Sigma 14mm f/1.8 art native Z mount?

[Sothoth]

So… why not in native Z mount? Is it because Nikon was being a bunch of AHs with not sharing their mount comm/spec sooner?

 

[Gary Skirvin]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

 

[Sothoth]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

True. But for $200ish more, which is a bummer. And extra weight and bulk for an already big and heavy lens. It would just be awesome to have a native Z mount.



Maybe I can also ask how you like the lens?

 

[Gary Skirvin]

This ultra wide is mostly for astro photography; I haven't had it out for that purpose since getting the Z's. Here's a sample from today . . .

80° on Tuesday, snow this morning !


Smith Rock State Park, Oregon

 

[Sittatunga]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

True. But for $200ish more, which is a bummer. And extra weight and bulk for an already big and heavy lens. It would just be awesome to have a native Z mount.

It's the same glass for mirrorless as for a DSLR lens, so for F mount it's 126mm long and for E mount it's 152mm long (Z mount would be 156mm long). The only extra bulk for a Z mount version over the F mount version would come from the bulge for the electronics (the sensor to lens hood distance has to be equal for every lens mount), which is minimal for the FTZ II adapter. It would be about 75g (nearly three ounces) heavier, but buying the adapter would give you access to hundreds of F mount lenses even if only dozens of them would autofocus on your camera. Given the choice of a DSLR lens and the same glass in a mirrorless mount, I would take the DSLR lens every time for its increased versatility.

Maybe I can also ask how you like the lens?

 

[Gary Skirvin]

Well-reasoned!

I've 14 F-mount lenses, zero Z-mounts. All work well with the Z's and I still use the D850. So instead of investing in Z lenses, the cost of a FTZ adapter allows me the versatility to use them all on either mount.

GS

 

[Sothoth]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

True. But for $200ish more, which is a bummer. And extra weight and bulk for an already big and heavy lens. It would just be awesome to have a native Z mount.

It's the same glass for mirrorless as for a DSLR lens, so for F mount it's 126mm long and for E mount it's 152mm long (Z mount would be 156mm long). The only extra bulk for a Z mount version over the F mount version would come from the bulge for the electronics (the sensor to lens hood distance has to be equal for every lens mount), which is minimal for the FTZ II adapter. It would be about 75g (nearly three ounces) heavier, but buying the adapter would give you access to hundreds of F mount lenses even if only dozens of them would autofocus on your camera. Given the choice of a DSLR lens and the same glass in a mirrorless mount, I would take the DSLR lens every time for its increased versatility.

Maybe I can also ask how you like the lens?

If I’m buying an adapter anyway I could get the Sony to Z adapter and get the Sony ultra wide bright lens which is quite a bit smaller and optically amazing. I think the Z lenses are overall sharper than F lenses so, although I can’t disagree with your logic, would still prefer a native Z mount or might prefer a Sony adapter and that glass over the Sigma.

 

[Gary Skirvin]

I see you already have the Nikon Nikkor Z 14-30mm F4 S

Do you just need a fast f/1.8?

I also have the Sigma ART 14-24mm f/2.8 (to replace the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 which kissed the pavement) and it's certainly more useful in more environments than the 14mm prime.

GS

 

[Sothoth]

I see you already have the Nikon Nikkor Z 14-30mm F4 S

Do you just need a fast f/1.8?

I also have the Sigma ART 14-24mm f/2.8 (to replace the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 which kissed the pavement) and it's certainly more useful in more environments than the 14mm prime.

GS

I don’t know that I need it. I recently purchased (but haven’t received) the Laowa 10mm f/2.8 zero-d and a TTartisan 50mm f/1.4 tilt to try more unusual photographic techniques (for me). I am also considering a fast ultra wide prime but not as wide as the Laowa. The 14mm art might be good for night photography but of the three more niche-y lenses I considered, the Sigma was the least interesting to me. I want it for night shooting. Tried that in the past (on film, with some success) but never stuck with it because as much as I liked doing the outdoors part of it, the opportunities for it were few and far between). Not sure my f/4 is suited to this but something f/2.8 or brighter would work.

 

[Sittatunga]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

True. But for $200ish more, which is a bummer. And extra weight and bulk for an already big and heavy lens. It would just be awesome to have a native Z mount.

It's the same glass for mirrorless as for a DSLR lens, so for F mount it's 126mm long and for E mount it's 152mm long (Z mount would be 156mm long). The only extra bulk for a Z mount version over the F mount version would come from the bulge for the electronics (the sensor to lens hood distance has to be equal for every lens mount), which is minimal for the FTZ II adapter. It would be about 75g (nearly three ounces) heavier, but buying the adapter would give you access to hundreds of F mount lenses even if only dozens of them would autofocus on your camera. Given the choice of a DSLR lens and the same glass in a mirrorless mount, I would take the DSLR lens every time for its increased versatility.

Maybe I can also ask how you like the lens?

If I’m buying an adapter anyway I could get the Sony to Z adapter and get the Sony ultra wide bright lens which is quite a bit smaller and optically amazing. I think the Z lenses are overall sharper than F lenses so, although I can’t disagree with your logic, would still prefer a native Z mount or might prefer a Sony adapter and that glass over the Sigma.

Not a Sony or Nikon user, but I think an AF E-Z mount adapter is about twice the price of an FTZ II. Adapting a Sony lens would be the way to go if size and weight were more important than money. I was just pointing out that the size and weight of an F mount lens on the FTZ II won't be significantly different to the size and weight of a Z mount version.

 

[Sothoth]

My f-mount with FTZ works fine with Z8 and Z9 .

GS

True. But for $200ish more, which is a bummer. And extra weight and bulk for an already big and heavy lens. It would just be awesome to have a native Z mount.

It's the same glass for mirrorless as for a DSLR lens, so for F mount it's 126mm long and for E mount it's 152mm long (Z mount would be 156mm long). The only extra bulk for a Z mount version over the F mount version would come from the bulge for the electronics (the sensor to lens hood distance has to be equal for every lens mount), which is minimal for the FTZ II adapter. It would be about 75g (nearly three ounces) heavier, but buying the adapter would give you access to hundreds of F mount lenses even if only dozens of them would autofocus on your camera. Given the choice of a DSLR lens and the same glass in a mirrorless mount, I would take the DSLR lens every time for its increased versatility.

Maybe I can also ask how you like the lens?

If I’m buying an adapter anyway I could get the Sony to Z adapter and get the Sony ultra wide bright lens which is quite a bit smaller and optically amazing. I think the Z lenses are overall sharper than F lenses so, although I can’t disagree with your logic, would still prefer a native Z mount or might prefer a Sony adapter and that glass over the Sigma.

Not a Sony or Nikon user, but I think an AF E-Z mount adapter is about twice the price of an FTZ II. Adapting a Sony lens would be the way to go if size and weight were more important than money. I was just pointing out that the size and weight of an F mount lens on the FTZ II won't be significantly different to the size and weight of a Z mount version.

Yes you’re right on all points. I’d originally thought the adapter was bigger but clearly it’s not.