Nikon is taking Viltrox to court. At least, that’s the rumor going around. According to Chinese court documents, the Japanese manufacturer is suing the Shenzhen-based lens maker for patent infringement related to the Z mount. This move could shake up the ecosystem of third-party Z mount lenses and is already causing concern among users.
Sommaire
A court case in Shanghai
For several days now, a rumor has been circulating in the photography community: Nikon has reportedly filed a lawsuit against Viltrox in China. The information, initially shared on Chinese social media and then picked up by the websites Asobinet and Nikon Rumors, is based on documents from Chinese court databases.
According to these sources, a hearing is scheduled at the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court on March 2, 2026. The case, registered under number (2025) Hu73 Zhi Min Chu No. 182, pits Nikon Corporation against three entities: Shenzhen Viltrox Technology Co., Shenzhen Jueying Technology Co. (the parent company of Viltrox), and Shanghai Qiuhong Photographic Equipment Co., a local distributor.
The subject matter of the dispute is very specific in Chinese patent law: it concerns a “dispute over royalties for the provisional protection period of a patent.” Specifically, Nikon is reportedly claiming royalties for Viltrox products sold while a Nikon patent was under review—a patent that has since been granted. The patent in question likely concerns the communication or autofocus protocols of the Z mount.
We have contacted Nikon. At the time of publishing this article, we have not yet received a response.
The 2x teleconverter, the trigger for the deal?
On Chinese social media, several theories are circulating about the origin of the dispute. One of the possibilities mentioned concerns the 2x teleconverter for Sony E and Nikon Z mounts recently marketed by Viltrox, whose launch was reportedly particularly low-key.
This Viltrox 2x teleconverter is the first optical accessory to feature a dual Nikon Z mount (on both the optical side and the camera body side). Some observers believe that Nikon may have viewed this product as crossing a line that should not be crossed. In this case, Viltrox may also have infringed on a Nikon patent.
This could explain why Nikon accepts the Megadap ETZ21 Pro+, which allows Sony E lenses to be used on the Z mount while maintaining autofocus, as it does not have a Z mount where the lens is screwed in.
Viltrox, an optical competitor that has become too serious for Nikon?
The discord may also be due to Viltrox’s spectacular rise in recent years. The Shenzhen-based manufacturer is no longer content to offer economical alternatives to the lenses of established manufacturers: it now competes head-to-head with them on optical quality.
The Viltrox “Lab” and “Pro” series perfectly illustrate this ambition. When we tested the Viltrox AF 135mm f/1.8 LAB, we highlighted the excellent image quality of this lens, which is capable of competing with the market leaders. The same is true of the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.2 LAB, which offers remarkable optical performance at a fraction of the price of its Nikon or Sony equivalents.
This rise in popularity puts Viltrox on a par with Sigma in many respects: build quality, optical performance, and autofocus reliability. The difference? The price. While a high-end Nikkor Z 35mm f/1.2 S lens retails for over €3,000, the equivalent Viltrox lens costs less than €1,000.
For Nikon, the equation becomes problematic. The Japanese brand relies on its lenses to generate margins. Seeing a third-party manufacturer offer credible alternatives at prices two to three times lower represents a direct threat to this business model. Especially since Viltrox continues to expand its catalog for the Z mount, with several new products announced for 2026: 35mm f/1.8 EVO, 55mm f/1.8 EVO, 50mm f/1.2 Lab, and 85mm f/1.2 Lab.
The previous Canon: a virtually closed RF mount
This case inevitably brings to mind the situation with Canon’s RF mount, which remains the most closed on the hybrid market. In 2021, Samyang was forced to quickly cease production of its RF mount autofocus lenses after legal pressure from Canon. Viltrox was also forced to withdraw its RF lenses from the market.
Since April 2024, Canon has slightly opened the door to Sigma and Tamron, but only for APS-C lenses designed for cameras such as the EOS R7 or R50. No third-party full-frame autofocus lenses are allowed on RF mounts: Canon reserves exclusivity in this premium segment.
Until now, Nikon’s Z mount seemed to follow a different philosophy. Unlike Canon, Nikon had never taken legal action against third-party manufacturers and allowed a diverse ecosystem of alternative lenses to flourish. This relative openness was also a selling point for photographers who wanted a wide choice of lenses at a range of prices.
What are the risks for Viltrox users?
If Nikon wins the case, several scenarios are possible. The most optimistic would be a licensing agreement allowing Viltrox to continue marketing its lenses in exchange for royalty payments, which would likely be reflected in the retail prices.
The pessimistic scenario, discussed on Chinese social media, would be an outright ban on Viltrox Z-mount lenses, similar to what happened with Canon’s RF mount.
A third, more insidious risk is of particular concern to current users: Nikon could theoretically release a firmware update for its Z cameras that would block or degrade compatibility with third-party lenses. On Chinese forums, the advice is already circulating: “Don’t update your camera’s firmware until the situation is clarified.”
A joke is circulating on social media: “If Viltrox is in court with Nikon, maybe Nikon will end up buying Viltrox.“ This is a reference to RED, which was acquired by Nikon after a long dispute over video patents.
The hearing on March 2 in Shanghai should provide the first concrete answers. Until then, photographers equipped with Z-mount cameras and Viltrox lenses remain in limbo.
