(Relatively) Inexpensive F-mount Lenses To Adapt?

[BlueBomberTurbo]

Picked up a V3 and EVF recently, along with a decentered 10/2.8 (got refunded and got to keep it). Looking to add a few F-mount AF-S/AF-P lenses via FT-1, as well as the 18.5, 10-30 PD, and a good copy of the 10. Tops on my list are the 70-300 AF-P DX VR for birding and 40/2.8 AF-S DX Micro for flowers/plants/etc. Might snag an 18-55 AF-P VR to throw in my car for scenery or things that pop up, as well. Any other recommended adapted lenses out there that work well with the V3?

 

[RichDitch]

The 18.5 and the 10-30 PD are very nice lenses for your V3. I use these two all the time for lots of things and especially for our indoor cats. They are small, in keeping with the V3 and the other N1 bodies, and give excellent image quality.

The DX 40/2.8 macro is also something use on my N1 cameras via the FT1. It is a relatively small and light lens that fits the N1 system and fills a whole in the N1 lineup. I also have the DX 85/3.5 macro and use it with the FT1 where I want a greater working distance.

Many N1 users have the 70-300 AF-P DX VR as a substitute for the wonderful CX 70-300 and find it serves their needs at a substantial cost savings. Reportedly it isn't as sharp past 200mm and it appears to have color fringing issues that need to be addressed in post processing, but I have no direct experience with that lens.

An 18-55 is also small and light, and there are many used ones available at modest cost. I haven't paid attention to them but I suspect the later versions with VR would make a decent short tele zoom. The more recent versions of the 55-200 with VR would be an obvious purchase as well.

"Relatively inexpensive" is rather subjective so I don't know if this fits your definition - the AF-S FX 300/4D (without VR) makes a great bird lens and is still less money than a clean CX 70-300. I used mine on both V2 and V3 bodies with good results, then traded it in on a used 300/4E to get VR and a smaller lighter lens to use instead.

 

[Box Man]

I sometimes use the 85mm f1.8 FX lens on my V1. The bokeh is pretty damn good, if you're interested. Shooting in color the chromatic aberration can be quite noticeable. I like the combination though. For me it produces satisfactory and satisfying results. That said I don't think many N1 shooters go this route.

 

[RichDitch]

I sometimes use the 85mm f1.8 FX lens on my V1. The bokeh is pretty damn good, if you're interested. Shooting in color the chromatic aberration can be quite noticeable. I like the combination though. For me it produces satisfactory and satisfying results. That said I don't think many N1 shooters go this route.

Indeed. I have used the same 85/1.8 on my N1 cameras and echo Box Man's observations on the lens.

 

[BlueBomberTurbo]

The 18.5 and the 10-30 PD are very nice lenses for your V3. I use these two all the time for lots of things and especially for our indoor cats. They are small, in keeping with the V3 and the other N1 bodies, and give excellent image quality.

The DX 40/2.8 macro is also something use on my N1 cameras via the FT1. It is a relatively small and light lens that fits the N1 system and fills a whole in the N1 lineup. I also have the DX 85/3.5 macro and use it with the FT1 where I want a greater working distance.

Many N1 users have the 70-300 AF-P DX VR as a substitute for the wonderful CX 70-300 and find it serves their needs at a substantial cost savings. Reportedly it isn't as sharp past 200mm and it appears to have color fringing issues that need to be addressed in post processing, but I have no direct experience with that lens.

An 18-55 is also small and light, and there are many used ones available at modest cost. I haven't paid attention to them but I suspect the later versions with VR would make a decent short tele zoom. The more recent versions of the 55-200 with VR would be an obvious purchase as well.

"Relatively inexpensive" is rather subjective so I don't know if this fits your definition - the AF-S FX 300/4D (without VR) makes a great bird lens and is still less money than a clean CX 70-300. I used mine on both V2 and V3 bodies with good results, then traded it in on a used 300/4E to get VR and a smaller lighter lens to use instead.

Just set up a trade at MPB for the FT-1 and 40/2.8. They didn't have the 70-300 AF-P DX VR, so I'll pick that up separately, and have a basic companion hiking kit for my Sony gear till I get the 10-30. How do you find the 85/3.5 to work? I was thinking about that lens, but figured since I'm using 2.7x crop camera, I wouldn't need to get as close as the native 1.5x body to get to 1:1. so working distance would be longer than DX for the same FOV. I was also considering the 60/2.8G since it's FX, so the max effective reproduction ratio would be better (2.7:1).

Haven't seen too much posted with the 70-300 on the V3. Also, based on what I saw at DPR, it doesn't seem like many Nikon 1 shooters are that heavy-handed with processing, as many pics look near SOOC, so sharpening probably isn't being used to its fullest potential. I use DXO for DeepPRIME NR, lens corrections, and sharpening, and am no stranger to putting in work to get the best image quality possible from the current software tech. At worst, I'd use Topaz AI to restore sharpness, so I'd assume I could counter whatever softness the 70-300 might have at the long end (outside of front/back focus issues).

As far as the 300, too much lens. I'd like to keep things as small as possible, so the 70-300 will be my biggest lens by far. Was thinking if there were any other fast primes I might be forgetting, but DSLRs weren't great for fast and wide at the same time.

I sometimes use the 85mm f1.8 FX lens on my V1. The bokeh is pretty damn good, if you're interested. Shooting in color the chromatic aberration can be quite noticeable. I like the combination though. For me it produces satisfactory and satisfying results. That said I don't think many N1 shooters go this route.

Indeed. I have used the same 85/1.8 on my N1 cameras and echo Box Man's observations on the lens.

Yeah, definitely not my focal length of choice (230mm). I shoot mostly nature and wildlife, so that's kind of dead center between the two opposite ends of the spectrum I need to be at (wide/ultra wide & super tele). I will say that I've a J5 twice, first with adapted lenses, 2nd with native. It was more the lack of EVF than anything that was the issue, and the V3 prices were too high back then to consider it. I had a Yongnuo 50/1.8 (50/1.8G copy) on the J5 and FT-1 and it was nice, but that's about as long as I'd go.

I'm also thinking about the 35/1.8G DX or Sigma 30/1.4 DC, but they might be too similar to the 40/2.8 in the end. Yes, the 1.3 to 2 stop gain is nice, but the focal lengths are very close, all being equivalent of a short telephoto. I'd much rather have something fast at the wide end, but that's going to pretty much be impossible with DSLR lenses. Maybe something like a Sigma/Tamron 17-50/2.8? Haven't seen much in the way of compatibility info on anything like that, though.

 

[Box Man]

Just set up a trade at MPB for the FT-1 and 40/2.8. They didn't have the 70-300 AF-P DX VR, so I'll pick that up separately, and have a basic companion hiking kit for my Sony gear till I get the 10-30. How do you find the 85/3.5 to work? I was thinking about that lens, but figured since I'm using 2.7x crop camera, I wouldn't need to get as close as the native 1.5x body to get to 1:1. so working distance would be longer than DX for the same FOV. I was also considering the 60/2.8G since it's FX, so the max effective reproduction ratio would be better (2.7:1).

Haven't seen too much posted with the 70-300 on the V3. Also, based on what I saw at DPR, it doesn't seem like many Nikon 1 shooters are that heavy-handed with processing, as many pics look near SOOC, so sharpening probably isn't being used to its fullest potential. I use DXO for DeepPRIME NR, lens corrections, and sharpening, and am no stranger to putting in work to get the best image quality possible from the current software tech. At worst, I'd use Topaz AI to restore sharpness, so I'd assume I could counter whatever softness the 70-300 might have at the long end (outside of front/back focus issues).

As far as the 300, too much lens. I'd like to keep things as small as possible, so the 70-300 will be my biggest lens by far. Was thinking if there were any other fast primes I might be forgetting, but DSLRs weren't great for fast and wide at the same time.





Yeah, definitely not my focal length of choice (230mm). I shoot mostly nature and wildlife, so that's kind of dead center between the two opposite ends of the spectrum I need to be at (wide/ultra wide & super tele). I will say that I've a J5 twice, first with adapted lenses, 2nd with native. It was more the lack of EVF than anything that was the issue, and the V3 prices were too high back then to consider it. I had a Yongnuo 50/1.8 (50/1.8G copy) on the J5 and FT-1 and it was nice, but that's about as long as I'd go.

I'm also thinking about the 35/1.8G DX or Sigma 30/1.4 DC, but they might be too similar to the 40/2.8 in the end. Yes, the 1.3 to 2 stop gain is nice, but the focal lengths are very close, all being equivalent of a short telephoto. I'd much rather have something fast at the wide end, but that's going to pretty much be impossible with DSLR lenses. Maybe something like a Sigma/Tamron 17-50/2.8? Haven't seen much in the way of compatibility info on anything like that, though.

The 35 1.8 DX works pretty well, but I hardly ever mount that because I have two 32 1.2 lenses. But as you said the 35mm is probably too similar to the 40mm 2.8 to justify picking it up. Good luck to you in your pursuit of good glass!

 

[lilispapa]

Picked up a V3 and EVF recently, along with a decentered 10/2.8 (got refunded and got to keep it). Looking to add a few F-mount AF-S/AF-P lenses via FT-1, as well as the 18.5, 10-30 PD, and a good copy of the 10. Tops on my list are the 70-300 AF-P DX VR for birding and 40/2.8 AF-S DX Micro for flowers/plants/etc. Might snag an 18-55 AF-P VR to throw in my car for scenery or things that pop up, as well. Any other recommended adapted lenses out there that work well with the V3?

I have the 70-300 AFP DX and a nice 55-200 VR II, the collapsing one. it is a nice compact lens and works very well on N1 cameras. I used it for several years before getting the 70-300 and within the same range they are equals. I was never willing to spend what it takes to get the 70-300 CX. I see there is an excellent + rated one on KEH right now for $844.39 but that's too much to pay IMO.

 

[RichDitch]

Just set up a trade at MPB for the FT-1 and 40/2.8. They didn't have the 70-300 AF-P DX VR, so I'll pick that up separately, and have a basic companion hiking kit for my Sony gear till I get the 10-30. How do you find the 85/3.5 to work? I was thinking about that lens, but figured since I'm using 2.7x crop camera, I wouldn't need to get as close as the native 1.5x body to get to 1:1. so working distance would be longer than DX for the same FOV. I was also considering the 60/2.8G since it's FX, so the max effective reproduction ratio would be better (2.7:1).

The 85/3.5 works fine on the FT1, although as an effective 229mm lens it works best on a tripod rather than hand held. Here's mine on a J5 via the FT1. I've also got a Really Right Stuff bracket attached so I can use my tripods fitted with the A-S clamps. Normally that's way too much focal length for the J5, but mounted on a tripod I can swing the LCD out horizontal and work from above to say my knees.

• Apple - iPhone 6s
• iPhone 6s back camera 4.15mm f/2.2
• 4.2 mm
• ƒ/2.2
• 1/30 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 100

A backyard bloom taken with the 85/3.5 on a J5.

• NIKON CORPORATION - NIKON 1 J5
• VR 85mm f/3.5G
• 85.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 160

Remember that focal length is focal length independent of format (CX, DX, FX). If you have an FX lens that gives you 1:1 it will also give you 1:1 mounted on a DX or CX body. It just seems like it is giving more magnification because you are seeing the smaller area of the small sensor just as you get by cropping the FX image.

Haven't seen too much posted with the 70-300 on the V3. Also, based on what I saw at DPR, it doesn't seem like many Nikon 1 shooters are that heavy-handed with processing, as many pics look near SOOC, so sharpening probably isn't being used to its fullest potential. I use DXO for DeepPRIME NR, lens corrections, and sharpening, and am no stranger to putting in work to get the best image quality possible from the current software tech. At worst, I'd use Topaz AI to restore sharpness, so I'd assume I could counter whatever softness the 70-300 might have at the long end (outside of front/back focus issues).

I'm not sure which 70-300 you are talking about here. There are definitely people here who use the CX 70-300 on a V3, including me. But I can't speak to the DX 70-300 as I've not paid close attention to the bodies users have mentioned.

As far as processing goes I and other shoot raw, while the are others who work directly in jpeg. I too use Deep Prime for noise reduction as I couldn't ignore the others in the old N1 forum who recommended it. Now I can't imagine using an N1 camera without having Deep Prime in my work flow. As far as sharpening goes I seldom see a need to add extra sharpening but do occasionally use Smart Sharpen in photoshop or ON1 NoNoise with the NR sliders set to zero.

As far as the 300, too much lens. I'd like to keep things as small as possible, so the 70-300 will be my biggest lens by far. Was thinking if there were any other fast primes I might be forgetting, but DSLRs weren't great for fast and wide at the same time.

Yes, the older 300/4D is large and heavy compared to native N1 lenses. That's why I traded up to the 300/4E to get a smaller and lighter version. At 26.6 ounces it is 7 ounces heavier than the CX 70-300 (19.4 ounces). I'm willing to accept that 7 extra ounces for the f/4 aperture, but for the usual walkabout birding the CX 70-300 is a better way to go.

Yeah, definitely not my focal length of choice (230mm). I shoot mostly nature and wildlife, so that's kind of dead center between the two opposite ends of the spectrum I need to be at (wide/ultra wide & super tele). I will say that I've a J5 twice, first with adapted lenses, 2nd with native. It was more the lack of EVF than anything that was the issue, and the V3 prices were too high back then to consider it. I had a Yongnuo 50/1.8 (50/1.8G copy) on the J5 and FT-1 and it was nice, but that's about as long as I'd go.

Me too. The 85/3.5 needs a tripod for best use. I don't like to go beyond the 10-30 or the 32/1.2 for normal use on a J5.

I'm also thinking about the 35/1.8G DX or Sigma 30/1.4 DC, but they might be too similar to the 40/2.8 in the end. Yes, the 1.3 to 2 stop gain is nice, but the focal lengths are very close, all being equivalent of a short telephoto. I'd much rather have something fast at the wide end, but that's going to pretty much be impossible with DSLR lenses. Maybe something like a Sigma/Tamron 17-50/2.8? Haven't seen much in the way of compatibility info on anything like that, though.

I've tried the DX 35/1.8 on my N1 cameras but couldn't see the point given that I've got a CX 32/1.2.

• NIKON CORPORATION - NIKON 1 J5
• 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm f/1.8
• 18.5 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/50 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 1600

The 40/2.8 makes more sense to me.

• NIKON CORPORATION - NIKON 1 J5
• 1 NIKKOR 18.5mm f/1.8
• 18.5 mm
• ƒ/2.8
• 1/125 sec
• Pattern
• Auto exposure
• ISO 500

I don't have any idea of how you can get a fast wide lens for the N1 cameras by adapting a larger format lens. 17mm with the 2.7x factor makes it act like a 46mm so it does nothing that the CX 10/2.8 already does.

 

[Box Man]

The 85/3.5 works fine on the FT1, although as an effective 229mm lens it works best on a tripod rather than hand held. Here's mine on a J5 via the FT1. I've also got a Really Right Stuff bracket attached so I can use my tripods fitted with the A-S clamps. Normally that's way too much focal length for the J5, but mounted on a tripod I can swing the LCD out horizontal and work from above to say my knees.
View attachment 1311

A backyard bloom taken with the 85/3.5 on a J5.

View attachment 1312

Remember that focal length is focal length independent of format (CX, DX, FX). If you have an FX lens that gives you 1:1 it will also give you 1:1 mounted on a DX or CX body. It just seems like it is giving more magnification because you are seeing the smaller area of the small sensor just as you get by cropping the FX image.



I'm not sure which 70-300 you are talking about here. There are definitely people here who use the CX 70-300 on a V3, including me. But I can't speak to the DX 70-300 as I've not paid close attention to the bodies users have mentioned.

As far as processing goes I and other shoot raw, while the are others who work directly in jpeg. I too use Deep Prime for noise reduction as I couldn't ignore the others in the old N1 forum who recommended it. Now I can't imagine using an N1 camera without having Deep Prime in my work flow. As far as sharpening goes I seldom see a need to add extra sharpening but do occasionally use Smart Sharpen in photoshop or ON1 NoNoise with the NR sliders set to zero.



Yes, the older 300/4D is large and heavy compared to native N1 lenses. That's why I traded up to the 300/4E to get a smaller and lighter version. At 26.6 ounces it is 7 ounces heavier than the CX 70-300 (19.4 ounces). I'm willing to accept that 7 extra ounces for the f/4 aperture, but for the usual walkabout birding the CX 70-300 is a better way to go.



Me too. The 85/3.5 needs a tripod for best use. I don't like to go beyond the 10-30 or the 32/1.2 for normal use on a J5.


I've tried the DX 35/1.8 on my N1 cameras but couldn't see the point given that I've got a CX 32/1.2.
View attachment 1316
The 40/2.8 makes more sense to me.

View attachment 1319

I don't have any idea of how you can get a fast wide lens for the N1 cameras by adapting a larger format lens. 17mm with the 2.7x factor makes it act like a 46mm so it does nothing that the CX 10/2.8 already does.

Great looking gear! Indeed, we can see a lot just by looking.

 

[BlueBomberTurbo]

The 35 1.8 DX works pretty well, but I hardly ever mount that because I have two 32 1.2 lenses. But as you said the 35mm is probably too similar to the 40mm 2.8 to justify picking it up. Good luck to you in your pursuit of good glass!

Yeah, I guess I'll have to wait and see what kinds of situations I end up shooting in with the 40, in order to see if I need the 35/1.8 or even the 30/1.4. I don't usually shoot indoors much, but when I do, I usually prefer a 35 in FF terms (roughly 13mm CX). Nothing like that out there, though.