Third-party lenses for Nikon Z (or similar) cameras

[Birna Rørslett]

A a direct consequence of the mirrorless designs, many lenses  could be adapted and allow the intrepid user an in-depth experimentation. A trend these days is the proliferation of third-party *new* lenses mainly of Chinese origin for the mirrorless systems. often they are delivered with mount for Nikon Z, Sony E,  Fuji, Canon R, m4/3, or Panasonic-Leica L. Not all offerings provide the whole range of mounts, though.

What is most interesting with these products, apart from the often rather low price, is the exciting new optical designs allowing ultra-ultra-wide, macro or specialised lenses. Many have good to excellent optical performance despite the lower price and build quality and workmanship can be surprisingly good as well.

Some of the new product lines offer full electronic compatibility including AF with Nikon, Sony, etc. Other operate as manual only with no communication to the camera, which may or may not be an issue for the end user.

I invite NG members and supports to share their experiences with such lenses for their cameras. Myself I have optics from Viltrox, Laowa, Meike, Miitakon and probably some additional brands I have lost track of. Voigtländer (made by Cosina in Japan) APO-Lanthars aspire to being legendary, however since the co-operation of Cosina and Nikon is almost official, these lenses  (in native Z mount) come in an intermediate position as far as third-party vs. native maker's line-up is concerned.

[Birna Rørslett]

From the Voigtländer Z-mount line I have the 35mm f/1.2 Nokton DX and the APO-Lanthar 65mm f/2. Both are excellent performers and are fully compatible to the Z system. Thus they deliver full EXIF information which I personally find beneficial.

The 65/2 APO-Lanthar is super sharp, with an almost perfectly flat field of view and high contrast, already set wide open. It doubles as a fast lens for cityscapes and landscapes too. The build and workmanship are first class, although I find the all-black 'Kiwi' appearance on the dull side and would wish for more colourful details such as those of the little 35/1.2. The latter, being a DX lens, can be used on the FX cameras as well as it does not lock the hosting camera into 'DX' mode. Most DX lenses with electronic communication do that which is a small nuisance if the end user wants to explore the entire projected image circle.

The 35/1.2 is pretty sharp even at f/1.2, but there is field curvature and quite visible barrel distortion of objects at near distance. Contrast is reduced by vestiges of internal flare. Stopping down evens out the field and increases image contrast, but of course will not influence the geometric distortion.

I frequently use the 35/1.2 Nokton on the Z9 as the combination is neat and unobtrusive and the DX file size from this camera is large enough for most purposes. In fact, using DX lenses on the Z9 is a regular option for my work if I don't need the 45MPix files.

Two examples below. First, 65/2 APO-Lanthar on Z fc, then 35/1.2 Nokton on Z9

[paul hofseth]

As an invetrate chepskate I very seldom buy optics as new, hence on my Nikon 7 with a library of mechanical adapters I use my old Nikon, Zeiss, Kinoptik, Angenieux, Leitz/Leica stuff which as far as the M-lenses go are very compact and reasonably good (including a summicron,  cosina/ringfotos  90mm apolanthar  and their tiny 25mm). The R-rom lenses are much fatter and heavier, and the old Apomacro-elmarit is the sharpest of them. The Leitz rom-apoextender works well when (rarely) utilized even if the electric contacts are useless. My perhaps  modest requitrements are that my snaps should be sharp enought o  allow "100% enlarged" views on my screen. The conclusion is that optics made by competent designers and fabricators are well worth aquiring.

Lately  i have relied much more on using Birnas Z-native 24-70- with a wide angle in a pocket to avoid lugging more optics around  The wide is the Zeiss 18mm and occasionally the Fisheye Elmarit 16mm designed by Minolta. For snaps of birds in my garden the apotelyt 180 and the almost as good Angeneux serves well when I cannot get my ancient Novoflex pigriff to work properly.(When framing and enlargements of small details is less important  and compactness and weight matters I put a small LeitzX2 camera in a pocket although ist 28mm is reasonably sharp and flarefree its lack of a sunshade is annoying).

In sum, the focus enlargement mechanism of the N7 and its ability to handle low light enables one to use old slow and sharp optics and not go broke by buying new (unsharp) highspeed stuff and my only gripe is its unruly controls (easly inadvertently shifted).

p.

[Birna Rørslett]

The Laowa lenses in my possession are as follows; 24mm f/14 Probe 2X, Ultra-Macro 25mm f/2.8 2.5-5X, 100mm f/2.8 Macro 2X, 9mm f/5.6, and 11mm f/4.5. The first four are in F-mount and the two wide-angles are native Z. I have added CPU to the F-mount lenses so they also can communicate with the Z bodies through the FTZ/FTZ.2 adapters. Alas the Z-mount lenses are all purely manual and lack electronics to give correct EXIF data.

The Probe 24 is kind of weird with its long snout which can stand submersion and sports a built-in water-tight LED ring light. It goes to twice life-size and is rather darkish at its effective f/14 to f/40 apertures. Focusing is smooth through a manual collar to the rear, but focusing travel is very short so easy to overshoot the target. The EVF isn't always great for focusing at these small effective apertures anyway, unless the scene is bright. Image sharpness is OK but not stellar and my guess is this lens is primarily targetted for video and cine applications. Anyway the 24 Probe is fun to work with after its idiosyncrasies are mastered. By the way, Laowa is now replacing this lens with the new and 'brighter' 24mm T8, which adds even more advanced features (and carries a substantially higher price too).

Dandelions (Z30 + 24/14) and Greater Duckweeds (Z6 + 24/14) illustrate the use of this lens,

[Akira]

The Laowa lenses in my possession are as follows; 24mm f/14 Probe 2X, Ultra-Macro 25mm f/2.8 2.5-5X, 100mm f/2.8 Macro 2X, 9mm f/5.6, and 11mm f/4.5. The first four are in F-mount and the two wide-angles are native Z. I have added CPU to the F-mount lenses so they also can communicate with the Z bodies through the FTZ/FTZ.2 adapters. Alas the Z-mount lenses are all purely manual and lack electronics to give correct EXIF data.

The Probe 24 is kind of weird with its long snout which can stand submersion and sports a built-in water-tight LED ring light. It goes to twice life-size and is rather darkish at its effective f/14 to f/40 apertures. Focusing is smooth through a manual collar to the rear, but focusing travel is very short so easy to overshoot the target. The EVF isn't always great for focusing at these small effective apertures anyway, unless the scene is bright. Image sharpness is OK but not stellar and my guess is this lens is primarily targetted for video and cine applications. Anyway the 24 Probe is fun to work with after its idiosyncrasies are mastered. By the way, Laowa is now replacing this lens with the new and 'brighter' 24mm T8, which adds even more advanced features (and carries a substantially higher price too).

Dandelions (Z30 + 24/14) and Greater Duckweeds (Z6 + 24/14) illustrate the use of this lens,

I've always loved these types of wideangle closeup images of extreme DOF since I had read your classic article here:

http://www.naturfotograf.com/roll_your_own_lens.html

[Alaun]

The Laowa 24 is a lens to have fun

 

[Birna Rørslett]

The 'fun' aspect of the Laowa Probe 24mm f/14 is undeniable. However, the sibling Laowa 25mm f/2.8 Ultra-Macro 2.5-5X is a true workhorse if you are into studio photomacrography. The range 2.5 to 5X life-size is very useful for many natural subjects and I have used the lens very extensively for the last 5-6 years, in conjunction with my Aquatic Plant Project.

The lens is quite small, but extends significantly when the magnification is increased. There is no focusing as such, only a collar to change magnification. The lens is *not* parfocal across its magnification range thus needs to be carefully focused for a given shoot, preferable mounted on a sturdy focusing rail or suchlike setup. Getting the required depth of field at these magnifications is futile just by stopping down the lens, thus focus stacking is the obvious approach and the one used exclusively in my work with the 25 Laowa. At the short end of focusing, f/4 delivers excellent sharpness, whilst at 5X it is preferred to set the aperture to f/2.8. The sharpness is quite good to excellent and despite the lack of ED elements, chromatic nasties are rarely an issue. However, for motifs that are partly submersed such I often encounter, the refractive properties of the air-water surface will introduced some visible colour fringing. Judicious placement of the light source(s) can mitigate the CA to some extent, though, but retouching may be required later. One cannot really blame this on the lens as it is  the physical nature of the subject, rather than the optical properties of the lens, that bring forth the chromatic issues. Any lens in the same situation will encounter a similar problem.

So far, so good. Below is the setup I use with the Laowa 25 mm f/2.8 lens. There is a (cheap) cute LED ring light that can be added to the front of the lens and powered by USB (PC or powerbank). However, due to the danger of added reflection in the water interface, I rarely use the ring light.

As shown, the camera + lens is at an angle to the subject. More often I use the setup in a vertical orientation, many times with the fibre optic cables proving backlighting to the subject. Working distance is several cm and the narrow snout of the lens makes lighting the subject easy.

[Birna Rørslett]

Just allow me a couple of images taken with the Laowa Ultra-Macro 25mm f/2.8. Most are purely documentary thus not visually very interesting. So just these examples from the world of duckweeds Lemna.  People knowing me are familiar with my duckweed affinity I'm well aware this interest is not common-place. Unfortunately as duckweeds see a staggering range of practical and commercial use these days, even in the space programs. However those are tales best reserved for a rainy day.

Magnifications 2.5 to 5X here.

Duckweed anatomy and concepts (2.5X), duckweed with the very elusive fruit development (5X); the fruit develops in one of the budding pouches to the rear of the mother frond

[Akira]

Just allow me a couple of images taken with the Laowa Ultra-Macro 25mm f/2.8. Most are purely documentary thus not visually very interesting. So just these examples from the world of duckweeds Lemna.  People knowing me are familiar with my duckweed affinity I'm well aware this interest is not common-place. Unfortunately as duckweeds see a staggering range of practical and commercial use these days, even in the space programs. However those are tales best reserved for a rainy day.

Magnifications 2.5 to 5X here.

Duckweed anatomy and concepts (2.5X), duckweed with the very elusive fruit development (5X); the fruit develops in one of the budding pouches to the rear of the mother frond

Amazing images, as always, Birna!  Are they stacked images?

[Birna Rørslett]

Yes, both are. The duckweed anatomy lesson is probably 8-10 frames, whilst the last one showing the fruit is approx. 60 frames.

[Akira]

Yes, both are. The duckweed anatomy lesson is probably 8-10 frames, whilst the last one showing the fruit is approx. 60 frames.

Thank you for the disclosure.  I always enjoy these extremely detailed images of the plants!

[Erik Lund]

Very very impressive images! Much appreciated also to include picture of the camera/lens setup

[Birna Rørslett]

For access to the domain of *wide* angle lenses, I have the Laowa 9mm f/5.6 and 11mm f/4.5. Both are manual lenses, quite compact,  and built with nice workmanship. Their diagonal angle of view is 135 and 126 degrees, respectively (FX); on DX, they still are very wide at 113 and 104 degrees. Such wide views are notoriously tricky to translate into effective visualisations -- my experiences of course. However one can always crop (sic) later

Unfortunately there is no electronics inside so to get useful EXIF information, one has to enter appropriate information to the camera. Only Z9, at present, allows an exact lens specification, whilst for the other Nikons, the focal lengths have to be fudged. I set the 9mm as either 8 or 10mm, depending on the camera, and the 11mm to 13mm most of the time. My database will do its best to disentangle the information later to identify the lens correctly, but I must admit, the Z9 after the latest firmware makes the job much easier. Wish something similar comes to the other Nikons in due time. After all, the Olympus for ages has a setup similar to Z9 as far as describing third-party lenses is concerned. 

OK, enough whining. The 11mm f/4.5 Laowa has 62mm filter thread so one can, with some fingerspitsengefühl mount filter to it (the lens hood is permanently affixed and narrow). For the 9mm lens, one can set up ad hoc solutions with rear-mounted filters, however that usually involves either cut-to-size gel filters, or slim and small filters held in position by a drop of glue(!).  Still, doable if you are careful and don't swap lenses too frequently.

Some examples follow below, the first 2 with the 11mm f/4.5 lens on DX (Z50), next 2 is IR with FX(Z5), the last is 9mm f/5.6 on FX (Z5).  I love using such wide lenses for IR photography, in case anyone wonders.

[Thomas Stellwag]

Tamron AF 70-300 mm DI III RXD. Looking for a travel lens, I bought the Tamron.  It is only usable on full frame cameras, as it has no stabilizer. Got it today and did some test shots in my town. I am satisfied with the results for such a small and cheap lens, which will be in my bag, using the same space as my 24-120mm, while being less heavy.

[pluton]

I acquired a new TT Artisans 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye lens in Nikon Z mount.
Quick summary:
Imaging quality is as good, or nearly as good as the old favorite Nikon Fisheye-Nikkor 16/3.5 F/K/Ai.
It's moderately wider than the old 16/3.5. 
Heavy---weighs about 50 grams more than 16/3.5 + FTZ.
Focus/aperture rings turn opposite to Nikon and are heavily damped.  Stiff is the word I'd use to describe it at 20ºC.  May loosen in hot temps, may stiffen even more in cold temps.
Z mount good, very slight rotational play when mounted.  No data comms between lens and body.
Focus markings inaccurate but might be internally adjustable.  I added marks on the barrel for common distances.
Some buyer reviews report a loose front element; mine was barely tight, which I fixed with a point-tip spanner.
I wanted a "suicide lens" for video shooting where the more expensive/harder to replace Nikon 16/3.5 might get damaged.  This lens will work for that purpose.
Below, some example shots, all at f/8 or f/11;
Tripod mounted comparison 11/2.8 then 16/3.5,
Screen shot enlargements showing  a bit more flare on the 11/2.8,
A CU of my paint marks on the focus ring (R to L: ∞, 15', 10',5'),
then some other casual snap shots.  Shot on Z7II and Z6II.