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

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
Cheap adapters can lose you image quality my failing to mount the lens parallel to the sensor, or by having sloppy mounts which don't locate properly. However, spend enough for a good one, you should be OK.

As others have said, unless you gat a 'smart' adapter, you'll lose AF and aperture actuation. This is a big problem if your lenses don't have aperture rings (that is they are G type lenses or later. In the F mount aperture actuation is mechanical, so the adapter needs a motor in it to drive the aperture. I would guess that there could be a problem with accuracy of aperture selection if the adapter isn't carefully manufactured, another reason why a satisfactory adapter is likely to be expensive.

So far as I can see, there are two autofocus capable adapters from F mount to Sony FE mount, one from Fotodiox and one from a venture called MonsterAdapter (yes, really). The Nikon F mount is a tricky candidate for adaptation to a mirrorless camera. Nikon made a good adapter for their Z system, but they had the advantage of all the inside knowledge on how both protocols worked. An independent vendor reverse engineering things might have a more difficult time, although Sony does licence the FE mount protocols, at least in base form.

I haven't used either of the above adapters, but my general experience with these cross-brand independent adapters is that they range from unusable to reasonably useful in limited circumstances. Unusable might range from failure to work at all with a large selection of lenses, focus hunting and unreliable focus or triggering camera fault modes. Reasonably useful tends to mean decent, if a bit slow performance in single-shot AF modes across quite a range of lenses. I've never had one that can be relied on with every lens, nor one that works well enough to be usable for continuous autofocus or subject tracking.

I would expect that any Nikon F lens used with an adapter on an A9 would not be any good at all for any kind of sports photography, so given that is what you want to do, I'd forget that idea. If you were a landscaper or portraitist, yes, you could likely get some use. I think you have two options. The first is to sell your Nikon lenses and use the cash to start to build a Sony lens system. their lenses have lately been excellent, so there is no loss in function there, though obviously some loss of cash.

The other option is to be a little patient and wait for Nikon to nail mirrorless AF. I'm pretty confident that they will get there. Already firmware updates have produced big improvements, and you can expect the forthcoming Z9 to have as good AF as anything on the market - that will be Nikon's number one goal, and I expect them to achieve it. Whilst that's likely to be outside your price range, you'd expect them to spread that type of AF performance to models lower down the range quickly. Nikon is in a position where it has no option to perform, and that's a big incentive to get it right.
 
Hi everyone, thanks for the replies. The AF is my biggest concern and currently, from what I can gather, Sony is top dog (or is it dawg?) for that. I’m currently using a d800 (hand me down) that only shoots at 4 fps. If I want to stick with Sony native lenses, as that sounds to be the safest route, what about going with the a7iii? Significantly cheaper than the a9, shoots at 10fps, and gives me a jump start in cash toward a 70-200 2.8. I realize 10 isn’t 20, but I feel like that’s still a huge jump from the 4 I’m currently shooting with.
 
Hi everyone, thanks for the replies. The AF is my biggest concern and currently, from what I can gather, Sony is top dog (or is it dawg?) for that. I’m currently using a d800 (hand me down) that only shoots at 4 fps.
I used to shoot motorsport with a D800. One tip, use it in 1.2x crop mode, then it does 6FPS, and you still get a 25MP result.
If I want to stick with Sony native lenses, as that sounds to be the safest route, what about going with the a7iii? Significantly cheaper than the a9, shoots at 10fps, and gives me a jump start in cash toward a 70-200 2.8. I realize 10 isn’t 20, but I feel like that’s still a huge jump from the 4 I’m currently shooting with.
If AF is of importance you really need native lenses for whatever system you go with. Anyhow, regarding the lens, if you're on a budget, why not go with the f/4 version of the lens? Should be fine for your usage plus quite a bit less expensive and a bit smaller and lighter?
 
Hi everyone, thanks for the replies. The AF is my biggest concern and currently, from what I can gather, Sony is top dog (or is it dawg?) for that. I’m currently using a d800 (hand me down) that only shoots at 4 fps. If I want to stick with Sony native lenses, as that sounds to be the safest route, what about going with the a7iii? Significantly cheaper than the a9, shoots at 10fps, and gives me a jump start in cash toward a 70-200 2.8. I realize 10 isn’t 20, but I feel like that’s still a huge jump from the 4 I’m currently shooting with.
Both the Sony cameras are very good (I shoot motorsport with an a7ii and am very happy with the results I get). I find the IBIS very useful for using shutter speeds to get blur into the wheels of a car while keeping the body sharp.

The main difference between the 7 and 9 in use will be the viewfinder, which is zero blackout on the a9. Have you tried an electronic viewfinder? Be warned that panning with a non-zero blackout EVF can require a bit of relearning panning technique.

I am surprised that you are finding the D800 to be holding you back - I would have thought it would be quite well suited to motorsport (other than lacking IBIS). Are you just looking for more frames per second?
 
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
Unless an adapter has glass elements to help regain infinity focus, an adapter has no optical effect. In the case of adapting DSLR lenses to mirrorless cameras, there is usually no risk of loss of infinity focus, because the adapter is basically an extension tube that is needed to hold the DSLR lenses far enough away from sensor, not putting the lens too far from the sensor for infinity focus.

AF, however, is dependent upon electronic translation of protocols, and may suffer somewhat, or some adapters may not even translate and require full manual operation of the lens (many lenses do not have manual aperture controls, or do focus-by-wire which is gone without "the wire").

--
Beware of correct answers to wrong questions.
John
http://www.pbase.com/image/55384958.jpg
 
Last edited:
That’s a big part of it, but also more iso capability. The d800 takes some amazing pictures, but I really get limited in low light.
 
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
I don't think you lose any quality (unless you expect to use tele-converters).
Any teleconverter concerns shouldn't be any different than with native mounts. An adapter should place the lens+TC at the same distance from the sensor as in the native mount situation. If the OP is going from a Nikon APS-C to Sony FF and only using the TC on the FF, then the TC issues are the same as if the OP went to a Nikon FF.

That said, TC issues are usually quite small, as far as what the TC itself loses in light and contrast and adds in aberration, and most other issues other than slower AF are not real practical issues for most good real-world reasons for using a TC. Yes, stepping 1.4x as far away from the subject with a 1.4x to fit the subject in the frame has serious losses in IQ, but it is mostly due to the distance; not the TC. That is a "bad" use of a TC.
 
Everything...camera(s) and lens(es). With the proceeds, buy the A9 and a lens or two.
 
If there are lenses in the adapter, yes they will have a negative impact on image quality. How much will depend on the adapter.
 
You will not lose image quality, but you will lose focus speed, or maybe even autofocus at all. For some uses that's fine, but not for motorsports.

If you want to keep your Nikon AF-S lenses, get a Z6II or Z7II with the FTZ adapter. If you really want to switch to Sony, get E-mount lenses. They don't necessarily have to be Sony: Sigma makes some great ones.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top