Would a Nikon Z 50 give a new life to those old DX lenses?

OK, I know I am coming back on what was already mentioned earlier by poster skyrunr and others. Would it be a good move to spend 400$ extra and have 16-50, and 24-200 instead of 50-250? It seems so.

The question arises because I discovered another possibility : the DX 16-80mm which is an optimal range in my sense, equivalent to 24-120mm. The planned 18-140mm Z lens is equivalent to 28-210mm. But of course through the FTZ adapter with probably less efficiency.

I have however to carefully evaluate the possibility to use that lens as the main lens. It is not intended at sport but rather landscape and blogging, products, occasionally people, so no need for speedy AF. It is of course bulkier than the 16-50mm, but would certainly be fitted on the camera most of the time, versus having always to switch from wide to longer. Anyone tested that lens on FTZ?

alpshiker said:

OK, I know I am coming back on what was already mentioned earlier by poster skyrunr and others. Would it be a good move to spend 400$ extra and have 16-50, and 24-200 instead of 50-250? It seems so.

The question arises because I discovered another possibility : the DX 16-80mm which is an optimal range in my sense, equivalent to 24-120mm. The planned 18-140mm Z lens is equivalent to 28-210mm. But of course through the FTZ adapter with probably less efficiency.

I have however to carefully evaluate the possibility to use that lens as the main lens. It is not intended at sport but rather landscape and blogging, products, occasionally people, so no need for speedy AF. It is of course bulkier than the 16-50mm, but would certainly be fitted on the camera most of the time, versus having always to switch from wide to longer. Anyone tested that lens on FTZ?

Click to expand...

My answer to that is a careful maybe.

At the same (or near same price) I am of the opinion that you should get a native Z lens for a Z camera. Not because of the FTZ being evil or anything, but rather because the new Z lenses are optically great and designed to take full advantage of the AF systems in Nikon's new Z series mirrorless cameras.

But if the focal range is exactly what you want, and if you did enough research to confirm the lens you're interested in is optically good (sharpness, sharpness uniformity, distortion, and CA/color fringing) then why not?

MustAg said:

alpshiker said:

OK, I know I am coming back on what was already mentioned earlier by poster skyrunr and others. Would it be a good move to spend 400$ extra and have 16-50, and 24-200 instead of 50-250? It seems so.

The question arises because I discovered another possibility : the DX 16-80mm which is an optimal range in my sense, equivalent to 24-120mm. The planned 18-140mm Z lens is equivalent to 28-210mm. But of course through the FTZ adapter with probably less efficiency.

I have however to carefully evaluate the possibility to use that lens as the main lens. It is not intended at sport but rather landscape and blogging, products, occasionally people, so no need for speedy AF. It is of course bulkier than the 16-50mm, but would certainly be fitted on the camera most of the time, versus having always to switch from wide to longer. Anyone tested that lens on FTZ?

Click to expand...

My answer to that is a careful maybe.

At the same (or near same price) I am of the opinion that you should get a native Z lens for a Z camera. Not because of the FTZ being evil or anything, but rather because the new Z lenses are optically great and designed to take full advantage of the AF systems in Nikon's new Z series mirrorless cameras.

But if the focal range is exactly what you want, and if you did enough research to confirm the lens you're interested in is optically good (sharpness, sharpness uniformity, distortion, and CA/color fringing) then why not?

Click to expand...

This seems to be a more than decent lens, except for distortion. Does the Z 50 apply in body lens correction to JPG's and videos?

For 1st party lenses, it does

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

alpshiker said:

OK, I know I am coming back on what was already mentioned earlier by poster skyrunr and others. Would it be a good move to spend 400$ extra and have 16-50, and 24-200 instead of 50-250? It seems so.

The question arises because I discovered another possibility : the DX 16-80mm which is an optimal range in my sense, equivalent to 24-120mm. The planned 18-140mm Z lens is equivalent to 28-210mm. But of course through the FTZ adapter with probably less efficiency.

I have however to carefully evaluate the possibility to use that lens as the main lens. It is not intended at sport but rather landscape and blogging, products, occasionally people, so no need for speedy AF. It is of course bulkier than the 16-50mm, but would certainly be fitted on the camera most of the time, versus having always to switch from wide to longer. Anyone tested that lens on FTZ?

Click to expand...

These alternatives effectively give up the minimum 75mm of additional reach the 50-250 offers. Because the 16-50 is a no-brainer the 24-200 all-in-one would be redundant between 16-24 and offers nothing beyond 200. Unless you desire a single lens solution I recommend putting the extra $400 into a more useful specialized lens or save it for later.

msu79gt82 said:

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

Click to expand...

Great. Best price I found is at the NY superstore, FTZ 100$ as an add on price. No-brainer as you say. BTW, is this a good place to buy to send to my son who lives on the west coast in California? Living abroad, I know nothing about interstate taxes policy.

alpshiker said:

msu79gt82 said:

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

Click to expand...

Great. Best price I found is at the NY superstore, FTZ 100$ as an add on price. No-brainer as you say. BTW, is this a good place to buy to send to my son who lives on the west coast in California? Living abroad, I know nothing about interstate taxes policy.

Click to expand...

You mean B&H? They will charge sales tax. You (or your son) can get it back on the spot by signing up for the Payboo card (kind of a credit card).

BasilG said:

alpshiker said:

msu79gt82 said:

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

Click to expand...

Great. Best price I found is at the NY superstore, FTZ 100$ as an add on price. No-brainer as you say. BTW, is this a good place to buy to send to my son who lives on the west coast in California? Living abroad, I know nothing about interstate taxes policy.

Click to expand...

You mean B&H? They will charge sales tax. You (or your son) can get it back on the spot by signing up for the Payboo card (kind of a credit card).

Click to expand...

Thanks. Right, I see that option on the site now. Could save 100$ on the cart. Do the CA based stores charge sales tax as well when sent in state?

alpshiker said:

BasilG said:

alpshiker said:

msu79gt82 said:

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

Click to expand...

Great. Best price I found is at the NY superstore, FTZ 100$ as an add on price. No-brainer as you say. BTW, is this a good place to buy to send to my son who lives on the west coast in California? Living abroad, I know nothing about interstate taxes policy.

Click to expand...

You mean B&H? They will charge sales tax. You (or your son) can get it back on the spot by signing up for the Payboo card (kind of a credit card).

Click to expand...

Thanks. Right, I see that option on the site now. Could save 100$ on the cart. Do the CA based stores charge sales tax as well when sent in state?

Click to expand...

I don't know for sure, I never bought camera gear online from a California store (always B&H). That said: I would think so, yes. I think there was a loophole where out-of-state stores wouldn't charge you, and you were required to then declare this to your state to pay the tax (which many people didn't). But this loophole has now been closed, and out-of-state suppliers like B&H will charge sales tax as well. So there is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage to ordering out of state. I hope I'm getting this the right way round.

My experience both with B&H and the Payboo people has been very good. Even closing the Payboo account (I left the US) went without a hassle.

BasilG said:

alpshiker said:

BasilG said:

alpshiker said:

msu79gt82 said:

alpshiker said:

I have learned to be cautious of kit lenses, but would you recommend the 16-50mm and 50-250mm kit Lenses?

It is true that this kit is at an incredible price right now. My son is a cyclist and having a kit with two lenses that altogether is less than a Kg is excellent. He has had a Canon 7D with 3 lenses. The kit weigh 3,6Kg and therefore never leaves home.

Click to expand...

Yes, I highly recommend the Z50 Two Lens Kit.
Note that I was able to get an FTZ for an additional $50 on top of the Kit’s sale price. At $50 I consider the FTZ a no-brainer.

Click to expand...

Great. Best price I found is at the NY superstore, FTZ 100$ as an add on price. No-brainer as you say. BTW, is this a good place to buy to send to my son who lives on the west coast in California? Living abroad, I know nothing about interstate taxes policy.

Click to expand...

You mean B&H? They will charge sales tax. You (or your son) can get it back on the spot by signing up for the Payboo card (kind of a credit card).

Click to expand...

Thanks. Right, I see that option on the site now. Could save 100$ on the cart. Do the CA based stores charge sales tax as well when sent in state?

Click to expand...

I don't know for sure, I never bought camera gear online from a California store (always B&H). That said: I would think so, yes. I think there was a loophole where out-of-state stores wouldn't charge you, and you were required to then declare this to your state to pay the tax (which many people didn't). But this loophole has now been closed, and out-of-state suppliers like B&H will charge sales tax as well. So there is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage to ordering out of state. I hope I'm getting this the right way round.

My experience both with B&H and the Payboo people has been very good. Even closing the Payboo account (I left the US) went without a hassle.

Click to expand...

My experiences with B&H have been excellent too, for almost 30 years. Never mind those taxes, they are probably needed. I will however ask junior if he wants the card. Thanks for your kind reply to my asking.

I typically buy from Adorama as I am not at all interested in B&H's Payboo CC and I usually prefer the free included add-ons from Adorama.

Adorama is offering the Z50 Two Lens Kit plus FTZ plus extras (including SD card and Peak Design Wrist Cuff) for $1297, although it shows it currently back-ordered for some reason.

If you can wait this appears to be a better deal to me.

https://www.adorama.com/nkz50k2fta.html

msu79gt82 said:

I typically buy from Adorama as I am not at all interested in B&H's Payboo CC and I usually prefer the free included add-ons from Adorama.

Adorama is offering the Z50 Two Lens Kit plus FTZ plus extras (including SD card and Peak Design Wrist Cuff) for $1297, although it shows it currently back-ordered for some reason.

If you can wait this appears to be a better deal to me.

https://www.adorama.com/nkz50k2fta.html

Click to expand...

I had a look I confess, but not knowing if it's two days, weeks or months is a bit of a heck. I saw stocks disappear within two days from some websites, so it might by the last chance? As someone mentioned, there could be a mark II coming soon.

No merchant charges sales tax, they collect it for the taxing entity.

The G lenses auto focus very well on the Z cameras with the FTZ unit, but the AF-d lenses will not auto focus on any Z camera because they lack a focus motor. The AF-d lenses are also screw drive, and maybe at some point there will be a FTZ-d adapter or a third party adapter for the AF-d lenses.

Beside native Z glass, I use a Fringer smart adapter with my Canon lenses and it does a really good job.

Michigan Sandman said:

The G lenses auto focus very well on the Z cameras with the FTZ unit, but the AF-d lenses will not auto focus on any Z camera because they lack a focus motor. The AF-d lenses are also screw drive, and maybe at some point there will be a FTZ-d adapter or a third party adapter for the AF-d lenses.

Beside native Z glass, I use a Fringer smart adapter with my Canon lenses and it does a really good job.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that's interesting! I didn't know that there was no motor drive in the FTZ. Now I understand better why some lenses won't operate.

I saw the Fringer adapter. Had I a Z-7, I would surely get one to use my EF lenses, although it is pricey. I personally shoot Sony with MC-11 and I'm so glad I can use those lenses. Been shooting the 85mm 1.2 today and although it is the old version, it works flawlessly. Thanks Sony, and thanks Sigma!

alpshiker said:

I have a bunch of old Nikon lenses that have been sitting for years in a drawer. Some are DX lenses that I liked at the time I was using them on the Fuji S-2 and S-3. I wonder if taking a Nikon Z 50 with FTZ adapter would give those lenses a new life? This would be to have a relatively light an affordable travel kit to give to one of my kids.

• Tokina AT-X M35 PRO DX Macro 35mm f2.8

• Tokina AT-X Pro SD 12-24mm F4

• Nikon 18-200mm VR version I (built in motor)

If experiences or knowledge base are available, should those lenses fully work on the FTZ adapter? Thanks for your feedback!

The main drawback I find to the Z 50 is the non side flippable screen for use on tripod. Maybe there would be a better option?

Paul

Click to expand...

Mounting my old Nikon AF-S 18-200mm VR lens (mine is the ver 2 ... but optically identical to your ver 1) to the Z50 certainly breathes new life into this lens. Specifically speaking for me, it's the focus accuracy throughout is entire zoom range. Previously I have used this lens on my D3200, D7000, and D7500 but was never able to achieve the same consistency with the DSLR's (despite being able to AF Fine Tune with the D7XXX's).

Besides the 18-200, I've also tried other similar zoom lenses on the Z50 through the FTZ adapter. Such as the AF-S 18-140, 16-80, and a couple 18-55 kit lens (both AF-S & AF-P variations). They all work fine. Yes, coupled with the FTZ adapter, this does become a larger/heavier rig than what many would consider optimized for mirrorless ... but honestly, it's no bigger than a D3XXX series DSLR.

The 16-50mm Z "kit" lens is fantastic. It was made to work with this Z camera so everything works flawlessly in it. But to be honest, most of the time I have the FTZ mounted on my Z50 camera and use all my F-mount lenses on it. When I want to bring a small carry-around camera with me, then that's when I pop the 16-50 Z lens on it and now I have a nice, small, lightweight camera. It's just so versatile to have the Z50 perform double duty like this.

Here's a picture I took with my Nikon 18-200mm on the Z50:




Z50 with Nikon 18-200mm lens

2yota said:

Mounting my old Nikon AF-S 18-200mm VR lens (mine is the ver 2 ... but optically identical to your ver 1) to the Z50 certainly breathes new life into this lens. Specifically speaking for me, it's the focus accuracy throughout is entire zoom range. Previously I have used this lens on my D3200, D7000, and D7500 but was never able to achieve the same consistency with the DSLR's (despite being able to AF Fine Tune with the D7XXX's).

Besides the 18-200, I've also tried other similar zoom lenses on the Z50 through the FTZ adapter. Such as the AF-S 18-140, 16-80, and a couple 18-55 kit lens (both AF-S & AF-P variations). They all work fine. Yes, coupled with the FTZ adapter, this does become a larger/heavier rig than what many would consider optimized for mirrorless ... but honestly, it's no bigger than a D3XXX series DSLR.

The 16-50mm Z "kit" lens is fantastic. It was made to work with this Z camera so everything works flawlessly in it. But to be honest, most of the time I have the FTZ mounted on my Z50 camera and use all my F-mount lenses on it. When I want to bring a small carry-around camera with me, then that's when I pop the 16-50 Z lens on it and now I have a nice, small, lightweight camera. It's just so versatile to have the Z50 perform double duty like this.

Here's a picture I took with my Nikon 18-200mm on the Z50:

Click to expand...

The picture of the fishermen's village is amazingly detailed for a zoom of this amplitude. The 18-200 was an amazing lens indeed at the time it came out. I still wonder how the V1 would perform. I don't remember what the mark II was implemented with.

Mirrorless cameras are taking the lead over DSRLs , besides size and weight, mainly because they turned to AA filter free sensors I think. My first idea was to upgrade my son's 7D with a 90D, to let him use his Canon lenses. But comparing the test results on the Digital Imaging website with the Z 50, I saw that the 20,5 Mpx sensor of the Nikon was delivering a better image (in my sense) than the 32Mpx Canon camera, at less of an expense of pixels. Add to that, the fact that the non L lenses are bulky and optically outdated, the bulk of the whole DSLR set, and the fact that you can get a Z 50 with 2 lenses kit, for the price of the 90D body, it was evident that it is not so wise to recycle the old gear, unfortunately for the planet. On the general advice kindly provided in this thread, I purchased the 2 lenses kit. I also added the FTZ adapter at kit price, and got a second hand Nikkor G 50mm 1.4 for 300$, the prime Z lenses being “just a little bit out of reach”. This set should bring together the best of both worlds, with possible addition of other G lenses in the future for a specific use.

I thank all who kindly provided advice and shared their experiences in this thread. It's great to have a community to share with, particularly in those distancing days!

alpshiker said:

Mirrorless cameras are taking the lead over DSRLs , besides size and weight, mainly because they turned to AA filter free sensors I think.

Click to expand...

Whether a camera has an AA filter or not depends more on the pixel size than DSLR vs MILC. Nikon use AA filters on 24MP full frame cameras, including the Z6, but not on 24MP APS-C (since the D7100, so 7-8 years now), while their higher resolution full frame cameras do not have AA filters whether they are mirrorless (Z7) or DSLR (D850).

I think the big difference is probably the focussing being integrated with the imaging sensor (mirrorless) vs focussing using a set of sensors that are on a different optical path (which means that many things need to be aligned and positioned correctly, with more scope for small errors), plus the addition of contrast detect focussing. These should give more accurate and consistent focus.

And if you shoot jpeg the in-camera processing has certainly come on in recent years.

You can also consider a Nikon FX ML body.

When using a DX lens on Nikon FX ML, the entire viewfinder and rear monitor is expanded to "full size" with no DX crop showing.

Viewfinder wise there is no difference between FX and DX on Nikon ML FX bodies.

You might need to consider a Z7 rather than a Z6 as getting a DX crop on an ML body reduces the MP used to capture an image by a little more than 50%.

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.