Nikon PB-6 on a mirrorless digital camera: reproduction ratios change?

[_T_]

If you’re using a nikon z camera you’re at a slight disadvantage for a setup like yours as it’s flange distance is the shortest of any of the major manufacturers at 16mm.

Compared to the flange distance of the system the bellows is designed for (46.5mm) this means you’re losing about 30.5mm of extension from the nominal value of the bellows (208mm). At the required extension for 1:1 for an 80mm lens (≈160mm) this means you would only have about 17.5mm of further movement on the rail with which to focus.

Whether or not those 17.5mm are a viable distance in which to focus depends on how far from the sensor plane the frame of film is being held.

All of this being the case I definitely agree with Ian C that reclaiming the lost flange distance is the most obvious solution to this problem. Every mm of extension tube added is a mm of movement given back to the rail.

A set of extension tubes are also very affordable and readily available, especially compared to buying a different lens or finding and buying a difficult to source rail extension.

I would rig up a test where an object is held at the correct distance from the setup to allow it to be in focus and measure the distance at which it lies from the front of the lens with a ruler. Subtract that distance from the distance at which the film is held from from the front of the lens in your holder and that will give you the amount of additional movement you need and thus the length of extension tube(s) required. Or if the results show too great a distance for extension tubes, it will tell you if you really do require the additional extension of the extension rail

 

[Dan Fromm]

If you’re using a nikon z camera you’re at a slight disadvantage for a setup like yours as it’s flange distance is the shortest of any of the major manufacturers at 16mm.

Compared to the flange distance of the system the bellows is designed for (46.5mm) this means you’re losing about 30.5mm of extension from the nominal value of the bellows (208mm). At the required extension for 1:1 for an 80mm lens (≈160mm) this means you would only have about 17.5mm of further movement on the rail with which to focus.

Whether or not those 17.5mm are a viable distance in which to focus depends on how far from the sensor plane the frame of film is being held.

All of this being the case I definitely agree with Ian C that reclaiming the lost flange distance is the most obvious solution to this problem. Every mm of extension tube added is a mm of movement given back to the rail.

A set of extension tubes are also very affordable and readily available, especially compared to buying a different lens or finding and buying a difficult to source rail extension.

I would rig up a test where an object is held at the correct distance from the setup to allow it to be in focus and measure the distance at which it lies from the front of the lens with a ruler. Subtract that distance from the distance at which the film is held from from the front of the lens in your holder and that will give you the amount of additional movement you need and thus the length of extension tube(s) required. Or if the results show too great a distance for extension tubes, it will tell you if you really do require the additional extension of the extension rail

Hmm. If I'm clear on the OP's equipment, he has a PB-6 bellows. F-mount. He has a Z6 II body. Z-mount. F-mount into Z-mount does not go.

Attaching an F-mount bellows to a Z-mount body requires a a mount adapter FTZ or FTZ II. Male end, Z-mount, female end, F-mount. F-mount flange-to-sensitized surface distance is 46.5 mm. You say the Z-mount f-to-ss distance is 16 mm. So the adapter has to be 30.5 mm thick.

What have I missed?

If I understand the PB-6 correctly, fully collapsed it is 48 mm thick. Fully extended it is 208 mm thick. So, minimum front flange (female) to sensitized surface distance is 94.5 mm. Maximum is 254.5 mm.

In post #1 above the OP stated that a 50/2.8 enlarging lens on his rig (Z6 II + something + PB-6) "I still can't focus at 1:1 and I don't get the whole negative/slide on the sensor." The OP must have put an adapter between the PB-6 and enlarging lens. I don't think he's ever said what he used. If I'm right, he should tell us what he used.

Today the OP wrote, in post #23 above:

Today I have finally bit the bullet and tried my newly bought 80mm El-Nikkor. I had to extend it to around 160mm from the sensor plane to focus at 1:1, which made it impossible to focus on the negative, as there's not enough rail to get it further away! I need more rail... or I should have gotten a shorter lens (the Micro-Nikkor 55mm comes to mind). Looks like the 80mm El-Nikkor wasn't a good buy after all.

I suspect that the OP meant that whatever he's using to hold the negative being copied won't hold it far enough away from the lens. So, OP, what are you using to hold the neg?

The obvious solution for copying 35 mm slides/negs has been mentioned several times in this discussion. Z6 II + FTZ (or FTZ II) + PB-6 + 55 or 60 mm MicroNikkor + (ES-1 or ES-2 or PS-6) will do that jobs.

The obvious solution for copying a larger negative is Z6 II + FTZ (or FTZ II) + PB-6 + (any old lens, the OP's 50/2.8 enlarging lens would do, so would his 80/2.8) on a copy stand with the neg on a light box. OP, what are you trying to use to hold the larger neg?

 

[wiltw]

For simplicity of checking various distances...the film plane to object being copied at 1:1 will be 4*FL ...

• 2*FL is distance of film plane to lens optical node,
• 2*FL s the distance from lens optical node to object being copied.

 

[_T_]

Hmm. If I'm clear on the OP's equipment, he has a PB-6 bellows. F-mount. He has a Z6 II body. Z-mount. F-mount into Z-mount does not go.

Attaching an F-mount bellows to a Z-mount body requires a a mount adapter FTZ or FTZ II. Male end, Z-mount, female end, F-mount. F-mount flange-to-sensitized surface distance is 46.5 mm. You say the Z-mount f-to-ss distance is 16 mm. So the adapter has to be 30.5 mm thick.

What have I missed?

If I understand the PB-6 correctly, fully collapsed it is 48 mm thick. Fully extended it is 208 mm thick. So, minimum front flange (female) to sensitized surface distance is 94.5 mm. Maximum is 254.5 mm.

In post #1 above the OP stated that a 50/2.8 enlarging lens on his rig (Z6 II + something + PB-6) "I still can't focus at 1:1 and I don't get the whole negative/slide on the sensor." The OP must have put an adapter between the PB-6 and enlarging lens. I don't think he's ever said what he used. If I'm right, he should tell us what he used.

Today the OP wrote, in post #23 above:



I suspect that the OP meant that whatever he's using to hold the negative being copied won't hold it far enough away from the lens. So, OP, what are you using to hold the neg?

The obvious solution for copying 35 mm slides/negs has been mentioned several times in this discussion. Z6 II + FTZ (or FTZ II) + PB-6 + 55 or 60 mm MicroNikkor + (ES-1 or ES-2 or PS-6) will do that jobs.

The obvious solution for copying a larger negative is Z6 II + FTZ (or FTZ II) + PB-6 + (any old lens, the OP's 50/2.8 enlarging lens would do, so would his 80/2.8) on a copy stand with the neg on a light box. OP, what are you trying to use to hold the larger neg?

You’re right. I forgot about the adapter.

 

[fdonadio]

For simplicity of checking various distances...the film plane to object being copied at 1:1 will be 4*FL ...

• 2*FL is distance of film plane to lens optical node,
• 2*FL s the distance from lens optical node to object being copied.

BINGO!

That’s what’s happening here. PB-6’s rail is 250mm long. I need 320mm between the Z6 II sensor and the slide/negative being digitized. This can be solved by using a long extension ring, like @Ian C and @_T_ said. The camera will go further back and the bellows can be contracted a little.

I have also noticed that my problem with the El-Nikkor 50mm is the exact opposite: the bellows won’t contract enough to make the lens nodal point be 100mm away from the sensor.

Using lenses designed for Nikon cameras (Micro-Nikkors) would be the best solution, as @Dan Fromm suggests. They are designed with the flange distance in mind. Also, for 35mm, I wouldn’t need more than 60mm focal distance.

 

[fdonadio]

@gorbas and @Dan Fromm : I will be posting pictures of my set up and more detailed explanations tomorrow. It’s almost 1am here and I gotta sleep.

 

[Ian C]

I set up my PB-6 with a Nikon FE SLR. The flange distance is 46.5 mm. But so too is a Nikon Z camera when the Nikon FTZ adapter is attached, as is the case when using an F-mount lens, extension tubes, or bellows. The flange distance of the Z camera is 16 mm + 30.5 mm for the adapter = 46.5 mm.

So, using a Nikon Z camera with the FTZ adapter gives the same overall F-mount lens flange to image plane distance as a Nikon film SLR—46.5 mm.

My Fotodiox M39-Nik adapter allows attaching an M39 Leica thread enlarging lens to the adapter. The adapter has the male Nikon F mount on the rear. Its thickness is 2.0 mm (for computing lens position relative to the image plane).

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413323-REG/fotodiox_m39_nikf_lens_mount_adapter_for.html

Here are some pertinent measurements:

Nikon PB-4 has a closed thickness (flange-to-flange) of 43 mm per the owner’s manual and confirmed by my measurement.

Nikon PB-6 has closed thickness of 48 mm

I attached the PS-6 Slide Copier to the front of the PB-6 rail.

I mounted the Fotodiox M39-Nik adapter onto the PB-6 and installed a 50 mm f/2.8 EL Nikkor enlarging lens onto the Fotodiox adapter. I placed a 35 mm mounted slide into the copier and was able to fill the viewfinder frame with the image of the slide. I didn’t compute the magnification but judged it to be about 1:1.

This was done with the focus adjustment on the bellows unit at—or close—to the fully-closed limit. Though close, a precise 1:1 magnification might not be realized. This is easier on the PB-4 because the bellows contract 5 mm closer than the bellows on the PB-6.

Next, I removed the 50 mm lens and installed an 80 mm f/5.6 EL Nikkor into the adapter. I used two Star-D extension tubes between my FE SLR and rear of the bellows unit. The tubes are 13 mm, 21, mm, and 31 mm. They can be used singly in any combination. I used 31 mm + 13 mm = 44 mm. Now I could place the flange of the 80 mm EL Nikkor at the required position relative to the image plane of the camera for 1:1 magnification. This allows fine-tuning the lens position and consequently, the magnification.

But this won’t work because the slide is now TOO CLOSE TO THE LENS TO FOCUS, even though the slide copier is as far forward as possible on the PB-6 rail.

An intermediate focal length lens, such as 60 mm f/4 Rodagon, 60 mm f/4 Rodagon WA, or a 63 mm f/2.8 EL Nikkor—used without extension tubes—would work to give 1:1 magnification and provide sufficient leeway to fine-tune the magnification.

These Nikon bellows units would have greater utility had Nikon chosen to make the rails a bit longer, say, 25 – 50 mm longer. The PB-4 and its dedicated PS-4 or PS-5 slide copiers are more versatile than the PB-6 because they allow positioning of the copier farther forward relative to the end of the rail. The PB-4 also allows side-to-side shift of the front standard and some degree of Scheimpflug correction.

https://www.cameramanuals.org/nikon_pdf/nikon_pb-4.pdf

 

[MarkWalberg]

BINGO!

That’s what’s happening here. PB-6’s rail is 250mm long. I need 320mm between the Z6 II sensor and the slide/negative being digitized. This can be solved by using a long extension ring, like @Ian C and @_T_ said. The camera will go further back and the bellows can be contracted a little.

I have also noticed that my problem with the El-Nikkor 50mm is the exact opposite: the bellows won’t contract enough to make the lens nodal point be 100mm away from the sensor.

Using lenses designed for Nikon cameras (Micro-Nikkors) would be the best solution, as @Dan Fromm suggests. They are designed with the flange distance in mind. Also, for 35mm, I wouldn’t need more than 60mm focal distance.

If you want to use an enlarging lens, the Nikkor 63/2.8 would probably work, and is a very good lens, and is not too expensive.

 

[fdonadio]

If you want to use an enlarging lens, the Nikkor 63/2.8 would probably work, and is a very good lens, and is not too expensive.

I used an enlarging lens because that what came in my initial kit. I should have noticed that it might not be the best option, but I just went ahead with it. As I also need lenses for an enlarger, I thought it would be a good idea and didn't think enough about it.

 

[fdonadio]

@Ian C, @gorbas and @Dan Fromm,


Here's a picture of my setup (the FTZ adapter is, in fact, an FTZ II):

When using the 50mm El-Nikkor, even with the bellows fully contracted, the distance between focal plane (sensor) and lens' nodal point exceeds 100mm, which makes it impossible to get the whole slide or negative in the sensor:

On the other hand, with the 80mm Componon-S, the right distance between focal plane (sensor) and lens' nodal point can be achieved, but then there's no way to focus on the slide or negative, as the rail is too short for the PS-6 to be moved farther away from the lens:

@Dan Fromm: I am still not digitising any 120 film yet.

Conclusions:

1. Using enlarger lenses was not a good decision with this specific setup. A Micro-Nikkor 55mm (in its various incarnations) or a 60mm AF-D would have been a better choice, at least for 135 film.

2. One possible solution for digitising 135 film with the 80mm Componon-S is using a long extension tube (like a PN-11) between the FTZ II and the PB-6. This may make it possible to move the PS-6 far enough from the lens.

3. A copy stand setup is the only option for both 120 and 135 film.

Now I can spend money on the tube, but it doesn't seem to be a logical decision... Maybe it's better going the copy stand route and ditching the PS-6.

P.S.: I have never bought anything at Fritz Luhn, so I can't recommend his business.

 

[Ian C]

Regarding conclusion 2 of post #35:

Read post #32. I tried using an 80 mm lens and 44 mm of extension tubes between Nikon FE lens mount and the PB-6 on 1-25-26. The required lens-to-sensor distance can be attained with the setup I described. But the slide copier is too close to the lens to obtain focus.

Here is the PB-6 manual.

https://www.cameramanuals.org/nikon_pdf/nikon_pb-6_bellows.pdf

50 mm f/2.8N EL Nikkor: f = 52.0 mm, flange distance is 43 mm. The second nodal point is 52 mm – 43 mm = 9 mm forward of the lens flange.

https://www.galerie-photo.com/manuels/el-nikkor-enlarging-lenses.pdf

When mounted on the PB-6, the minimum image distance = second node to enlarger lens flange + M39 adapter (assumed 2 mm) + minimum bellows distance + forward face of FTZ mount to sensor.

Minimum image distance = 9 mm + 2 mm + 48 mm + 46.5 mm = 105.5 mm

magnification = image distance/focal length – 1 = 105.5 mm/52 mm - 1 = 1.03X

This isn’t exactly 1:1, but it is close. It’s slightly greater magnification than 1:1. Since the design of the PB-6 prevents placing the lens closer to the camera. This is the minimum [error corrected] magnification possible with this lens and the PB-6.

It’s possible to use the 80 mm lens on the PB-6 for 1:1 copying. You might have to build a simple light box with a light source inside and place the box far enough from the lens to get correct focus.

It might resemble a contact printing box. The light source could be a flash unit or a lamp. The film or slide would be held in a glass carrier consisting of two sheets of glass to keep the film flat (roll film). The film must be centered with the lens axis and be parallel to the camera’s sensor. The focusing and photography would be done in a darkened room. The distance from the lens to the box would be adjusted to obtain the magnification you require.

 

[gorbas]

Thank you fdonadio for posting pictures. It clears a lot of confusion for me. Issue is, PB-6 has less extension than PB-5 I'm using. Difference is that PS-5 (negative holder) add's "working distance" to the bellows. With your PB-6 and PS-6 it's subtracts, because they share the same track.
I'm doing 1:1.07 reproduction ratio instead of 1:1(thin white line around full frame) and with 75mm lens distance from negative plane to the sensor is ~290mm. It's hard to figure out exact iris plane on the lens but I assume that those ~290mm should be equally divided between distance in the front of the lens and behind.
You can add rail extension to the bellows or extend bellows by adding extension tubes but as Ian C said, he was then lacking space to move PS-6 in proper focus.
In term of the quality I got way better scans with 80mm Componon S than with 3.5 or 2.8/55 Micro Nikkors or any other 6 element enlarging 50mm lenses I tried. I did not try any of 60mm Micro Nikkors. Back in the day I tried copy stand approach and in term of keeping things parallel and lack of pain in the neck, right Nikon bellows and negative holder in horizontal position beats is big time.
Good luck!

 

[xkaes]

This is the maximum magnification possible with this lens and the PB-6.

Don't you mean minimum?

 

[fdonadio]

@Ian C,


Regarding all of your posts, especially #36: thanks so much for all the effort and maths.

I've met a friend today that happened to have a set of extension tubes made by Kenko, maybe the exact ones you suggested (12, 20 and 36mm). I've borrowed them and have just tested the 36 and 12 mm tubes "in series" between the FTZ and the PB-6. Bellows is almost totally collapsed. Everything sits at their limits: the back "standard" of the PB-6 is at the near end (relative to the camera) of the rail and the PS6 is at the far end.

I got the whole negative in the sensor with a very thin border around it! Everything is in perfect focus (even the dirt). Measurements show the distance between focal plane and negative to be (almost?) exactly 320mm (4x FL), as suggested by @wiltw.

About the problems' roots, I guess it's case closed. Again, in my opinion, the PB-6 is more useful with taking lenses, not enlarger lenses.

I think I'm going for the holder you suggested, instead of the PS-6. I will have to deal with the parallelism between the original (slide or negative) and the camera's focal plane, but it's OK.

There are affordable light sources out there. Most of what I shoot is black and white, so CRI is not that important. Anyway, I only scan to have previews of my shots. The real magic will happen in the darkroom.

 

[fdonadio]

Again, thanks everyone for all the help and suggestions!

 

[fdonadio]

I've shot this a couple years ago. Used the rig with tubes, illuminated with a Godox flash. Basic curves editing (including inversion) and resized to 2000x3000 (bicubic). All the dirt and hairs are there to be seen, you can even see that some are on the back, others on the front. No unsharp mask applied. Looks sharp enough.

Rowers. Nikon FM2, 35-70mm f/3.5 AI(s?)? No idea what focal distance and aperture was set, probably more like 70mm. Film is Adox HR-50, shot at box speed and developed with HR-DEV, according to the instructions on the package.

 

[250swb]

It seems like some very complicated and expensive rigs are being constructed to get around the problem that the cheap 55mm micro is not a 1+1 lens. The simple answer is to use the slightly more expensive 60mm AF-D lens which fits directly onto the FTZ to give 1+1 reproduction without needing all the extra bits.

 

[Ian C]

Per Post #38, the error in my post #36 is corrected. Thank you for catching it.

I thought about this problem a bit more. The bellows unit works as intended. But for slide copying at 1:1, the PB-6 has limitations. That’s because of the minimum 48 mm flange-to-flange distance of the fully closed bellows and the fact that the PS-6 Slide Copying attachment can’t be placed any farther forward on the rail when longer lenses are employed to deal with the 48 mm closed bellows restriction.

One rather expensive solution is to obtain the PB-6E Extension Bellows unit. You’d remove the front standard from the PB-6E, connect the PB-6 and PB-6E together and attach the PS-6 onto the rail of the PB-6E.

In this way, the PS-6 can be placed at the correct position for the desired magnification with a lens of the appropriate focal length. We can calculate this position to determine where everything must be to see what’s needed.

1:1 magnification occurs when the overall distance from the subject plane to the image plane = 4f + the distance between the first & second nodal points. Nikon provides the correct focal lengths (to the nearest 0.1 mm) and nodal distances in its EL Nikkor PDFs.

50 mm f/2.8N EL Nikkor

f = 52 mm, nodal distance = 13.9 mm

Subject to Image = 4(52 mm) + 13.9 mm = 221.9 mm

Note: The 48 mm closed bellows dimension interferes with the desired magnification with this lens.



63 mm f/2.8N EL Nikkor

f = 62.9 mm, nodal distance = 5 mm

Subject to Image = 4(62.9 mm) + 5 mm = 281.8 mm

Slide copier must be placed beyond the end of the PB-6 rail.


80 mm f/5.6N EL Nikkor

f = 80.2 mm, nodal distance = 3.3 mm

Subject to Image = 4(80.2 mm) + 3.3 mm = 324.1 mm

Slide copier must be placed beyond the end of the PB-6 rail.


I can’t find the nodal distance data for the 4/80 Componon-S. The data for the 80/5.6 EL Nikkor should be similar as they are both are 80 mm 6-element 4-group Double Gauss design lenses.

The camera manufacturers don’t generally provide nodal distance data for their lenses. I’ve no idea why. Nikon has always given the most complete data for its enlarger lenses compared to the other makers.

With this setup, you can obtain 1:1 magnification and fine-tune it per your requirements.

Another possible idea: The plastic end caps on the PB-6 are attached with 1/4"-20 thread-per-inch UNC thread. You could remove the forward cap and use the threaded hole as an attachment point for a simple extension of your own design to hold the PS-6 at the appropriate distance from the lens.

The 60 mm f/2.8 AFD Micro Nikkor is a fine macro lens with sufficient focus travel that it can focus to 1:1 without bellows or extension tubes. The nodal distance data is not available. However, it’s probably safe to assume that it is similar to the 63 mm EL Nikkor.

f = 60 mm, assumed nodal distance = 5 mm

Subject to Image = 4(60 mm) + 5 mm = 245 mm

As with the 63 mm and 80 mm enlarging lenses, a slide copier must be placed beyond the end of the PB-6 rail.

 

[Dan Fromm]

It seems like some very complicated and expensive rigs are being constructed to get around the problem that the cheap 55mm micro is not a 1+1 lens. The simple answer is to use the slightly more expensive 60mm AF-D lens which fits directly onto the FTZ to give 1+1 reproduction without needing all the extra bits.

Huh? Although I have a PB-4 and a PS-4, for slide copying (NOT scanning), I prefer to use a 55/2.8 AIS MicroNikkor plus PK-13 (27.5 mm extension tube) with an ES-1 screwed into the front of the lens. All this on a D810, not that which camera I use matters. Works a treat. Much easier to set up and use than the bellows with its slide holder.

 

[fdonadio]

I thought about this problem a bit more. The bellows unit works as intended. But for slide copying at 1:1, the PB-6 has limitations.

Thanks again for the clear explanation and data.

Yes, the PB-6 might work well with the 55 or 60mm Micro-Nikkors for that. In my case, the problem is not the PB-6 per se, but the combination with the 50mm El-Nikkor.

The idea for a homemade extension is a good one. I only need to get the original around a couple inches further away…

Anyway, you can see (post #41) that I achieved a good result with the extension tubes added to the rig. It is an acceptable solution for 135 film.

For 120, the copy stand setup is a must.

 

[loccdor]

Copy work can be more technically challenging than the photography itself. I'm still improving my setup and technique after 2 years. I use a copystand and 50mm 1:1 macro lens for 35mm and 120. Extension tubes and lens reversal for half frame is a recent addition to the workflow.

 

[Dan Fromm]

@Ian C, @gorbas and @Dan Fromm,


Here's a picture of my setup (the FTZ adapter is, in fact, an FTZ II):

@Ian C, @gorbas and @Dan Fromm,


Here's a picture of my setup (the FTZ adapter is, in fact, an FTZ II):

https://www.photrio.com/forum/attachments/img_3401-jpg.416598/

OP, thanks for posting this.

Your rig is more surreal than I expected, and that seems to be the way Nikon intended it.

The PS-4 has a bellows at the rear. The bellows' rear clips into a 55 MicroNikkor's filter threads to keep out stray light. What in your rig keeps the darkness between lens and PS-6 slide holder in? I've checked the PB-6 manual and apparently the PS-6 doesn't have an integral bellows. What was Nikon thinking?

OP, this thread has also been very revealing. I suggest that you obtain a copy of A. A. Blaker's book Field Photography or a copy of Lester Lefkowitz' book The Manual of Closeup Photography. Both used to be available from used book sellers (abebooks.com, alibris.com, amazon.com, ...) at reasonable prices, may still be. Both are old and so are film-oriented. Nevertheless they lay out the basics very clearly. Blaker is, IMO, the better teacher.

I know that you're in the EU and may have problems buying from US vendors, but please try.

 

[250swb]

Huh? Although I have a PB-4 and a PS-4, for slide copying (NOT scanning), I prefer to use a 55/2.8 AIS MicroNikkor plus PK-13 (27.5 mm extension tube) with an ES-1 screwed into the front of the lens. All this on a D810, not that which camera I use matters. Works a treat. Much easier to set up and use than the bellows with its slide holder.

Insightful, but the OP was asking about using a Nikon Z mirrorless camera, which has a different native lens mount, so the camera and therefore the subsequent accessories does matter doesn't it?

 

[Ian C]

Regarding one point of post #47

". . . apparently the PS-6 doesn't have an integral bellows. What was Nikon thinking?"

The Nikon PS-6 has an integral bellows shade to keep room light from interfering with film or slide copying. To open it, you’d grasp the rearmost frame and pull rearward to defeat the two magnet latches at the sides that normally keep the bellows shade closed. It opens most easily by prying open one side at a time.

You can see this in the following video at the 1:15 time.

Nikon PS-6 slide negative copy and lightroom editing - YouTube

Here’s a video about using the PB-6 bellows unit.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Insightful, but the OP was asking about using a Nikon Z mirrorless camera, which has a different native lens mount, so the camera and therefore the subsequent accessories does matter doesn't it?

Not at all. Thanks to the FTZ adapters, what fits an F-mount Nikon fits a Z-mount Nikon.

Also, remember that for slide copying the user should set the aperture and tell the body to use aperture preferred auto exposure. That the AIS lens has no chip and that the PK-13 has no contacts is irrelevant.