wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
Seeing that Nikon S to Nikon Z adapter makes my wallet whimper Brian 
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I've used the Nikkor 24/2.8 that came on an FE I bought and the CV 58/1.4 FE that the Head Bartender sold me. Both were superb on the Z7, I've not tried them on the Zfc, it's kind of the stepchild of my gear. To be perfectly honest, I don't like the FTZ adapter, it makes an already bulky arrangement even worse. The best set up I've used is the Fotodiox M to Z adapter and struggle with full manual.
tcmx3
Established
Due to the flange distance I find adapting SLR lenses to be mostly not worth it. Fun, but not something I do a whole lot.
I think there are a few places where it makes a lot of sense. For example, if I had the sort of autofocus lenses from the prior generation where I could make use of that via adapter. As an example the Nikon 105mm f1.4. I note from Nikon's own compatibility list that most of their lenses targeted at professionals seem to be represented as having compatibility. Plus you get the very accurate sensor autofocus, so that's cool. Those lenses are already huge so the adapter doesn't add much length. It might keep you from having to buy a Z mount equivalent (if it exists) which is great of course.
Another case would be macro or other live view applications where you would be tripod mounted or otherwise mostly stationary. Here, I'm not entirely sure it's worth it, necessarily, but maybe you have a special application optic or something you're really attached to. Perhaps a special portrait lens that is part of a signature look. Again, these situations have compromises built in that easily wash out the adapter.
Most cases I feel like you are going to feel the compromise. That's ok though. I've done it and certainly liked the results. In the past, I preferred adapted lenses because I was not a huge fan of the rendering of a lot of the good Canon/Nikon/Sony lenses. Now, I adapt lenses from time to time for nostalgia, and am actually quite happy with the rendering of the Z lenses.
In regards to sharpness of these lenses on high resolution sensors, I agree with the folks who suggest it simply does not matter. Don't adapt boring lenses because they will be less sharp, not autofocus, not be weather sealed, etc. Pixel level sharpness doesn't matter much for a vintage 50/1.2 does it? I can't say I think it does. A bunch of lenses that are absolutely terrible by today's standards made photographs that are not only wonderful photographs but still look good at sensible print sizes. Drag the contrast slider to the right (or don't), it'll be fine. Just my opinion.
I will note that the Nikon FTZ adapter is frustrating to me. It's pretty expensive for what it is. On the other hand, it's going to work well. I have a few adapters from other brands, mostly expensive ones, and the quality is variable. A metabones I have is clearly not machined quite properly in the bayonet part and so that one was a write-off. Novoflex seems solid though. The Nikon one just works, there is some value to that.
I think there are a few places where it makes a lot of sense. For example, if I had the sort of autofocus lenses from the prior generation where I could make use of that via adapter. As an example the Nikon 105mm f1.4. I note from Nikon's own compatibility list that most of their lenses targeted at professionals seem to be represented as having compatibility. Plus you get the very accurate sensor autofocus, so that's cool. Those lenses are already huge so the adapter doesn't add much length. It might keep you from having to buy a Z mount equivalent (if it exists) which is great of course.
Another case would be macro or other live view applications where you would be tripod mounted or otherwise mostly stationary. Here, I'm not entirely sure it's worth it, necessarily, but maybe you have a special application optic or something you're really attached to. Perhaps a special portrait lens that is part of a signature look. Again, these situations have compromises built in that easily wash out the adapter.
Most cases I feel like you are going to feel the compromise. That's ok though. I've done it and certainly liked the results. In the past, I preferred adapted lenses because I was not a huge fan of the rendering of a lot of the good Canon/Nikon/Sony lenses. Now, I adapt lenses from time to time for nostalgia, and am actually quite happy with the rendering of the Z lenses.
In regards to sharpness of these lenses on high resolution sensors, I agree with the folks who suggest it simply does not matter. Don't adapt boring lenses because they will be less sharp, not autofocus, not be weather sealed, etc. Pixel level sharpness doesn't matter much for a vintage 50/1.2 does it? I can't say I think it does. A bunch of lenses that are absolutely terrible by today's standards made photographs that are not only wonderful photographs but still look good at sensible print sizes. Drag the contrast slider to the right (or don't), it'll be fine. Just my opinion.
I will note that the Nikon FTZ adapter is frustrating to me. It's pretty expensive for what it is. On the other hand, it's going to work well. I have a few adapters from other brands, mostly expensive ones, and the quality is variable. A metabones I have is clearly not machined quite properly in the bayonet part and so that one was a write-off. Novoflex seems solid though. The Nikon one just works, there is some value to that.
vha
Isn't it coffee time ?
Thanks for the thought on the adapters, Novoflex have been considered since they have a good reputation, and nikon well because they made the camera and the lenses For some strange reason i have lots of nikkor glass, enough that a Z6 or 7 sounds like a good idea, especially since I now have surrendered, Im not able to get rid of Nikon
For some strange reason i have lots of nikkor glass, enough that a Z6 or 7 sounds like a good idea, especially since I now have surrendered, Im not able to get rid of Nikon 
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I was a fairly early Z convert starting with a Z6 and I was all hot to adapt my older manual focus Nikkors. I found the experience to be underwhelming due to converter limitations and bulk, I’m much happier with a Voigtlander chipped Z mount 40 and converted (from Sony) 21/ 3.5 on my Zf. On my Z9 and Z6 I stick to AF-S lenses on a FTZ or FTZ II.
But, it’s nice to be able to trot out an older Nikkor on occasion. I just don’t do it as often as I thought I would.
But, it’s nice to be able to trot out an older Nikkor on occasion. I just don’t do it as often as I thought I would.
A year and almost a half later, I’m still using a Z6 without native Z glass.
I find it to be a great platform for adapted lenses. Going back 17 or so years from when I first adapted to mirrorless, I really like the highly damped and quiet shutter, the viewfinder, the custom button programming, the IBIS, not to mention the menu system is far preferable to my old Sony A7II.
I find it to be a great platform for adapted lenses. Going back 17 or so years from when I first adapted to mirrorless, I really like the highly damped and quiet shutter, the viewfinder, the custom button programming, the IBIS, not to mention the menu system is far preferable to my old Sony A7II.
which adapter are you using for this?
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I have the Viltrox - it seems to work fine, I’m not using AF functions but for data link it seems solid - including focus conformation.
I always wanted Voigtlander to make this lens in native Z, but when they discontinued the Sony version I figured it would never happen.