z7-dissasembly-teardown/

That was what many people thought, including me. However, what this teardown shows is the thickness of the removable glass. There is also a glass layer epoxied to the sensor itself, which adds to the total thickness. If the real, total, sensor glass thickness actually was 1.1mm, then even "difficult" M mount lenses would perform flawlessly on a stock Nikon Z camera. Unfortunately, that isn't the case.

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2018/20181009_1248-NikonZ7-cover-glass-thickness.html

Edited September 13, 2022 by LarsHP
Link added.

[LarsHP]

18 hours ago, derleicaman said:

How well does the Z7 work after the Kolari conversion mod?

I got the Ultra-Thin mod on my Nikon Z6. My Z7 is in stock condition.

It works pretty much perfectly regarding the optical issues it is supposed to fix. I did a side-by-side comparison to a Leica M (240) with 28mm Summicron-M Asph II, and field curvature was identical. The M240 had less vignetting, but more "Italian flag" issue than the Z6UT.

Regarding colors, the "hot mirror" glass which is used doesn't match the one which Nikon uses, so the red colors are brighter, and in very warm lighting this may cause problems getting a good white balance. I have chosen to get myself the X-Rite Color Checker, which has a software package that will let you get perfect color rendition even with the mod.

[SrMi]

8 minutes ago, LarsHP said:

That was what many people thought, including me. However, what this teardown shows is the thickness of the removable glass. There is also a glass layer epoxied to the sensor itself, which adds to the total thickness. If the real, total, sensor glass thickness actually was 1.1mm, then even "difficult" M mount lenses would perform flawlessly on a stock Nikon Z camera. Unfortunately, that isn't the case.

The M has also special micro lenses.

Sean Reid has tested the cameras, and found the Z7 to be able to handle problematic M lenses better than any other except SL/SL2 cameras. Comparable numbers are on his site, and Sony has thicker toppings.

[LarsHP]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

The M has also special micro lenses.

Sean Reid has tested the cameras, and found the Z7 to be able to handle problematic M lenses better than any other except SL/SL2 cameras. Comparable numbers are on his site, and Sony has thicker toppings.

Right. Those special micro lenses are responsible for the better illumination with wide angle lenses, but after the back side illuminated sensors have entered the market, the smearing issues appears to have been solved.

Regarding Z7 versus the original SL, I have read one user saying he sold his SL after getting a Z7. However, as I understand it, the SL2 models have improved performance with "difficult" M lenses, so I expect they are still better than the Nikon Z cameras in that regard.

As I wrote in my first post, I tested my stock Z6 against my Sony a7II, and the difference was quite small. The Z6 had less or almost no smearing compared to the Sony a7II, but regarding field curvature, there was no or very little difference IIRC.

[250swb]

23 hours ago, rramesh said:

Many of the electronic features of mirrorless camera (Sony, Nikon) are superfluous for manual M lenses. 

If you already have Leica M lenses, then just buy a Leica M camera.

 

Well let's think what basic features does the Z7 have that are superfluous? If you compare size if it wasn't for the Z7 grip (grips are a Leica accessory), and the EVF housing (an EVF is a Leica accessory) the camera would be smaller than a digital M. So fully kitted out an M is very similar in size. The Z7 has a tilt LCD screen, and many more shooting modes available through a simple dial and not menu's. It takes XQD cards which are much, much faster. It has a range of native Nikon Z lenses that can reach further and wider than M lenses, and of similar quality. And there are a vast range of Nikon F mount lenses available to use. But what if you have a collection of M lenses, what does the Z7 offer that may make somebody want to add one to their armoury? Well it has IBIS, available for all your M lenses. So potentially in all the places that Leica users like to lurk, cafe's at night, dark alleyways, gloomy interiors, etc., they get the benefits of IBIS. 

If you have a range of Leica M lenses that don't come in the problematic category and want to compare cameras with tools the Z7 is a Swiss Army knife and the Leica M a letter opener. One is perfectly refined and does one job very well, the other solves a wider range of problems in a less aesthetic package, but it still works. 

Edited September 14, 2022 by 250swb

[LarsHP]

So, why didn't I just buy a Leica M camera?

1. The price for what you get. Even considering a used M camera compared to a new (!) non-Leica mirrorless full frame camera.

2. The lack of image stabilization. (This is a huge issue, and I frankly don't understand why even the M11 doesn't have IBIS; it only has it in the EVF.)

3. The much better EVF in all other current mirrorless cameras (perhaps except for the M11).

4. The lack of proper EXIF data in M cameras (aperture is guesswork and often wildly off) versus the ability to get correct EXIF data with the Megadap MTZ11 adapter.

5. In addition, there are several autofocus adapters (like the one mentioned above) for use with M mount lenses on Nikon Z and Sony cameras. The AF function is not that much of an asset though, considering how it compares to native AF lenses, but in certain scenarios it is helpful.

[SrMi]

On 9/15/2022 at 6:32 AM, LarsHP said:

So, why didn't I just buy a Leica M camera?

1. The price for what you get. Even considering a used M camera compared to a new (!) non-Leica mirrorless full frame camera.

2. The lack of image stabilization. (This is a huge issue, and I frankly don't understand why even the M11 doesn't have IBIS; it only has it in the EVF.)

3. The much better EVF in all other current mirrorless cameras (perhaps except for the M11).

4. The lack of proper EXIF data in M cameras (aperture is guesswork and often wildly off) versus the ability to get correct EXIF data with the Megadap MTZ11 adapter.

5. In addition, there are several autofocus adapters (like the one mentioned above) for use with M mount lenses on Nikon Z and Sony cameras. The AF function is not that much of an asset though, considering how it compares to native AF lenses, but in certain scenarios it is helpful.

Leica has answered #2: there is no space if the thickness of the body is to be preserved (which is a must).

[kivis]

I tried a Leica 35mm f2 lens on a Nikon Z6 (with adapter). If you like those red lines to tell you your in focus, you will be happy. Not for me.

[LarsHP]

11 hours ago, kivis said:

I tried a Leica 35mm f2 lens on a Nikon Z6 (with adapter). If you like those red lines to tell you your in focus, you will be happy. Not for me.

You can turn that off if you don't like it. I never use it.

[LarsHP]

12 hours ago, SrMi said:

Leica has answered #2: there is no space if the thickness of the body is to be preserved (which is a must).

Well, in that case, I will probably never buy a Leica M camera.

However, if I was a Leica engineer wanting to keep the thickness while considering IBIS, I would have extended the mount a bit from the body enough to fit the IBIS. That would keep the general thickness of the body (while making room for the IBIS mechanism). The flange difference between Sony E and Leica M is less than 10mm, so we can conclude that the protruding mount would be less than that.

People mount the accessory grip, which adds to the total thickness anyway. Those who desperately need the slimmest possible body can buy M bodies without IBIS.

Edited September 17, 2022 by LarsHP

[kivis]

49 minutes ago, LarsHP said:

You can turn that off if you don't like it. I never use it.

You kind of need the red focus lines to keep a manual focus lens to have accurate focusing.

Edited September 17, 2022 by kivis

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[SrMi]

4 hours ago, LarsHP said:

Well, in that case, I will probably never buy a Leica M camera.

However, if I was a Leica engineer wanting to keep the thickness while considering IBIS, I would have extended the mount a bit from the body enough to fit the IBIS. That would keep the general thickness of the body (while making room for the IBIS mechanism). The flange difference between Sony E and Leica M is less than 10mm, so we can conclude that the protruding mount would be less than that.

People mount the accessory grip, which adds to the total thickness anyway. Those who desperately need the slimmest possible body can buy M bodies without IBIS.

Leica has also said that eliminating mechanical shutter would likely allow IBIS to be added without increasing the thickness.