The Commlite Nikon F to Sony E adapter will come with autofocus and stabilization support

Commlite-Nikon-F-to-Sony-E-adapter-with-autofocus-and-stabilization-support Commlite-Nikon-F-to-Sony-E-adapter-with-autofocus-and-stabilization-support-2 Commlite-Nikon-F-to-Sony-E-adapter-with-autofocus-and-stabilization-support-3
Matt Granger published a hands-on review of a new Commlite Nikon F to Sony E adapter (Nikkor lenses on a Sony a7 camera) that will come with autofocus and stabilization support:

The reviewed adapter was a prototype, there is no word when the production version will become available. Commlite adapters are sold on Amazon and eBay.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Eric Calabros

    Do I want Nikon upcoming mirrorless solution look like this? Nope. Big Nope.

    • D800GUY

      Why not? You want a Nikon 1 sized body that’s awkward to hold and use?

    • sdancer

      How would this this be any hint at the look or feel of a new mirrorless system? I’m asking because it isn’t.

    • neonspark

      you mean an f-mount mirrorless? yeah, it would suck and be just as ackward.

      • Eric Calabros

        F mount or forget it. This combination of very compromises is simply ridiculous

      • Ken Elliott

        Why? Using older Nikkor lenses on an EVF camera with focus peaking is fantastic. I’d buy an F-mount EVF full frame in a heartbeat. Right now, I have a Sony A6000 with an F-to-E adapter, and it’s a good solution. But a Nikon with autofocus for AFS lenses would be a winner.

        • harvey

          no. give me a mirrorless with a different mount that allows for smaller lenses and a thinner body. If the FT-1 is any indication, Nikon can make a very good F-mount adapter if you want to use that behemoth glass.

          • Singani Mamiya

            With a single AF point in the center?

  • Eric Calabros

    Do I want Nikon upcoming mirrorless solution look like this? Nope. Big Nope.

  • Michiel953

    Another gargantuan adapter for a Sony A7. Sigh. And using that to mate the body to a decidedly mediocre lens.

    Why, I wonder?

    • ZoetMB

      What’s mediocre about the Nikon 70-200 2.8? And the adapter looks about 1″ deep, which is fine IMO. I’d be much more concerned about the weight, although it’s almost irrelevant as compared to the weight of any big lens.

      In fact, that’s the problem with the A7 line. While the body is small and light and they do have a few small, lightweight lenses, once you get into the “big boys”, there’s almost no benefit aside from the body fitting into one’s bag a little easier.

      The Sony 35mm 1.4 weighs 1.4 lbs, the 55mm 1.8 weighs 1.2 lbs, the 16-35 weights 1.1 lbs, the 24-240mm weights 1.7 lbs, the 28-135 f4 takes 95mm(!) filters and weights 2.7 lbs and the 70-200 f4 weighs 1.9 lbs. So there’s really no size or weight savings if that’s what people are looking for, at least not with those lenses.

      But depending upon where Nikon goes, I might be more inclined to switch at some point knowing that this adapter is available. It would be a far easier transition if I didn’t immediately have to replace all my lenses.

      • Michiel953

        The 50/1.4G is a mediocre, characterfree lens imho. I owned one once.

        And no, I don’t like EVF’s. Yet?

        • Carleton Foxx

          That’s so interesting because I love the images I get out of my 50mm 1.4g. As long as I keep the light directly behind the subject it’s awesome. But front lit subjects, you’re right. It’s kind of bland

        • Carleton Foxx

          That’s so interesting because I love the images I get out of my 50mm 1.4g. As long as I keep the light directly behind the subject it’s awesome. But front lit subjects, you’re right. It’s kind of bland

          • Michiel953

            I just couldn’t get myself to like that lens. Switched to a 2.0/50 Makro-Planar, really liked that one (lots of character), then, almost two years ago when it came out, to the 1.4/58 Nikkor. That one, frustrating as it sometimes is, I really love.

      • Good glass is heavy glass – almost without exception. And Sony’s mount and the lever arm created by a 70-200 2.8 can’t tolerate those forces for long. You end up with skew and asymmetry while compromising down to 11+7 bit color. All a regretful decision.

      • EvilTed

        The Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 weighs 10z/281g
        The Sony/Zeiss 16-35 F4 weighs 18.2oz / 515.96g
        The Sony/Zeiss 70-200 F4 weighs 29.7 oz / 840g
        All are smaller and lighter than the Nikon equivalents

        Check your math.

        I own D810 and D750 with the holy trinity of zooms and the A7r II and A7s II with Zeiss Loxia primes, Zeiss Batis primes, the 55 1.8, 16-35 F4 and 70-200 F4.

        The D810 is a superlative long exposure rig.

        The D750 gives me close to sports speed and decent low light.

        Nikon gives me long lenses and the UWA.

        Sony gives me hand-held, travel, small size + amazing low light.

        Different tools for different jobs…

        • ZoetMB

          I erred on the 55, it weighs 9.91 oz. (.62 lbs), but everything else was essentially correct. The 16-35 f4 weighs 1.144 lbs. The Nikon is much heavier, but it’s a 2.8. The Sony and Nikon 70-200 f4 both essentially weigh the same: 1.85 lbs for the Sony and 1.87 lbs. for the Nikon.

          I was very excited when the Sony was first released. But when I started sticking long lenses on it, I discovered that overall size and weight savings was minimal unless you use the small kit lenses. And look at the 28-135mm: 95mm filters and it weighs 2.68 lbs. That’s not exactly a size and weight savings.

          If you love your Sony, fine — different strokes for different folks. But IMO, there’s no real size and weight savings once you put some “real” lenses on it. At least not enough to warrant me investing in a new system, especially considering the other disadvantages to the Sony (although I suspect most will be corrected by the next iteration). You obviously have resources, but if I were to move to Sony, I would have to sell all my Nikon equipment.

          • EvilTed

            You are wrong on the size thing too.
            The Nikon 70-200 F4 is considerably longer than the Sony equivalent.
            I initially bought one, but returned it in favor of the F2.8 VR II model.

            The new 24-70 VR model, I also own, and it is a heavy pig of a lens, so we can’t really compare there either.

            Yes, Sony have some lenses that mitigate the size/weight benefits and I hear you on this.
            I don’t buy these lenses because they unbalance the system.
            I own the 16-35 F4 and 70-200 F4 because they are excellent travel zooms.
            Yes, with the grip snd 2 batteries on a sling they are close to DSLR size and weight, but here’s the advantage.
            They can strip right down and mount a 120g 35mm F2.8 and be extremely stealthy for street work.

            It also depends what you call “real”. The Zeiss Batis are definitely real and probably as good, if not better, than any equivalent DSLR lens.
            The 85 1.8 is as good as the Leica 90 APO I sold recently and the Nikon 85mm 1.8G I had for a few weeks.
            The Loxia are real and real good too I might add. As good as any MF Leica lenses.

            You see, Sony can adapt from a zoom-oriented camera to a RF size small walkabout but a DSLR cannot. The D750 (which I also own) is way too big and bulk in comparison and I barely use it because of this. It’s the odd one out. The D810 is excellent but the D750 just annoys me because it tries to be a lighter pro-body but the buttons are all different and it ultimately fails for me.

            Anyway, you should try owning a Sony A7 series for a bit before dismissing them out of turn.
            Yes, they have warts and annoyances.
            I actually sold all my Sony kit (A7 II + A7s II snd all lenses) to buy the Nikons but missed the Sony EVF so much that I ended up selling all my Leica gear to buy back into their system.

            That’s testament to my idiocy or Sony’s quality or both 😉

    • El Aura

      Yeah, why would anybody ever want to use a camera with an EVF? A camera that focusses with perfect accuracy (on static subjects at least), a camera that allows accurate manual focussing, a camera that can take images without a mirror slap?

      A camera that can do all the above but still has access to a very large catalogue of lenses including many that people already own?

    • Ken Elliott

      Because sometimes we need to do something that works better with an EVF. In my own case, I have several manual focus Nikkor lenses. One of my D700 bodies has a Katz Eye screen with a split-prism in the center, allowing me to easily focus my 600/4. But I can’t find such a screen for my D800 (I’m told this is due to changes by Nikon, but I’m not certain). Yet my Sony A6000 does a great job with this lens. In fact, the Sony works better than any current model Nikon. And when we get to macro, and the PB4 bellows, the Sony is exceptional. So Nikon’s poor support of older lenses is forcing me to Sony.

      As a side note, I find it odd that the Sony can fire my Nikon strobes, but my Nikon V1 can’t. If Sony ever gives us a utility to customize the menus and controls, then I can fix the really horrible control issues that prevent me from loving the camera.

    • mdb79

      How else do you get the correct flange distance than with the appropriate “gargantuan” sized adapter to get it the correct distance from the sensor. That is how they work.

  • nukunukoo

    If the quality is good, then I can easily do my Nikon-to-Sony (A7R2) transition. =) I got a huge amount of good F-mount Nikkor and Sigma glass.

    • Go watch the video. The only thing good about the product is the physical finish. Aside from that it’s useless.

      • nukunukoo

        I already own one for two weeks now. It trumps my D800 in many ways. Amazing DR recovery, IQ and 4K! My only complaint is the lossy compression causing chroma on shadow pulls and the menu system is not as good. And the OIS got me gobsmacked, wow.

        • lalala

          I think he means the adapter, not your a7r2

          • nukunukoo

            oooh. my bad…

  • verytoxic

    will it provide aperture support on older lenses?

    • sdancer

      It has to. There’s only 5 or so lenses in Nikon’s lineup that don’t use the mechanical link (the tilt/shift and the new superteles), and the 70-200 is not one of them.

      Now, AI-S and friends would be another issue if that’s what you’re after.

  • animalsbybarry

    Everyone expects a full frame mirrorless Nikon with the a7rii sensor….possible 6 months after the a7rii release.
    But we are hearing nothing about it.
    How abought digging up some news on that?

    • Riley Escobar

      The one thing that would hold me back would be if it used the F mount. I’ve been having fun using M42 etc. lenses on a Fuji X-E1. If Nikon simply released a mirrorless F mount, it would just be more of the same.

      • animalsbybarry

        That makes no sense…if I had a collection of top notch Nikon glass I would want a full frame mirrorless Nikon mount to be one of 3 options
        F mount…so I could use my F mount lenses
        Sony E mount ….so I could use my F mount lenses with an adapter, and the camera would be universal
        New short mount so F mount and other dslr lenses csn be used with adapter.
        My top preference is if all mirrorless cameras were to agree on sharingva common mount. Sine E mount is the most firmly established short mirrorless mount I would like to see it be universal…sort of like Arca Swiss.

        • harvey

          Nikon would never lease a mount from someone else, neither would Canon or Sony or Pentax etc.

        • Riley Escobar

          By mirrorless F mount I meant one that did not require an adapter (your option 1). There’s not much to gain by just going to a mirrorless body without going to a new mount. Nikon is already working on weight and size reduction for as shown by the D3300 and D5500 that are lighter and smaller than the previous models. Keeping the F mount and its long register is a deal breaker for me.

          Your option 2 is a Sony A7 and the Commlite adapter (if they fix the bugs).

          Your option 3 is ideal, but implied in my post is that it will not be called an F mount (just imagine the confusion that would add to Nikon’s already messy system).

          I’m with you on a universal mount, but sadly that will never happen as lenses is where the money will be (again) as body sales continue to drop.

          • Fly Moon

            “already messy system”

            Why?

            • Riley Escobar

              Just try to explain to someone if their older Nikon lens is compatible with their Nikon camera. Non-AI lens? Mounts on a D3300 but not a D4. AI lens? Works with a D7200 but only in manual exposure mode on a D3300. Nikon has been great at extending the life of the F mount, but not very good at naming the different versions.

  • neonspark

    WOW look at how ridiculous an F mount mirrorless looks. Thom Hogan’s suggestion that this is where nikon needs to go needs some serious reality check. Nobody will buy such camera. New mount, or nikon may as well close shop in the mirrorless market for good.

    • Why is this ridiculous? If the damn thing worked it would be pretty compelling. You can always strap on a giant grip if you need to counterbalance a lens. Bear in mind, Nikon can release an F-mount mirrorless with special compact kit lenses (e.g. that fold into the mount) and still offer an overall compelling product.

      I suspect, however, that Nikon’s CX mount is actually the right long-term option. Assuming the V4 comes out and has the new sensor, decent ergonomics (including viewfinder), sane price OR is rugged (and — we can pray — a standard hotshoe) the 1 series suddenly looks to me like the best ILC system out there.

      Image quality: good enough.
      Size: actually small and light even with serious reach (indeed more reach than any other system)
      Reach: 18mm — 810mm 35mm equivalent
      Focusing: can actually track motion
      Video: OK, maybe Nikon will get this right one day. But the super high fps stuff on my V1 is actually pretty amazing.

      No-one else can compete with this. Sony’s stuff has no reach, the lenses are huge and expensive.

      Fuji has no reach.

      M43 for all its gigantic selection of lenses is crippled at reach and still has focus issues (see the latest review of the M10 mk II).

      Meanwhile you can get a (hypothetical) V4 system with f1.8 wide and normal primes, f1.2 portrait, long telephoto with focus good enough for birds in flight, and an 18-35mm wide for $3k total.

    • Why is this ridiculous? If the damn thing worked it would be pretty compelling. You can always strap on a giant grip if you need to counterbalance a lens. Bear in mind, Nikon can release an F-mount mirrorless with special compact kit lenses (e.g. that fold into the mount) and still offer an overall compelling product.

      I suspect, however, that Nikon’s CX mount is actually the right long-term option. Assuming the V4 comes out and has the new sensor, decent ergonomics (including viewfinder), sane price OR is rugged (and — we can pray — a standard hotshoe) the 1 series suddenly looks to me like the best ILC system out there.

      Image quality: good enough.
      Size: actually small and light even with serious reach (indeed more reach than any other system)
      Reach: 18mm — 810mm 35mm equivalent
      Focusing: can actually track motion
      Video: OK, maybe Nikon will get this right one day. But the super high fps stuff on my V1 is actually pretty amazing.

      No-one else can compete with this. Sony’s stuff has no reach, the lenses are huge and expensive.

      Fuji has no reach.

      M43 for all its gigantic selection of lenses is crippled at reach and still has focus issues (see the latest review of the M10 mk II).

      Meanwhile you can get a (hypothetical) V4 system with f1.8 wide and normal primes, f1.2 portrait, long telephoto with focus good enough for birds in flight, and an 18-35mm wide for $3k total.

    • Speaking of Thom Hogan: his site hasn’t been updated in a long while. Is he well?

      • tobi

        He may be having a photo gear crisis .. he posted and took away a post about moving to mirror-less 🙂 … or maybe he is just busy 🙂

      • Carleton Foxx

        He takes August off

      • Carleton Foxx

        He takes August off

  • Kriztoper

    its funny I was looking for one this morning but I found one on a different site http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/06/19/worlds-first-nikon-to-sony-e-mount-adaptor-with-fill-auto-focus-capabilities/

  • sdancer

    Oh dear. Whence did some people get the bloody stupid idea of an F-mount mirrorless into their minds?

    That’d be about the single most stupid idea since… actually it’d be right up there, and everyone *including Nikon* knows that. Not a single manufacturer kept their SLR mounts for mirrorless gear, because that just doesn’t make any bloody sense, and F is about the worst that’s left on the market.

    What will you people dream up to complain about next?

    • sperdynamite

      Actually, if they made a proper DF, meaning a camera the same size as the FM2, but took out the mirror and instead has a killer EVF, I’d be into it. The FMs were hardly larger than the A7, and the thing people complained about most with the DF was its size and number of controls. I would finally be able to focus ZF and AIS lenses accurately wide open on a Nikon body, sign me up.

      • Chris

        My complaint on Df is the grip being too shallow.

        • sperdynamite

          That stupid over priced attachment they made actually improved the grip a lot. Check it out if you want to keep using your DF. Yes, an EVF would eat batteries but I used an A7 for a while which has terrible battery life and it ended up being NBD. The batteries are small and cheap and I did not mind carrying a few. Of course, they have the MD-12 as inspiration for a cool grip’d battery grip!

          • Chris

            Thanks for the info. I probably would get a half case instead. I am still thinking about that. I had A7 for a while and was never impressed.

      • Ken Elliott

        Same here. My Sony A6000 with a Metabones adapter puts the aperture control back where it used to be, and the EVF peaking works fantastic on my older manual focus lenses. An EVF DF would be perfect!

      • sdancer

        This is not about their current lineup, it’s simply about the basic concept of using an SLR mount for a mirrorless camera, which is, pardon my insensitivity, technologically retarded. I would totally assume that Nikon would make a (working!) F-mount adapter a priority, but they would NEVER use the mount directly.

        • sperdynamite

          I’d take that too, as long as it handled better than an A7 with the adapter. I don’t think it’s that ridiculous to make a one off line of FM style mirrorless cameras though. The market is clearly there. Now for a modern mirrorless, I agree, and I think they’ll do that when they can design one that performs as well as the D750 can. Hopefully they’ll make at least one that uses the S2 as a starting point.

    • vriesk

      Actually, you’re quite wrong. Sony did keep their mount for the mirrorless SLT series.

      Having smaller flange distance gives lens designers more freedom when designing wide-angle lenses (you don’t need that much retrofocus), but the current computer-aided designs are very good anyway. Body size-wise it does not matter that much, since the grip sticks out anyway.

      So I’d argue that the idea of using F-mount for possible future Nikon mirrorless is a good one, without screwing up everybody to invest in yet another lens lineup.

      • sdancer

        Calling the SLT “mirrorless” is stretching it a bit. It was an intermediate technology that still needed the relatively massive flange distance to accommodate a mirrorbox, even if it was static and semi-transparent, so there was less motivation to design a new mount.

        The F mount in particular dates back almost 60 years and carries a lot of legacy. It has one of the longest flange distances in the SLR market, only surpassed by medium format and movie systems. On top of that, it has a relatively small usable inner diameter, which is one reason why there’s very few “funny” lenses with very wide apertures: the hole just isn’t big enough to fit the required exit pupil. This meant that “famous” lenses like the 58/1.2 Noct (is there even another?) required special engineering, including an aperture lever angling over the rear element and no space for any electrical contacts, which is probably one reason why the “revival” is “only” f/1.4.

        Oh, the new back-illuminated Sony sensor is one step closer to bringing back old wide-angle designs that extend very close to the film plane by allowing lower incident angles. Those designs massively ease construction, reduce weight, and you could actually have 35mm or 28mm lenses with acceptable optical quality that don’t weigh as much as a fast 24-70 standard zoom!

        All in all, dragging such a monstrosity of a mount into another generation of cameras just wouldn’t be a good idea in any way.

        • vriesk

          OK, I see those reasons. But it seems that all those other SLR manufactures that jumped into mirrorless also got it quite wrong – the only current mount accomodating full frame (for APS-C all those usable inner diameters don’t matter that much anyway) is Sony E-mount, and it also looks like it happened kinda by accident, as the mount obscures sensor edges and causes issues with telephotos longer than 300mm.

          Also, look how huge the Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 is.

    • MyrddinWilt

      The only good reason to go to mirrorless is so that wide lenses no longer need to have a retrofocus design with a huge front element. A 14mm f/1.4 should cost no more than about $200 for a mirrorless mount. But on F-mount the f/2.8 is $1400 and you can’t use filters without a special adapter.

      If I bought a full frame mirrorless Nikon, it would be strictly for wide angle shots. A DSLR is going to still beat it for telephoto as it can have better autofocus and viewfinder. Using an f-mount adapter as an occasional convenience, sure but not as default.

      I always carry a V1 with my big gear because its like having a lossless 2.5x teleconverter in the bag. A full frame wouldn’t give me that advantage. In fact it is really hard to see any advantage it would have over a CX body with decent sensor resolution and a good set of dedicated CX wide primes. Diffraction would be better but everything else depends on the lens aperture, not the sensor size. Its what goes into the camera that matters, not what happens inside the camera.

      • capitanharlock

        Diffraction, bokeh and a bigger viewfinder, actually.

        • MyrddinWilt

          No, bokeh is due to the lens design. Depth of field goes by the actual aperture, if you have a 100mm aperture you get the same depth of field regardless of sensor size for the same field of view.

  • Riley Escobar

    I would be interested in this if they get AF to work well. It would be cheaper than the Fuji road that I’m now going down.

    • Chris

      Commlite, in previous tests, has problems with certain Canon lens.

    • VanHoff

      I see a trend here with fuji pre-paid trolls on every -brand-rumors web, they all talk about the perks and the “slight” but undeniable endless capabilities of Fuji vs any other camera on this universe… Given I don’t have an stable job as a Photographer, how much you think Fuji or a subsidiary will pay me to do even more trolling than you (all of you) do on a month???

      • Riley Escobar

        Tell me what you find out as I’d love to get paid by anyone to take pictures. I’ll be a shill for any brand 🙂

      • nwcs

        Fuji doesn’t have the budget for that, but they do engender a lot of loyalty. I’d say Sony trolls have been the worst lately.

  • dbltax

    I have a bunch of Nikon lenses (obviously) but have been intrigued by the A7S. What’s put me off those is having to buy a bunch of lenses too… With an adaptor like this, I’d literally be able to buy the body and adaptor and that’s it. Strong product.

  • MonkeySpanner

    The adapter looks like it is about the size of a pancake prime.

  • This is really exciting news for those wanting to find a way to replace their 14 bit capable cameras with Sony’s awesome 11+7 bit technology. I don’t like all of those different shades of blue and prefer the Yves Klein school of mono color.

  • El Aura

    That might be the case but has little to with the mirrorless vs DSLR status of both cameras but rather with the specific Lifeview/EVF implementation. And given the same Lifeview/EVF implementation, and EVF makes handheld focussing much easier than having to deal with a bulky loupe.

    • Agreed. The loupe is a crappy solution.

    • Agreed. The loupe is a crappy solution.

  • Back to top