Nikon Zƒ – breathing new life into R lenses?

[AZN]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quite a buzz on the internet about the soon-to-be-released Nikon Zƒ:

https://www.nikon.com.au/mirrorless-z-f

Combined with a (say) Rayqual R→Z lens adapter:

https://japanhobbytool.com/products/rayqual-lr-nz

… or with a (again say) the Rayqual M→Z adapter, stacked with a Leica R→M adapter, could it be a compact Leica R10-like camera Leica themselves absolutely refuse to make?

[StS]

Isn't the SL that R-series successor? The Zf is announced as mirrorless as well, the only reasons I see to chose it is if one prefers the handling or because it costs less.

Stefan

[benqui]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb StS:

Isn't the SL that R-series successor? The Zf is announced as mirrorless as well, the only reasons I see to chose it is if one prefers the handling or because it costs less.

Stefan

Or because it has the best AF system (at least in the marketing)

[wizard]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb benqui:

Or because it has the best AF system

Which would not seem to be of much help if used with Leica-R or Leica-M lenses, as the OP had suggested.

[benqui]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb wizard:

Which would not seem to be of much help if used with Leica-R or Leica-M lenses, as the OP had suggested.

No it is not right! You can use the Techart AF Adapter with the Nikon and it works very good with M lenses. I use the Techart AF adapter mostly with the Summilux 1.4/35 and the Apo Summicron 2/50 in combination with the Nikon Zfc and I have to admit that it works very well. Although the eye detection is working with the M lenses! If you ever have a chance to use this combi, give it a try. But in darker light situations it does not work so reliable. 

[dpitt]

Correct me if I am wrong... 

I did not read anything about the sensor filter cover being optimized (thinned/tunneled with nano technology) for sharpness. That would mean it is not as good with M wides as the SL and M system is, and maybe it will not even be as good as the SL with R lenzes.

The 96 pixel muti shot mode sounds promising for R lenses.

The B&W mode button sounded like an interesting feature, but it is more convenience than anything else IMO. It can easily be done and even improved on in PP AFAIK

Then I was charmed by the similarity with the FM2 and therefore the form factor of my Nikon FE. It is a good step in the right direction, but it is still 120g heavier and more than a cm higher than the original.

Of course the IBIS and high ISO mode sound promising. I hope that for MF, it has a good magnification (6x or 10x) mode that can easily be turned On/Off with a button like I can with the SL.

[AZN]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Zf should work fine with almost all R lenses, as does the Sony a7Rn series.

Should also be okay with longer M lenses, say 50mm ‘cron and above.

Am liking the Zf retro dial controls. Always wished Leica made a mirrorless with some of the R9 form factor and contols. Instead we got the Bauhaus SL slab (sigh).

[hepcat]

20 hours ago, AZN said:

Quite a buzz on the internet about the soon-to-be-released Nikon Zƒ:

… or with a (again say) the Rayqual M→Z adapter, stacked with a Leica R→M adapter, could it be a compact Leica R10-like camera Leica themselves absolutely refuse to make?

That space is already occupied by the Lumix S5 and S5 II.   I had a Nikon Df.  It's a decent camera and the analogue-style controls were nice, but it's not nearly the build quality of the Lumix S5.  Of course that doesn't mean the Zf will be that way, but I'm guessing it might.   And the S5 is L mount native and adapts nicely to R mount lenses.  I have no desire to return to a Nikon digital.

[Stuart Richardson]

It looks great! But I agree that it does not seem to change all that much other than aesthetics and size. I am sure it will work very well with the R lenses. The SL series, however, will likely still remain the best mount for all Leica lenses, as it is the only one that supports the trickier M lenses without substantial softening, as well as offering EXIF data via the adapter to the camera. That is useful for data, but also means you do not have to enter in the focal length every time you change lenses so that the stabilizer works, which is a pain and something that at least in my opinion is worth paying a bit more to get rid of. Additionally, the SL cameras are the only cameras that will support the S lenses with autofocus. Even though the adapter works with the Panasonic cameras and CL, they will not autofocus.

Just curious, did you use the R9? I went from the R9 to the S, and then eventually the SL2. I think the R9 is not substantially smaller than the SL2. In fact, I think it is not nearly as ergonomically pleasing without the motor drive. The camera is pretty thick and bulky, and the shutter button is placed a bit awkwardly. For me at least my finger did not naturally lie there. It worked a lot better with the motor drive or DMR. It was very nice to handle with both, but certainly not svelte! The SL2 is half the height and falls into the hand perfectly.  Anyway, we all have different feelings on this stuff!

In any case, this new Nikon looks lovely, and if it helps breathe new life into the R lenses for you, that is great. Just be prepared for sticker shock if you have not looked at used prices for ten years or so, haha. I sold my R lenses to get into the S, and these days I wish I had kept them! They are crazy expensive now...

Edited September 22, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[AZN]

11 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

it does not seem to change all that much other than aesthetics and size.

@Stuart Richardson → I agree with most of your comments.

The other big change is price.  The Leica SL2s in Australia is $AUD 8.39K, the proposed Nikon Zƒ will be $AUD 3.5K.   The Panasonic S5ii is currently a much more reasonable $AUD 2.68K, but no analogue dial interface.  May as well stick with the SL (typ601).

> SL cameras are the only cameras that will support the S lenses

I don't have any S lenses, so moot point for me.

> Just curious, did you use the R9?

Yes, I have (and still occasionally use) an Anthracite R9 with motor winder.  Bulky sure, but surprisingly it isn't so heavy.  I also have the SL (typ 601), although it is mainly used for my M lenses lately.

But my main point was the analogue controls the Zƒ will bring to to the table. Leica have them with their M digital cameras, why are they so verbotten with the L series?…

>  I sold my R lenses

Well I didn't 😃 In fact I went on a bit of a spree in 2017 and have twelve of them now, all ROM except for the Fisheye-Elmarit-R 16mm.  Got them to use on my Sonys (AR, ARII and lately ARIV), and also occasionally on the SL (typ 601).  

But what I've always been looking for is to use them on something like the R9, or the R6.2 I had twenty years ago.  Maybe the Zƒ will bring back that tactile turn-the-dial feeling instead of press the random button and scroll the menu(s) feeling.  Don't know.  Maybe the new camera will look cool but feel awful to use – like the APS-C Nikon Zƒc a colleague was using yesterday.

Nevermind.  Looking at some of the replies above, looks like I'm in a tiny minority in thinking about this…

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by AZN

[Stuart Richardson]

Yes, I loved the R9 with the winder, and like you, I also used an R6 which I found better for me than the R9 without the winder. I certainly agree with you about the pricing too. I bought my SL2 used from a friend and feel like I did very well out of that. I had shot the S before (also used or demo), so the S lenses were an important consideration for me. In any case, I am happy Nikon is bringing out a camera like this and I do think the camera looks really really nice. Excellent that you can fold away the screen entirely, and a 40mm f2 is a great focal length (think Mamiya 7 80mm, 40mm Summicron in the CL etc). I would probably more likely stick to mostly the Nikon lenses with it (I have never liked manual focus with EVF's), but I can see it being nice to use with the Leica R lenses. Back when the D3 came out, I switched to that from the DMR and used my 100mm and 180mm Elmarit lenses on it with Leitax mounts, and they were the sharpest lenses I had in the whole system. Having to stop down is a bit of a drag, but it still worked just fine for slower moving photography. It was a great way to use the R lenses digitally when Leica had no full frame option and before the proliferation of adapters.

I will say, however, that it has been about ten years since I have migrated from the R and M to primarily the S and SL cameras, and I am extremely happy with them. I think smaller and lighter is often better, but not at the expense of optical quality...at least for me. If I did the kind of photography where I had to drag my full kit around with me all day, then of course I don't think I would be quite so sanguine about it. But my studio work is obviously in the studio, and my landscape work is generally done using a car as a base station. It would have been nice if the S lenses had an aperture ring (maybe they would be usable on more cameras), but in the end I found that with these electronic cameras I very rarely use them anyway. Not never, just rarely.

[Stuart Richardson]

As an aside, you can probably get a S2 and 70mm for near the price of the Nikon and some R lenses at this point. That will be a lot more like the R9 to my mind...having a similar but improved VF over the R9 and having an analog shutter speed dial. It does not have an aperture ring, but it is superb for manual focus. Anyway, just a left field thought. The S line prices have crashed so hard that I suspect that many of the lenses are cheaper than the most sought after R lenses at this point. That may not last if the rumored S mirrorless comes out in 2025.

[AZN]

BTW forgot to mention that back in July 1999 I had Herb Zimmerman of Professional Camera Repair in NYC modify my Nikon F2A to use a Leica R bayonet mount.  Lost aperture control and stop-down metering only, but it worked.

Problem was that Herb used an ancient Leicaflex bayonet mount, so I took it off and had a local engineer machine a groove into the ring to be able to mount more modern R lenses.

In Feb 2002 I sold the camera to Steve Gandy, who I notice still has a web-page up about it:

Nikon F2 R (cameraquest.com)

Now that was old-school hackery 😃

 

[Camaro5]

On 9/21/2023 at 3:42 AM, dpitt said:

The 96 pixel muti shot mode sounds promising for R lenses.

I tried this the other day using an Sl2-S and Elmarit-R 24/2.8.  Took two shots at f/8 ISO 100.  The multi-shot image was ever-so-slightly more detailed, but the single shot was very good as well.  Both were sharp and clear and neither of them had any kind of chromatic aberrations.  Tree branches against a bright blue sky showed no fringing which was impressive.  

The 28/2.8 lens I got is from 1985 and looks practically brand new.  It was in the original box with all the accessories right down to the little instruction sheets they gave you.  I've done a few prints with it and for all intents and purposes they look pretty much like images I've shot with any other lens.  At first, I thought maybe it would've been better to get the 24/2.8 M version of this lens but this one is a great performer.  

[dpitt]

14 hours ago, Camaro5 said:

I tried this the other day using an Sl2-S and Elmarit-R 24/2.8.  Took two shots at f/8 ISO 100.  The multi-shot image was ever-so-slightly more detailed, but the single shot was very good as well.  Both were sharp and clear and neither of them had any kind of chromatic aberrations.  Tree branches against a bright blue sky showed no fringing which was impressive.  

The 28/2.8 lens I got is from 1985 and looks practically brand new.  It was in the original box with all the accessories right down to the little instruction sheets they gave you.  I've done a few prints with it and for all intents and purposes they look pretty much like images I've shot with any other lens.  At first, I thought maybe it would've been better to get the 24/2.8 M version of this lens but this one is a great performer.  

This. Leica R lenses were developed with the same care for quality as the M lenses.They were at least as good as there M counterparts at the time and their retail prices were the same or higher too. They now sell at much lower prices compared to the M vintage lenses.

M lenses needed to be as small and short as possible to not block the RF. R lenses could be made larger and because of the mirror, they are now better suited for adaption on sensors that are not tuned for wide M lenses. The larger size and weight do not matter much on a body that is already much larger and heavier compared to the M system. R lenses are tiny compared to the current zooms and primes for mirrorless FF systems.

Edited September 28, 2023 by dpitt

[davidmknoble]

I have found at the end of the day, I really only need to change aperture and shutter speed quickly.  Changing ISO is not as much of a problem, and I typically have time.

That said the SL really is universal between the M and the S (and R).  The SL and S007/S3 have similar layouts and controls, so setting the shutter speed on the top dial and the aperture on the thumb wheel is pretty quick.  Every time I have ventured away from a Leica sensor I end up disappointed and come back.  There is something about the drawing.

I was  intrigued by the Nikon Zf, but then I don’t have any Nikon glass to use with it.  I suppose if you have the gear, the body makes sense.  But having M, SL, R and S glass makes the decision to stay much easier.  I came very close to a Nikon Df when it came out, but I have ultimately been happy with the SL system.  (I do still shoot the R DMR occasionally to have fun).

[Ray Vonn]

The flange distance and adapter for Z systems when using R lenses is quite long, not short as it would be with M lenses, potentially making the lens quite a bit longer in appearance if used with a ZF, ie some might be best served with the haptics of the previous or existing Z5/6/7 models.  Not an issue for most potential R mount owners I suspect but it might be for others and possibly worth considering if one wants to use a ZF for R lens mount use.

[RexGig0]

With Nikon F-mount being a system that my wife and I share, and with my wife having already added a Z6, I reckon that it is inevitable that I will eventually added a Z-camera, and, the Zf could be the one. Unlike the Nikon Df DSLR, which was quite dumbed-down from the Nikon D600/D610, the Zf appears to be quite capable. Having R lenses is not a large motivator, in acquiring a Zf; I only have 28mm and 35mm Elmarit-R lenses. I have certainly lusted for a Leica Summilux-R 80mm lens, from time to time, so, some synergy could occur, resulting in adding the 80 R and the Zf, sooner or later.

Not that there is any hurry for us to add a Zf camera, for its own sake. Macro has become very important, lately, and neither of us is excited about the Nikon Micro-Nikkor 105mm Z-mount lens, based upon reviews we have seen.

Edited October 7, 2023 by RexGig0