Adapter thread. The new Lords of the Rings.

[simsurace]

Your latter assumption is correct.

Don't forget to include space for the lens release lever to move and work in your calculations. There is no way one could make an independent extension as short as 4mm for the Z. Consider the K1 for F is 5.8mm and the Z mount will need more.

If one allows replacing the original mount on the lens side, much narrower values could be reached, but then we have a bespoke modification of the lens, not an extension ring.

I don't really need such a ring myself, I'm just interested in the challenge 

The release lever is optional, if one is willing to take the lens off the camera in order to remove the extension ring. Everything depends on how important these things are to Michael  . I'm thinking that the ring would be for use on a wide-angle lens...?

[Birna Rørslett]

How will you be able to remove a lens  when there is extension without any release attached to it? The extension has to be locked to the lens otherwise there is a risk the lens will fall off by itself.* The camera can only help in the first of two necessary steps, that of releasing lens + extension.* been there more than once in my experimental setups. Never a nice experience.

[Jack Dahlgren]

How will you be able to remove a lens  when there is extension without any release attached to it? The extension has to be locked to the lens otherwise there is a risk the lens will fall off by itself.* The camera can only help in the first of two necessary steps, that of releasing lens + extension.* been there more than once in my experimental setups. Never a nice experience.

One could make a blind pin which is retractable from the camera side of the adapter. You would not be able to remove while mounted, but after removal from the camera the pin (perhaps on a flat spring) could be released. Think of the K1 without the tab.

[simsurace]

Or a small set screw...

[Birna Rørslett]

The modification of the mount on the lens would be easier. But I guess we are looking at this from different perspectives. If you pursue your idea further, do ensure a full coverage is given on NG

[simsurace]

I completely agree, modifying the lens is probably much simpler.

[Luc]

My K&F F to Z adapter had arrived. Very solid, good value for money. And looks and handles much better with manual lenses than the clunky FTZ.

[Birna Rørslett]

I have several of the K&F Concept adapters for Nik(RF)-Nik(Z), which are very good. As virtually all my F-mount lenses are "chipped", I normally stick with the FTZ to get full advantage of the lens CPU. If I do find alternatives with pass-through contacts, I'll consider them as well.

The FTZ does feel a bit "clunky", but otherwise is very well built. I had hoped for a version without the tripod mount platform though as this sometimes interferes with handling.

[Frank Fremerey]

I want to use my 1.4/50 Zuiko with the Z6. Which adapter is the best for the purpose? I'd like to have the aperture communicated to the camera if possible...

[Birna Rørslett]

An eBay search on "Olympus OM lens to nikon z" brings up dozens of adapters. Just take your pick. Note these are "dumb" adapter so no communication to the camera, as usually is the mirrorless reality. A throwback to the early '60s in that respect

[Akira]

I want to use my 1.4/50 Zuiko with the Z6. Which adapter is the best for the purpose? I'd like to have the aperture communicated to the camera if possible...

Doesn't Z6 meter with the adapted MF lens in M or A mode?

[Birna Rørslett]

Yes, it does. But you have no indication of what aperture is used, and since it's step-down "technology", the EVF becomes difficult to use if you stop down too far. It is this very area in which the superiority of an OVF is best seen.

[MEPER]

I am still in the Nikon-F world so no Z-adapters/rings so far...….but I had a look at some of my rings/adapters...….

BR-5 and BR-2A is probably was most Nikon users has.
Then I have a T2 adapter for F-mount, a 42 to 40.5 mm ring, a 42 to 39 mm ring and a 40.5 mm reversing adapter to be used for e.g. a 50/2.8 EL-Nikkor.
The large Nikon adapter (L-F) is a F-mount to 39mm adapter. Think the "L" stands for "Leica" and adapter was intended for Leica Visoflex lenses to be mounted on Nikon F-body....but I am not 100% sure. I don't know either if Leica Visoflex lenses is something you would consider…...but adapter can be used for other purposes if you can live with the extra spacing. A very well-made adapter.

[MEPER]

Seem image was missing...…..try again…….

[Akira]

Yes, it does. But you have no indication of what aperture is used, and since it's step-down "technology", the EVF becomes difficult to use if you stop down too far. It is this very area in which the superiority of an OVF is best seen.

As the individual eye is part of the optical system of the viewfinder, OVF or EVF, it is impossible to generalize.  That said, I struggled with the OVF (my last experience with one was D750) with slow lenses even wide open (like Ai20/4.0 or AF-P DX 10-30/4.5-5.6) in dim situations.  The EVF image will be grainy and jumpy in similar situations, but so far as the usability (at least to me) is concerned, an EVF or LCD wins.