The Lens Adapter Nikon REFUSED to Build

[David H. Hartman]

Personally I'd be happy with a "Z" equivalent of a D500

Unless a Z replacement for the D500 was substantially less expensive than the Z8 the Z8 makes an excellent replacement for the D500 as well as the D850.

At this point in time I see no advantage in DX as one can always crop an FX NEF deeply and if shooting JPG(s) where DX is desired the camera can be switched to DX capture mode.

If a Z replacement for the D500 was smaller than the Z8 the controls and function buttons would suffer.

Dave

[MILLIREHM]

More useful info about "reach"
& different ways to achieve it - thank you Les

Well, yes it's more affordable.
I would probably spend $7,000 differently though

If you compare the portability, weight & size of a D500 plus equivalent lens, it would probably cost less and be more portable out in the field than this 800mm and a Z8.

Of course, i appreciate that this thread has morphed into a discussion on whether Nikon has given us better options nowadays, compared to those from design decisions made decades ago.

Personally I'd be happy with a "Z" equivalent of a D500

Nikon was in a very difficult economic situation a few years ago and the Z-System was late, so we profit now from a very cheap 800/6,3 lens and dont forget the Z9 was offered 1000 Euro cheaper than the D6.
I was a heavy D500 user and frequently preferred it over the D850 (switched to DX mode when needed with a unique viefwinder surround visibility not available in the D6). One of the advantages of the D500 was the larger area of the image that was covered by the AF sensor as well. With the Z-System the situation has changed a bit. I can use Z9 and Z8 in FX/DX switch mode (the viewfinder adapts automatically which has pros and cons) and I am not sure whether I would buy a Z500 since its advantages are more limited. For me it would depend whether it is smaller and more ligthweight than the Z8 but share its control-layout and funcionality (like the ability to set EV values  in full stops). A control layout like the Z6/7 series is a reason for exclusion (like it was the case with the Z6III).

i appreciate the discussion as well but I am coming back that an adapter like described would be good for us and Nikons image, would most likely never happen (especially when Nikon is facing losses again and the market is shrinking) but this is not arguable on a pure rational level.

[Les Olson]

So there are pieces of gear that do not sell in numbers but make users dream, make them more attuned to Nikon, make them believe they belong to the communitiy of thoseusing the best camera system and such like. So now coming back to our desired advanced FTZ adapter Nikon could have made anengineering  marvel out of it and make headline and show that they uncomparably support their long-term users and value the Nikon gear they have bought in the past. It wont address the mass market I would certainly buy one or two of those and I certainly would not be alone.

BTW: You did write Z6 but mean the F6 or D6 I guess.

F6.

I would certainly applaud Nikon for making an engineering marvel regardless of its sales potential - not being either a stockholder or employee of Nikon it does not bother me if they lose a million or two.

However, if demonstrating support for long-term users is what is needed for Nikon's brand, an AF-D capable FTZ won't do it. The reason is that there are two issues for the usability of products more than a few years old: one, less important, is backward compatibility, and the other, more important, is spare parts availability. An AF-D capable FTZ won't help when the lens you bought to use it with develops a fault and can't be repaired. What would demonstrate a genuine commitment to long-term users is long-term spare parts availability.