Nikkor Z 40mm Lens mount conversion

[Jamie Pillers]

I just completed a conversion of the Nikkor Z 40mm lens' plastic mount to metal. Here's the YouTube video that inspired me to do this:

The Nikon part numbers needed for the conversion (metal mount and rubber gasket) are shown in the beginning of the video. It took a couple of weeks to get the parts from Nikon. Total cost was about $27.

The video is pretty thorough. The process is simple. One caveat (mentioned at the end of the video, and I confirm it) is that once converted, the lens mounts significantly more snugly on the camera, due to the addition of the weather gasket. Otherwise, no problems with auto focus, etc.. Here's a photo of the finished conversion:

 

[Nitroplait]

$27! Why couldn’t Nikon just put it on in the first place?
I wouldn’t have minded the marginal extra cost and doubt others would.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Agreed... dumb move by Nikon. Also dumb... Nikon comes out with the retro Zf, but then saddles it with all these behemoth Z lenses (except for the three 'pancake' 26, 28, and 40mm)! Nikon would've had a winner by offering some small manual focus lenses with aperture rings.

 

[JohnGellings]

I have no issue with a plastic mount. It is lighter and works fine for the weight of the lens.

 

[Ken Ford]

I just did this - an easy change. Getting the butt gasket was my main reason.

 

[PatrickT]

Just got my parts! Will do this shortly. Thanks for the heads up on the video and process.

 

[trix4ever]

I have no issue with a plastic mount. It is lighter and works fine for the weight of the lens.

I agree it's a small lens, but I have a friend with a camera shop on the Gold Coast in Queensland who does a brisk trade in replacing broken Nikon plastic lens mounts with 3D printed replacements. He can hardly keep up...

 

[wlewisiii]

Broken? I've got a fair number of lenses with plastic mounts and used them, sometimes fairly hard. Never managed to break any. SMH.

 

[trix4ever]

Broken? I've got a fair number of lenses with plastic mounts and used them, sometimes fairly hard. Never managed to break any. SMH.

Yes, but you know what you're doing. Most of the broken lenses my friend sees are the cheap telephoto zooms like the dx 55-200 that used to come with the cheap DSLR's as a 2 lens kit and frankly they're owned by people without a clue. Silly thing is these lenses are worth so little now it would probably be cheaper to buy another on Fleabay.
I've seen the queue of lenses to be fixed, it is a thing.

 

[wlewisiii]

Strange. Especially since more than a few of them are really cheap ones for Pentax. Optically fine but I can get them stupid cheap if I get the plastic ones. Just a small bit of care and no problem... I don't doubt you it's just ... Ah well.

 

[Dogman]

Having once been involved in an altercation with a footballer on the sidelines that resulted in the entire front of a Nikon F2 being snapped off, plastic lens mounts are okay with me. Easily replaceable, cheap...better than a new Nikon body.



................

 

[wlewisiii]

Having owned an F2, that's an accomplishment!

 

[Dogman]

Having owned an F2, that's an accomplishment!

180/2.8 lens on the F2 around my neck, 85/1.8 on an F2 in my hand. I came down hard on the one with the 180. Big chest bruise, broken camera. And it was just a damn high school football game. 🙄



.........................................

 

[splitimageview]

What’s the skinny on this lens, optically speaking?

 

[Dogman]

It's sharp enough. Most of the "look" comes from processing these days so not much to add there. Don't expect Leica/Zeiss quality but it's really a good lens. I would never consider carrying around one of the behemoth Nikkors no matter how great it is.

Viltrox also makes a couple of nice plastic bodied lenses I like--50/2 and 20/2.8.

Here's a couple done with the Nikkor 40/2.











.......................................

 

[wlewisiii]

What’s the skinny on this lens, optically speaking?

It's one I've heard (and having seen images from) good things about. If/when my M 240 goes away, a Z5 is likely to replace and the 40 is highly likely to be the only native lens I'd get.

 

[pixelated]

I like the 40 for its compactness, and as a bonus, it’s decently sharp.

 

[Ken Ford]

I like my Nikon 40/2, but I love my Voigtlander 40/1.2. Both have a place.

 

[JohnGellings]

I'm not a lens guy by any means and by that I mean pretty much any lens that can focus is good enough for me. However, I find my 40mm F2 SE to be less than desirable wide open. And I'm not a sharpness buff and this really surprised me. It just isn't on par with my other Z lenses. That said, it works really well from 2.8 on and can be used at F2 in a pinch for me.

 

[PatrickT]

I did this tonight and two things happened.

1. I couldn't get one of the smaller screws into the side of the barrel. It wouldn't go in and sit flush, so when I tried to put the lens on the camera it wouldn't go. Anyone run into this?

2. The lens is now *really* tight when putting it on the camera. Are all of the Z lenses with the rubber gasket this tight? I can't imagine they are.