Nikon vs MFT Mount Lenses

[Chris Messineo]

I'm looking to get some Rokinon cine lenses and trying to decide if I should get the Nikon or MFT mount (price and specs are the same).

Currently, I only have Nikon lenses and I have the Metabones Nikon to MFT adapter. I love what it does with my Nikon lenses (providing more light and a wider viewing angle).

So, would you stick with Nikon lenses or is there a benefit in using the MFT lenses directly with the AF100?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Chris

[DLD]

A full frame Nikon with the existing Metabones gives you more options.

Plus, you can also get a plain adapter, since you're fully manual with Rokinon anyway, and have even more looks with just one lens and two different adapters.

[mcbob]

m43 native lenses benefit from smaller size and weight and some have auto features. This wouldn't be the case with the Rokinon, which is the same lens in different mounts. If you're already used to the Nikon focus direction anyway, stick with the Nikon mount + SB (or non-SB).

[Chris Messineo]

Thanks for the feedback.

[Mac]

If you go with the Nikon mount, get an adapter for each lens and tape it in place with 1/4" black gaffers tape. I have Leica R lenses, which are excellent, but move slightly in the adapters (Novoflex) if not taped. I haven't used Rokinons, I know they're good, but I believe the focusing direction is traditional, whereas the Nikon brands focus the opposite way - that drives me nuts.

[mcbob]

With the standard adapters (even the Novoflex) I completely agree with you, Mac...

The Metabones adapters (I have Speedboosted and non-Speedboosted) are better, with actual spring retention, and operate as well as a stock Nikon body's mount.

[tflak]

Had a Novoflex with slight play. Simply inserted a thin screwdriver into the cuts in the brass mount and enlarged them slightly. Simple to do and cleaner than using gaffer tape (which I originally considered). Works a charm.