Nikon FTZ screw-mount lens adapter?

[chambeshi]

Dark corner of a bookcase - 1/15, f5.6, ISO25600.

The 70-180 Micro-Nikkor hunts until it manages to 'find' the lettering on the spines. AF of the 85 f1.4AFD is far better

Okay, thanks for the information, it's good to know.

How is autofocus in live view in lower light, e.g., indoors in available light?

[F2F3F6]

Zoom 700VR / 700VR QD =Zoom Touch 105 VR QD
 https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0035/index.htm

Yes I know, Eric, (thanks for information): I once had the 700VR as a notebook-camera, not bad at all (with 200 or 400 Iso C41 Fuji Xtra 200 or 400) !

[MILLIREHM]

Dark corner of a bookcase - 1/15, f5.6, ISO25600.

The 70-180 Micro-Nikkor hunts until it manages to 'find' the lettering on the spines. AF of the 85 f1.4AFD is far better

I would say the camera hunts with the 70-180 Micro, guess the speed of the lens makes the difference to the 85mm f/1,4 D AF

[jborg]

Some highly prized Nikkor lenses such as the AF-S 105 f1.4 do not have the real fastest (and expensive) ultrasonic ring motors, they use relatively cheaper and smaller gear motors. This one is even shared with a budget zoom lens of Nikon (I don't remember right now), and I've read of some less sought Nikkor AF-S lenses that have much better and faster motors than the one used by the expensive AF-S 105 f1.4.
The teardown that clarifies some hypes of Nikon advertising being untrue is here
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
All in all, it's not always true that AF-S is so much better than the old screwdriver AF 

[richardHaw]

I prefer the screw-drive as it's one less thing that gets broken in the long run

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Some highly prized Nikkor lenses such as the AF-S 105 f1.4 do not have the real fastest (and expensive) ultrasonic ring motors, they use relatively cheaper and smaller gear motors. This one is even shared with a budget zoom lens of Nikon (I don't remember right now), and I've read of some less sought Nikkor AF-S lenses that have much better and faster motors than the one used by the expensive AF-S 105 f1.4.
The teardown that clarifies some hypes of Nikon advertising being untrue is here
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/12/taking-apart-the-new-nikon-105mm-f1-4e-ed-af-s/
All in all, it's not always true that AF-S is so much better than the old screwdriver AF 

The 105/1.4 AF-S does focus very consistently (partly because it has less LoCA, I believe, and a sharp image) on D5/D6, but on my (earlier D810) and D850 it is a bit sluggish and doesn't keep up with a moving subject all that well; on a standing or sitting person either works well. With earlier lenses such as 105 DC or 85/1.4 AF-S or 85/1.4D AF, I don't get such high consistency of in-focus images at f/1.4 as I do with the 105/1.4. I've even had as high percentages as 99% of images in focus on the eye (I counted) with the D5.

But yes, the motor isn't as fast as e.g. the AF-S f/2.8 zooms. What I'm more interested is "are the images in focus?" And for that the 105/1.4 does very well for me, I would say it's one of the best lenses I've used in that respect. AF fine tuning, however, is required on all these fast primes.

I don't know what it is about the D8x0 that it can't keep up with a person walking towards a camera with fast primes, but this is my experience, whereas with the single-digit bodies it can with the 105/1.4 specifically. With the f/2.8 telezooms, all my cameras keep up with a approaching subject quite easily, even at 45 MP level I've had excellent results with the 70-200/2.8 E in the case of the D850.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

I prefer the screw-drive as it's one less thing that gets broken in the long run

For me I've observed a dramatic improvement in having eyes in focus in head and shoulder portraits going from 85/1.4 D to 85/1.4 G AF-S to 105/1.4, each step being substantially more consistent than the previous. I also found that with the AF-S lenses, it's easier to avoid the camera focusing on the eyeglasses and get focus on the eye itself, without too much trouble. I have never had an SWM fail so far.

Other than precise focus, I did love the 85/1.4 D AF Nikkor, it gives wonderful, richly coloured, beautiful images. However, the improvement in the consistency of AF led me to use and prefer the newer lenses.

[Erik Lund]

The 'focus speed' of the f/1.4 lenses are on purpose set to focus at a relative slow pace as to be able to catch a precise focus.
The fast Pro zooms f/2.8 and long Pro type tele lenses have more depth of focus so a little more forgiving to achieve precise enough focus wide open.
When attached the TC-20E also forces the camera to focus at a more slow pace. This can be disabled by 'breaking' the last of the pin connections.

[richardHaw]

The 'focus speed' of the f/1.4 lenses are on purpose set to focus at a relative slow pace as to be able to catch a precise focus.
The fast Pro zooms f/2.8 and long Pro type tele lenses have more depth of focus so a little more forgiving to achieve precise enough focus wide open.
When attached the TC-20E also forces the camera to focus at a more slow pace. This can be disabled by 'breaking' the last of the pin connections.

that's the reason why the 50/1.4G is so slow...I hated that lens, never owned one. tried one from a friend when it first came out and stayed with my 50/1.4D

[Erik Lund]

that's the reason why the 50/1.4G is so slow...I hated that lens, never owned one. tried one from a friend when it first came out and stayed with my 50/1.4D

Yes a perfect example where the old AF-D version is superior to a later AF-S version for; AF speed, usability and fully on par with IQ

[richardHaw]

Yes a perfect example where the old AF-D version is superior to a later AF-S version for; AF speed, usability and fully on par with IQ

bokeh is cleaner, too. that was the first thing i noticed

[F2F3F6]

With earlier lenses such as 105 DC or 85/1.4 AF-S or 85/1.4D AF, I don't get such high consistency of in-focus images at f/1.4 as I do with the 105/1.4.

Well, Ikka, seems normal to me for the AFD 105 that you can't get high consistency of in-focus images at 1,4...because it's a 2/105 !

But, it's true for these AFD 2/105 and 1,4/85 that in-focus consistency is far from 100% (I've got some 10% images more or less that are not precisely in-focus at full aperture).