1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

A Choice...

Discussion in 'Nikon Chat' started by SXH, Oct 31, 2019.

  1. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    As I have a Nikon-1 V2 and several lenses, I had a choice - wait for the 70-300mm lens (189-810mm equiv!) to come available at Wex, MPB or wherever. Highly unlikely, and when I have seen them (well, just the one) advertised used, it was around £500!

    Or, when I saw an FT-1 adaptor going for a ton, I could get that and possibly something like a cheap 70-300mm AF-S.

    I think my choice can be easily guessed...


    A quick check, using the 18-55mm kit lens off my D80, indicates that it works. Further testing to come; and if you don't behave, I may post some of the results... ;)
  2. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I have read varying reports of the FT-1 adaptor which is the main reason I haven’t bought one. I shall look forward to hearing about your experience wit it.
  3. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    The rain having held off for a while and there being a reasonable amount of light, I’ve given the FT-1 a quick test, using he V2 and 18-55mm kit lens off the D80. Some preliminary results follow. Don't know if you'll find them at all useful.

    It works, in that exposure and focussing are handled OK. Well, it’s a pukka Nikon product with all the electrical connections, so that was expected.

    Image quality is about as good as I expected, seeing as it’s only the kit lens and not expected to be great. And, as it only uses the middle third (approximately) of the image, you’d expect resolution and CA to be pretty good as they really only suffer at the edges of the full image.

    Full frame - just shrunk

    100% crop

    However, this also means that the amount of light is also reduced, so it does tend to force the ISO up, resulting in more noise. Up to about 650 seems fine with the V2, 800 up and the noise does increase – see this (quite heavily) cropped picture.


    Not sure if the long-exposure noise-reduction option would help with this. Probably not, but something else to check.

    Focussing seems a bit slow, compared with native Nikon 1 lenses, so it’s probably no use for birds in flight and so on.

    Conclusion? For me, it’s OK, but of limited use. It works fine in bright(ish) light, for non-moving (or slow) subjects. So it will get some use. It'd probably work well with one of the top of the range wide constant-aperture lenses, but as they cost several times what the native 70-300mm costs... I'll probably get a (used, cheap) 55-200mm AF-S to use with it - I can always use that with the D80.

    Oh, and I've also read that it limits long exposures to a couple of seconds, so probably not much use for milky water or astronomy pics. And that various manuals from around the world give different information on that score.
  4. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Not so quick about milky water. The effect works better with stacked multiple exposures.
  5. AndyTake2

    AndyTake2 Well-Known Member

    Never thought much of the FT-1.
    Used it on a J5 and it couldn't focus to save it's life. Hunted around like Elmer Fudd looking for Bugs Bunny.
    Ditched the J5 and Ft-1.
    Mind you, I mistakenly thought that a lighter camera than my D700 would be a good idea......and ended up getting a D5300, which I frequently want to bounce off a wall.
  6. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    That could be a J5 rather than FT-1 problem - from what I've read, Nikon did something to the J5 to prevent its use with certain lenses. An odd thing to do, but they buggered about with the 1 series something rotten. You'd think they wanted it to fail. Or maybe they just used it to experiment with?
  7. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I thought it was pretty obvious that they used it as an experimental system, the J5 was reckoned by reviewers to be the best of the range but it still has some severe limitations and compromises. The 30-110 lens is all but unusable on the J5 at the longer end and the sound is in no way a match to the video quality.
  8. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    I was disapointed that Nikon abandoned the Nikon 1 system. If they had taken it seriously then I would have bought in. I also would have bought the 70-300. And if they had then produced a 200-600 f5.6 for under £1000 bought that as well. 1" is more than enough for many of us but we are stuck with AP-S C. I really like my D500 but they are overkill for me.
  9. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    Personally I felt that the 1" sensor was a step too far. I have m4/3 gear as well as APS-C and I find that noise is significantly more of an issue at equivalent ISO with the smaller sensor being visible even at ISO 200 which certainly isn't the case with any of my APS-C cameras - not even the ancient EOS D30 which is a real noise monster. I suspect the 1 series were similar or worse...
  10. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I have a 1J5, which doesn't have a viewfinder, I find the 30-110 almost unusable with the rear screen, a 70-300 would be nigh on impossible unless using additional devices to allow using at eye level. With a finder there wouldn't be a problem.
  11. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    Well, I have again proved my weakness (or maybe it's a GAS relapse) and got myself a longer Nikon zoom to use with the FT-1 (and D80, must give it a try). It's a Nikkor 55-200mm f4-5.6 AF-S GII ED and looks like...

    Preliminary results are pretty good, imho.

    That clock (my HQS Wellington equivalent):

    and a 100% chunk thereof:

    An aerial:

    and some flowers:

    All images are the JPGs straight from the camera, bar being resized. Except the 100% chunk.

    I'm generally quite impressed with the quicky results - reasonable resolution and very little CA. With a hint of PSE (or ACR) fettling, I reckon it can produce pretty good pics.

    ETA: next thing is to check the firmwear version of the Ft-1 and see if it needs updating.

Share This Page