Nikon Z5 and three generations of Zeiss Lenses in three different mounts

Sonnar Brian

Sonnar Brian

Product of the Fifties
Staff member
Local time
1:52 PM
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
19,778
View My Gallery
I've had the Nikon Z5 for almost two years now. I've bought a lot of adapters for it, from the "one-trick pony" Canon 7 adapter to use the 50/0.95 on it, to S-Mount and Contax RF Mount, through Konica and other SLR mounts. I've used the Z5 at the Skating Rink and some other events- feel fairly comfortable with focus-peaking and the shutter latency on the camera. The 3.6MDot EVF is suitable for the job. I wanted to see how I like using it for a walk in the woods, using three very different Zeiss lenses.
C-Sonnar 50/1.5 in M-Mount, 8.5cm F2 Carl Zeiss Jena post-war lens in Contax RF Mount, and a first-batch 5.8cm F2 Biotar in Exakta mount. About as wide of a range of Zeiss lenses that I could think of that could fit in one small carrying bag.


RIMG0239.jpgRIMG0240.jpg
 
But can I nail focus?

Longest lens in the bunch- the 8.5cm F2. Shot at F4.
Did not bring a long lens. The Bad Eagle must have known that, as we were on the trail- landed in the tree above us.

100% crop, full-view. Focusing is accurate- I used the "Zoom View" programmed on the AF-ON button. I do not have an AF lens for this camera, so put it to good use.
Eagle_Crop.jpgDSC_5939.jpg
This is the second time I've seen a Bald Eagle at this park. And never this close. Next time- bringing at least a 300mm with me.

Same lens, F4 again.
Nicole_Small_85_f2_atF4.jpg
 
Last edited:
C-Sonnar, at F4.
DSC_5922-1.jpg

Same spot, Same Girl.
Zoom-Nikkor-C 43~86/3.5 on the Nikon Ftn Photomic.
lees4a.jpg

C-Sonnar at F4.
DSC_5924.jpg
 
Last edited:
wlewisiii said:
As an aside, I really do need a Z5 though I am having a lot of fun with a K5 in a very different way 👍
Click to expand...
The Nikon Z5 has got to be the best bang-for-the-buck camera made. This one was under $1K when the Nikon sale was on. At some point- will probably get a Zf. But between the Z5 and Df- I'm very content. Those and the couple of hundred lenses for them.
 
they have a Biotar 1:2. 85mm. It's a screw mount and it came to me several years ago. I think M42 and coated. Better that I should let it go to a more loving family.
 
The Z5 is a good choice for adapting lenses from different mounts, and its EVF focus peaking is adequate. However, for rangefinder lenses, the Z5 feels a bit large, and its ergonomics are not ideal. I hope an EVF-based rangefinder camera will be available on the market someday.
 
I bought a Z5 as my digital answer. I've got a truckload of Leica and Nikon F lenses, so I got a focusing Leica M>Nikon Z adapter. LTM lenses go on with LTM>M adapters, and all the Nikon lenses got their own Nikon F > M adapters. So now everythings an "M" lens and I'm not juggling adapters all the time, and every lens gets a close-focus boost from the first adapter.

I set the AF button under my right thumb as 100% magnification for focusing, and for critical focus I have the F2 button under my right ring finger set as 200%. Focus peaking is crap, in my opinion. It gets you close, but it's never spot on because it has it's own fake DOF and responds too much to high contrast subjects that are out of focus. But instant magnification right under my fingers works great.

I have no Z lenses to contend with and don't intend to get any.
 
Very first time using the Z-5 and first time using focus peaking.
I set it to highest sensitivity.

Canon 50mm F0.95, wide-open. 1/100sec, ISO 6400.

DSC_0476.jpg

I get a much higher keeper rate with focus peaking compared to using a Rangefinder with a 1.25x finder. It is like having an RF spot over the entire image. No problems with it- and I've used Rangefinders since 1969. I did not set out to like it so much- but keep an open mind.
 
Last edited:
Truthfully, I haven't touched a film camera since I got the Z5. It really answered all of my DSLR and Leica digital dislikes. Great finder! I think there's probably some dislike from people because Nikon chose to make the Z family look like SLRs where Sony made basically the same camera look like RF cameras, but functionally they're both what they are: mirrorless cameras, neither SLR nor RF. And mirrorless is a great solution, especially for available darkness, which is where I mostly shoot.
 
I spent about a week and 1500 shots learning my lenses and the camera. The first thing I learned was that maximum sharpness and glow focus at different spots than maximum contrast on many of my older lenses and some of the new ones, too, and peaking picks for contrast not sharpness, which is actually the enemy of glow. Using 200% forces you into focus for sharpness mode. And now my disrespected 50/1.1 Nokton is a much better lens because I can focus regardless of focus shift, sharpness vs contrast, or cam calibration and it turns out to be a much better lens than I thought it was, competitive with a lot of slower lenses, so it's become my lens of choice. On my Leicas I never really knew what the RF was doing, but I knew it probably wasn't quite exactly right a lot of the time. And my SLR work was all based on contrast, not sharpness. So that's fixed.

And the Nikons have the thinner filter stack, so some of my lenses that shouldn't convert well to digital work fine. Along that line, I discovered that the problem with [my particular?] 21/4 Color-Skopar-M isn't edge sharpness on ditigal, it's extreme backwards field curvature... edges focus much farther away, but it's still extremely sharp, actually. Which works well with certain types of pictures. Of that I was previously unaware.

And not of interest to many, but I do a lot with the Lensbaby Soft Focus I and II, which are the most flat field ones of the family, I think. They have the same glow/sharpness vs contrast problem in extreme, and focus on the Z is much more critical than I could manage on SLRs.
 
Last edited:
that Biotar is quite contrasty and good color for an uncoated lens!

Mirrorless, adapted lenses, and me go way back to 2008 with the Panasonic G1, before there even were commercially available adapters. I can’t count how many unmirrored digital I’ve used over the years. When I was looking at Nikon for the first time I decided on a used Z6 as it was only a smidge more $ than the Z5 and I like the readout on the top plate.

Fantastic cameras for the money. I too do not have any native Z glass.

I picked up a used Megadap autofocus adapter that works brilliantly, it’s M to Z. Then all the lenses are adapted to M, and presto, ancient lenses are now autofocus. 🙂 So I don’t use peaking or magnification.
 
I find the Z5 to be about the same size as the M9 when handling. If you put a Grip on the M9- even closer. I keep the half case on the M9 for better grip. I do like the grip on the Z5. I also have the M240 with EVF- but did not do that for the comparison.
RIMG0247S.jpgRIMG0249s.jpgRIMG0250.JPGCanon50F095_1.jpgCanon50F095_2.jpg
 
I'm surprised by how much I like the Z5. Having cursed EVFs for years, the Z5's EVF was a jolt. I still prefer OVFs but I can actually use this camera's finder more than adequately. It's a much better base for MF lenses than my much loved Fujis. AF Nikkors (other than the screw drive models) function perfectly with the FTZII adapter and the cheap and plasticky Z-mount Nikkor 40/2 and 28/2.8 are quite good. What's not to love?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom