FanMan
Established
It‘s no big problem, only something that I noticed while using my ZI during the last days. I don‘t think that it has an impact on the quality of the photos taken. However, I only want to share my experience.
When mounting a Nikkor lens onto my FM2 or my F3 I have to insert the lens in the camera body and twist it counterclockwise until it clicks into place. And while twisting the lens I can already feel that the mount begins to hold the lens. After the click I can grasp the lens by its mounting ring and try to turn it: the lens will not move - it sits absolutely firm in the camera body.
With the ZI this is not the case. Even after the click of the lens release button, which tells me that the lens is now mounted, the lens will move a very little bit if I try to turn it further or back. No big deal, but I noticed it. This wobble or loose connection I can feel also when I focus objects in the viewfinder.
So, maybe the F-mount is simply better designed than the M mount.
When mounting a Nikkor lens onto my FM2 or my F3 I have to insert the lens in the camera body and twist it counterclockwise until it clicks into place. And while twisting the lens I can already feel that the mount begins to hold the lens. After the click I can grasp the lens by its mounting ring and try to turn it: the lens will not move - it sits absolutely firm in the camera body.
With the ZI this is not the case. Even after the click of the lens release button, which tells me that the lens is now mounted, the lens will move a very little bit if I try to turn it further or back. No big deal, but I noticed it. This wobble or loose connection I can feel also when I focus objects in the viewfinder.
So, maybe the F-mount is simply better designed than the M mount.
peter_n
Veteran
I would hazard a guess that it is more an issue of manufacture rather than design. The lens should be tight in the mount. I have an F3 but Leica M bodies and they are equally tight. The M bayonet is a standard rangefinder mount and your ZI body requires an adjustment IMO.
Avotius
Some guy
thats bizzare, ive seen nothing but a stable and hearty mount when it comes to M but the nikon is no slouch, I would say that your sample might have a problem and may need an adjustment as stated above
R
ray_g
Guest
Same here. No problems with my M mounts.
While you are at it, try a Canon FD breechmount.
While you are at it, try a Canon FD breechmount.
FanMan
Established
You are right - it is not an issue of the design of the M mount itself. It seems that the „u“-shaped notch at the rear end of the Sonnar, into which the lens release button‘s extension clicks, was milled/cut with a - let‘s say with a production tolerance, which exceed Nikon‘s.
Seems that I‘m only a pedantic nitpicker
Seems that I‘m only a pedantic nitpicker
R
rpsawin
Guest
I shoot both M's and F's. I had an M2 that did not mount certain lenses "tightly". After I sent it off for a CLA the problem went away. I can honestly say that both M's & F's mount the lens to the body without any play when properly adjusted.
Bob
Bob
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
Arguably, screw mounts are the best: but they are also the slowest. I've used Canon's breech lock system -- also based on a screw thread -- for 31 years now, and it too is secure if a little slow. All bayonet mounts depend on machining accuracy: and all show the effects of wear and tear.