Can Nikon Dx Lens Be Used On A Nikon Mirrorless Camera

 Sign In  Sign upwardly
 Forums
-  All Recent Discussions
-  General Photography
-  Images
-  Exercise & Technique
-  Equipment
-  Site & Forum Help
 Learn
-  How-To
-  Inspiration
-  Gear
-  Concern
-  News
 Explore
-  Browse by Categories
-  Trending
-  Editors' Picks
-  Seeking Critique
-  Photo Of The Day
-  Photo Of The Calendar week
-  Photograph Contests
-  Shop

Hi Everyone,
I'thousand exploring the world of "mirrorless" and come up up with some questions, please enlighten me with your thoughts! I shoot with 2 Nikon DX bodies and got lenses like 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 17-55mm, 80-200mm etc. From a youtube clip, I've got the idea that whatever Nikon lens tin exist mount on Nikon mirrorless with an adapter! Now my question is since these new cameras come upward with large sensor in a small trunk, therefore, can Dx lens exist mount on mirrorless? is ther whatsoever crop cistron or whatsoever other event?

my two other questions are, why should I buy mirrorless over Dslr? (except that overweight factor) and how practiced is Nikon mirrorless Z series? Please advise. Thanks in advance. Raihan.
I tin can't speak to the Nikon mirrorless bodies. Nonetheless, I've been using another brand's mirrorless body for several years and in addition to its autofocus lenses, I am able to apply all of my Nikon, Canon, Leica. Yashica (Y/C), and Tamron lenses using the proper adapters. There is a crop factor on nigh mirrorless bodies. One advantage of that crop factor is that some of the aberations which typically occur well-nigh the edges of images taken with those lenses on their original SLR/DSLR bodies, don't occur because the sensors are just using a smaller portion of the glass - basically the central area of the lens. Mirrorless vs DSLR - I'd say it depends on what y'all exercise with your pictures. If you're mostly using the internet, not printing the images 16x20 inches or greater, a good mirrorless body tin can do fine, and near have features similar to DSLRs. If you're going for large prints or exhibition prints, you lot might prefer a DSLR .
I know with Canon mirrorless you can mount whatsoever Canon DSLR lens on a mirrorless with an adapter then I would assume the aforementioned with Nikon
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless
@SCL- i do mostly weddings, thanks to you and Brett.
Using DX lenses on the Nikon full-frame Z series cameras would exist a total waste material of time. The smaller prototype circle would effectively give you no better resolution than a 24 megapixel DX camera, and that'south with the Z7. The Z6 cuts that resolution in half over again.
However, you have at least three lenses that will properly comprehend full-frame, and those should be fully useable. Except there accept been reports of junior AF performance using adapted lenses. And of course you won't get the angle-of-view that y'all're used to with those lenses - it'll be much wider.
- Only you tin answer that.
Will it salvage weight and size? Hardly, when you add in the bulk and weight of the necessary adapter.
- Ask that again in about 6 months, when plenty real users, not paid reviewers, have found the bugs and positives.
Personally, I remember you'd exist crazy to trust any newly-released and relatively untried product as your income-earning tool. And even if it works out OK, the outlay on a adequately overpriced organization is going to take some while to compensate.
This is the age onetime Nikon marketing smoke and mirrors.
The F mountain itself has remained unchanged and in theory, any F mount lens will mount in any F mountain camera and the FTZ adapter.
However, there are many compatibility issues, of what F lens can exist put onto what dSLR. This is and so bad that you lot have to consult a compatibility nautical chart when buying a lens for your camera, or buying a new camera to encounter if all your lenses volition work on it.

Now to the question of putting a F lens onto a Z camera via the FTZ adapter.
Starting time you take to know which of your lenses are FX/FF and which are DX.
The FX lenses take a larger image circumvolve which volition cover the Z sensor.
The DX lens has a smaller image circle that volition Non embrace the unabridged Z sensor. You have to use DX lenses in DX way.
As for your lenses:

Your 35 could exist a DX or FX lens.
Your 50 is probably FX
Your 17-55 is DX
Your lxxx-200 is FX
This only addresses coverage of the Z sensor.
To me it makes no sense to utilise a DX lens on a Z camera in DX style. Y'all should be using all FX or Z lenses, then you tin operate in FX style.
The other thing is lens coupling and autofocus.
The FTZ adapter will simply autofocus with an AF-S lens.

It will NOT couple a mechanical autofocus lens to a Z camera. The AF and AF-D lenses will Not autofocus. So if your 80-200 is non an AF-South lens, you lot volition have to manually focus it. Same with the 35 and 50.
Main advantage of mirrorless camera is in their emplementation of video, you ever in life view style unlike DSLR, otherwise it is pretty much the same. Information technology is a bit lighter if you apply native lens, with adaptive lens weight deviation insignificant and autofocus ability is limited. I am using Sony A72 and Nikon DSLR's.
Mirrorless cameras have many advantages over DSLRs, besides size and weight.
- Precise auto focus - the sensors are in the image plane
- Precise motorcar exposure - the sensors are in the image plane
- Augmented transmission focus - peaking (and so-so) and digital magnification
- Quiet operation - no mirror to make noise, quiet or even silent (electronic) shutter operation
- Continual live view - both eye level and rear brandish
- Vivid finder at all ambient light levels
- High resolution - fifty-fifty 24 MP is more than than most DSLRs possess.
- Face recognition (for both AF and AE)
- Eye focusing
Where mirrorless suffers is in bombardment life, due to the small available infinite and loftier overhead of the finder. That said, the new Sony battery is twice equally large every bit the old version, and the cameras take 40% less power. I routinely get 8 hours or more and over 600 single frames ( potentially thousands if shot at 20 fps).
- DSLRs wake upwards faster, nearly instantly for a Nikon, but up to i second for a Sony A9. The work-around is to actuate the camera every bit you enhance it to middle level.
- There are more than long prime number lenses for DSLRs (300 mm and upwards), important for sports and nature photography.
- DSLRs have less apparent blackout when shooting (the Sony A9 excepted).
- Better conditions-proofing
Comments on the above list. Quite a few DSLRs have resolutions >24MP (Canon 6DII, 5DIV, 5Ds, Nikon D850 etc). Precise machine exposure-can't encounter whatever difference here betwixt the systems. DSLRs besides take "continuous live view" via the optical viewfinder, but it is not chosen a fancy name. I do not find face recognition or eye focusing that globe shattering - OK if in that location is a single bailiwick in the frame, simply otherwise I don't discover them very useful. Many DSLRs take "serenity manner"- admittedly not as silent equally a full electronic shutter, but perfectly OK. An reward of mirrorless over a DSLR is the nearly 100% frame AF coverage.
The tiresome outset up time and difficulty shooting at fast frame rates are the main issues with mirrorless, as is the poor battery life. But obviously this is where the market is going. The weight issue is non such a big deal. The cameras are smaller, but the organisation as a whole is not, unless you get for a smaller format (APS, m43) which is certainly worth thinking nearly.
- DSLR's which have live view (from the sensor) distinguish it from conventional view through the optical finder.
- Flagship DSLR'south nonetheless hover at about 20 MP. Nikon and Canon have conceded to marketplace demands with ~fifty MP sensors in the D850 and 5Ds, but without lenses to friction match.
- Confront recognition is very useful when shooting live events in the presence of distracting elements (microphones, furniture) which are closer than the subject area
- Eye focus is extremely useful for portraits. For some reason, it will track a bee in flight around flowers
- "Silent" way for a DSLR means slower winding - less noise (perhaps) for a longer time. "Silent" for a mirrorless camera means silent. The aperture is the loudest affair you hear. Even AF is quiet, nearly silent compared to the click and whir of AF-S
- If you call up fast frame rates are a problem with mirrorless, you haven't tried a Sony A9 at 20 fps, with tracking that follows a bailiwick off screen and then recovers when information technology reappears. If tracking has a fault, it is being too "viscous" in the A9. Even the A7Riii is no slacker, at 12 fps at 42 MP per frame.
- A 400/2.viii, or even a 70-200/iv on a MILC is a lens with an attached photographic camera. A Sony with a Loxia lens is Leica-sized, but quieter, with an accurate viewfinder. It's even smaller than the F3, which is pretty modest to begin with.
I hear that SLR's accept been banned from the Oval Office in favor of MILC's because of the distracting racket. That may become the standard for official newsers, if not photo ops.
DSLR's which have live view (from the sensor) distinguish information technology from conventional view through the optical finder.
Yes, but y'all are still seeing the image in existent time and without the need for battery power

Confront recognition is very useful when shooting alive events in the presence of distracting elements (microphones, piece of furniture) which are closer than the subject

Truthful but not an earth shattering development. What happens when there are a lot of faces?

"Silent" mode for a DSLR means slower winding - less dissonance (perhaps) for a longer time. "Silent" for a mirrorless camera means silent. The aperture is the loudest affair you hear. Even AF is quiet, nearly silent compared to the click and whir of AF-S

I never commented about the Sony A9: that is indeed the exception, simply currently it is the only exception. Even with a cheap DSLR you get good rapid shooting.

A Sony with a Loxia lens is Leica-sized, just quieter, with an accurate viewfinder. Information technology's even smaller than the F3, which is pretty small to begin with.

You lot are cherry picking an expensive prime number manual focus lenses to represent the whole course of lenses. Overall the differences are not neat in my opinion. The bodies are smaller, just the lenses in general are not.
None of the DSLR manufacturers conflate "Live View" in the manner y'all advise. The EFV updates at 120 fps, and there is no flicker or blackout if the shutter speed is ane/125 or faster.
You can use the joy stick, 4-way, or simply touch the screen to select the confront on which you desire to focus. You can as well use a head shot to designate specific faces, which will be automatically selected in preference to faces in full general.
Tracking is every bit good in the A7iii and A7Riii equally in the A9. They're just not as fast in continuous shooting. Canikon flagship DSLR's top out at 12 fps, the same as the Sony A7Riii.
They're far cheaper than Leica lenses. There are several minor kit lenses for Sony too, but AF, focus-by-wire, and lesser build quality. If you want Leica image quality and handling on a Sony, and then Loxia lenses are a bargain.
Look! I think all mirrorless cameras are headed in the same direction. I'one thousand nearly familiar with Sony cameras, so I use them as examples. It will take Nikon and Canon time to take hold of up, merely Sony won't stand up all the same in the meantime.