Reading mode: Light Dark

Will I lose image quality if I use a lens adapter?

Go to last post
Z

ziggy5408

Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
3
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
I don't think you lose any quality (unless you expect to use tele-converters).

But a basic "mounting" adapter (w/out glass) should have no effect on IQ.

But there could be some interfacing operational issues between Nikon & Sony.
 
You will not lose any image quality as most good quality adapters, They are simply just empty tubes that take up the space that was usually occupied by the reflex mirror. However, cheap adapters may be made poorly, with the lens not sitting perfectly parallel to the sensor. If this happens, the corner sharpness may be affected. Don't cheap out on an adapter.
 
Aoi Usagi said:
You will not lose any image quality as most good quality adapters, They are simply just empty tubes that take up the space that was usually occupied by the reflex mirror. However, cheap adapters may be made poorly, with the lens not sitting perfectly parallel to the sensor. If this happens, the corner sharpness may be affected. Don't cheap out on an adapter.
Click to expand...
I've never noticed any issues with cheap adapters. If the lens is tilted slightly that just changes the plain of focus as with a tilt lens. Not having the camera perfectly parallel to the subject will correct for this so in the real world the sort of tilt errors that might exist are not noticeable. Corner sharpness can be affected if single elements are out of true but no adapter is going to do that!

Cheap adapters can have threads that are not as smooth, or other such features that make them less pleasant to use, but it is very rare for them to be unable to function & give great results.

Most adapters will however loose autofocus & sometimes aperture control. The more expensive smart adapter can convert signals to regain these functions but AF will never be as good as native lenses.
 
Last edited:
PhotoTeach2 said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
I don't think you lose any quality (unless you expect to use tele-converters).

But a basic "mounting" adapter (w/out glass) should have no effect on IQ.

But there could be some interfacing operational issues between Nikon & Sony.
Click to expand...
Old Nikon lenses with fully manual control will work perfectly. The more recent lenses which are electronically controlled by the camera are likely to give problems.

I suggest buying a Nikon Z mount mirrorless camera rather than a Sony . The adapter made by Nikon will work.

Don Cox
 
Last edited:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
No loss of optical quality, but you will lose some or all of the auto functions of the Sony. This will be of particular importance for a sports shooter.

A plain "spacer" adapter will just give you manual focus capability, but no aperture control on modern Nikon lenses. More expensive adapters may provide some degree of functionality, but nothing like a genuine Sony lens.

My suggestion is to buy a Sony prime lens to go with your new camera while you learn the ropes. You will busy enough wrangling your new kit without the frustration (and expense) of the adapted solution. The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is a useful lens.
 
WryCuda said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
No loss of optical quality, but you will lose some or all of the auto functions of the Sony. This will be of particular importance for a sports shooter.

A plain "spacer" adapter will just give you manual focus capability, but no aperture control on modern Nikon lenses. More expensive adapters may provide some degree of functionality, but nothing like a genuine Sony lens.

My suggestion is to buy a Sony prime lens to go with your new camera while you learn the ropes. You will busy enough wrangling your new kit without the frustration (and expense) of the adapted solution. The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is a useful lens.
Click to expand...
A 35/2.8 will be of very little use to a sports shooter! Nearly all sports are shot with lenses longer than a 135mm let alone 35mm
 
petrochemist said:
WryCuda said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
No loss of optical quality, but you will lose some or all of the auto functions of the Sony. This will be of particular importance for a sports shooter.

A plain "spacer" adapter will just give you manual focus capability, but no aperture control on modern Nikon lenses. More expensive adapters may provide some degree of functionality, but nothing like a genuine Sony lens.

My suggestion is to buy a Sony prime lens to go with your new camera while you learn the ropes. You will busy enough wrangling your new kit without the frustration (and expense) of the adapted solution. The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is a useful lens.
Click to expand...
A 35/2.8 will be of very little use to a sports shooter! Nearly all sports are shot with lenses longer than a 135mm let alone 35mm
Click to expand...
That's a rather obvious point.

The 35mm will give the OP something to work with while he gets used to the camera, and will also be handy for travel/landscape.

I'd suggest a Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 when funds permit. Even the f/4 model does an excellent job.
 
WryCuda said:
petrochemist said:
WryCuda said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
No loss of optical quality, but you will lose some or all of the auto functions of the Sony. This will be of particular importance for a sports shooter.

A plain "spacer" adapter will just give you manual focus capability, but no aperture control on modern Nikon lenses. More expensive adapters may provide some degree of functionality, but nothing like a genuine Sony lens.

My suggestion is to buy a Sony prime lens to go with your new camera while you learn the ropes. You will busy enough wrangling your new kit without the frustration (and expense) of the adapted solution. The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is a useful lens.
Click to expand...
A 35/2.8 will be of very little use to a sports shooter! Nearly all sports are shot with lenses longer than a 135mm let alone 35mm
Click to expand...
That's a rather obvious point.

The 35mm will give the OP something to work with while he gets used to the camera, and will also be handy for travel/landscape.

I'd suggest a Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 when funds permit. Even the f/4 model does an excellent job.
Click to expand...
I really can't see any point in the OP buying a Sony camera or lenses when there's barely enough budget for the camera body.

If the Nikon Z cameras aren't good enough now, the best thing would be to carry on using the Nikon DSLR for a year or two. until Nikon's Continuous Auto Focus catches up with Sony's.

Don Cox
 
D Cox said:
WryCuda said:
petrochemist said:
WryCuda said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
No loss of optical quality, but you will lose some or all of the auto functions of the Sony. This will be of particular importance for a sports shooter.

A plain "spacer" adapter will just give you manual focus capability, but no aperture control on modern Nikon lenses. More expensive adapters may provide some degree of functionality, but nothing like a genuine Sony lens.

My suggestion is to buy a Sony prime lens to go with your new camera while you learn the ropes. You will busy enough wrangling your new kit without the frustration (and expense) of the adapted solution. The Sony 35mm f/2.8 is a useful lens.
Click to expand...
A 35/2.8 will be of very little use to a sports shooter! Nearly all sports are shot with lenses longer than a 135mm let alone 35mm
Click to expand...
That's a rather obvious point.

The 35mm will give the OP something to work with while he gets used to the camera, and will also be handy for travel/landscape.

I'd suggest a Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 when funds permit. Even the f/4 model does an excellent job.
Click to expand...
I really can't see any point in the OP buying a Sony camera or lenses when there's barely enough budget for the camera body.

If the Nikon Z cameras aren't good enough now, the best thing would be to carry on using the Nikon DSLR for a year or two. until Nikon's Continuous Auto Focus catches up with Sony's.
Click to expand...
My main point was to discourage to OP from wasting money on any sort of adapter.
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
There is no reason why you should lose any optical quality.

You will be likely to lose some functionality though.

You will likely have to focus manually and set aperture on the lens (or on the adapter - if your lenses don't have an aperture ring you will need to get an adapter that does).

I use a lot of old manual focus lenses on my a7 and I love it, but I'm used to manual focus so you might need to think whether lack of AF will affect your sports photography (perfectly possible with MF, but some have a strong preference for AF).

You will likely get a bit more functionality (but no extra image quality) if you went with a mirrorless Nikon - aperture is more likely to be controllable from the body and you might even get autofocus (if the lens has an autofocus motor built-in).
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
If you primarily shoot sports, it seems ludicrous to shoot Nikon lenses adapted on an a9. They will not AF very fast.
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
I'm going to go against the grain here - but this is just my opinion/theory.

Nikon digital cameras are optimized for Nikon lenses. That is, the camera passes along the lens information to correct for any optical quirks. So, a Nikon body knows how to correct for a Nikon lens.

A Sony body will not have the information to identify and correct a Nikon lens. It may not be able to control the autofocus or aperture as quicky either. If at all.

On the plus side, many Nikon lenses are quite valuable as trade-ins.

Another thought, many sport scenes are near/at infinity (long focal length, beyond 30 feet) so autofocus is not the greatest priory considering depth of field.
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
By now you should know there are no issues with optical quality. But with adapted lenses, there will always be some loss of functionality and/or performance with autofocus and aperture control.

I hate to hammer you with more bad news but Petapixel/SonyAlphaRumors report the A9 is shown as discontinued at Adorama & B&H. Petapixel speculates this may only be a result of the chip shortage.

Brian Smith maintains a guide to E-mount adapters (scroll down to the Nikon section). It contains brief descriptions of how each adapter performs - it's not looking good for the Nikkor sports shooter.

--
Lance H
 
Last edited:
lehill said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
By now you should know there are no issues with optical quality. But with adapted lenses, there will always be some loss of functionality and/or performance with autofocus and aperture control.

I hate to hammer you with more bad news but Petapixel/SonyAlphaRumors report the A9 is shown as discontinued at Adorama & B&H. Petapixel speculates this may only be a result of the chip shortage.

Brian Smith maintains a guide to E-mount adapters (scroll down to the Nikon section). It contains brief descriptions of how each adapter performs - it's not looking good for the Nikkor sports shooter.
Click to expand...
Nikon seem to put a lot of effort into making their DSLR lenses difficult to adapt.

Don Cox
 
I think it's more that lenses are now "smart" and can communicate with the camera bodies. For instance a wide angles lens can pass along distortion correction information.
 
thinkinginimages said:
I think it's more that lenses are now "smart" and can communicate with the camera bodies. For instance a wide angles lens can pass along distortion correction information.
Click to expand...
Canon EF lenses are widely adapted with great success. Nikon lenses are not.

Don Cox
 
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?
Click to expand...
There will be some loss of IQ: "center resolution is pretty much unchanged, it’s only when you get away from center that you start to see issues":

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters/

Did this stop me from using adapted glass?

No, it didn't. YMMV.
ziggy5408 said:
thanks for the help
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
D Cox said:
PhotoTeach2 said:
ziggy5408 said:
Hi, I currently use all Nikon dslr cameras. Love them, however, looking at everything being released I’ve decided it’s time to switch to mirrorless. After doing a ton of research I’ve decided on a Sony a9, because

I primarily shoot sports. My question is, with the price I can only afford the body immediately and will work on glass later. If I buy a lens adapter for my Nikon lenses to use temporarily, how much, if any loss of quality will there be?

thanks for the help
Click to expand...
I don't think you lose any quality (unless you expect to use tele-converters).

But a basic "mounting" adapter (w/out glass) should have no effect on IQ.

But there could be some interfacing operational issues between Nikon & Sony.
Click to expand...
Old Nikon lenses with fully manual control will work perfectly. The more recent lenses which are electronically controlled by the camera are likely to give problems.

I suggest buying a Nikon Z mount mirrorless camera rather than a Sony . The adapter made by Nikon will work.

Don Cox
Click to expand...
I would "LIKE" to agree ... but Nikon does not make an A9 (or A1) equivalent.

Sony appears to be restricting the "stacked" sensor technology for their own cameras.

Even the newest FZ1000-II still (has to) use the original sensors because Sony will not sell it RX10-IV sensor, (so they are still able to retain the original $1700-1800 price).
 
Sensor stack thickness difference can alter image quality. As an example, with a dumb adapter (no optics), wide angle full frame lenses developed to used with film cameras perform poorly on Micro Four Thirds (µ4/3) cameras. At least MetaBones SpeedBooster is designed to correct the effect of the thick sensor stack on µ4/3 sensors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
  • Question Question
A quandary re cameras
Replies
18
Views
2K
UncleVanya
UncleVanya
W
Canon R7 vs Sony a6700
2
Replies
20
Views
12K
Mountaingrapher
M
E
M6II vs Nikon Z6(II) AF
Replies
17
Views
5K
musicshootr
M
Joshua May
  • User review User review
Not the best, but better
Replies
3
Views
676
thunder storm
T
Mofisa Wu
How Do You Know It’s Time to Stop Using the Kit Lens?
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
GeoffRG
G

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top