it looks fine dude, there's no other way anyway

From what I'm reading, it sounds like the results aren't very good. Not only does the (sadly necessary for infinity focus) lens element in the adapter affect contrast and sharpness, but it's also quite small and apparently means that most lenses are reduced to f/3.5 or less.

It's worth a shot, though, since it's decently cheap.

Nikons aren't great for adapting lenses to. Get a Canon or m43 or Mirrorless.

>>2771705
Canon wouldn't really be any better in this case, EOS adapters for Exakta have the same lens in them. M43 would work, but would suck because of the 2x crop factor.

I hate to say it, but the ideal camera in this case would probably be an A7R, since it's got the short flange distance of mirrorless but an FF sensor behind it.

>>2771634
get a sony a7

>>2771726
That's true for Exakta, but Canon's flange distance 2.5mm shorter than Nikon, which means many lenses are easily adaptable.

Thanks guys. I think I'll give it a shot. I mean, I can always send it back if it doesnt work and i dont see any alternative.

>>2771726
Well, acutally canon hat a flange distance of 44mm while exakta has 44,7mm. That gives you 0,7mm space you can use.
I used this to adapt my exa lenses to a nikon1 because a nikon1-eos ef eos ef-exakta combination was cheaper than a nikon1-exakta adapter.

>>2771634
are you literally me, i'm in exactly the same situation as you

The exacta lenses will mount via an adapter, but they won't meter properly so you'll have to use a light meter and as far as I can tell from using MF lenses with a D5300 the MF rangefinder isn't available. Instead, with me there's a little green light in the bottom left of the viewfinder.

In my case the lenses came from my aunt and uncle who used them a lot in the '70s, and the camera they were on has also died.

Not sure what the IQ would be like, I'm still not sure if I want to buy an adapter.

>>2771726
Actually they make thinner adapters without the lens for canon and you still get focus at infinity.