LA-EA4 or MC-11 for A7ii

[ZytaZiouZ]

I am soon to be a proud owner of a new to me A7ii, but I currently have no autofocus fullframe lenses for it.  I have more lenses than I really should that can be adapted, but I'm trying to keep costs down, so I just want to get one adapter, but I am having a hard time deciding between the LA-EA4 and either MC-11 or one of the cheaper adapters.  I have newer Canon mount lenses, and Minolta A-mount lenses.  Other than a 2 year old, I don't typically take action pictures.  I take most pictures of landscapes or zoos/aquariums or again the 2 year old.  I'm semi leaning towards the MC-11 or fotodiox or similar, but I really want usable autofocus.

 

LA-EA4 (already have LA-EA2)

Faster focus, more reliable focus?

100-300 APO

50 2.8 macro (I love this lens on my A6000)

50 1.7 (Aperture is stuck open, need to try to operate on it)

28-105 Tamron

28-85 Kit

70-210 F4 (not sure I have a very good copy)

80-200 supersoft lens

 

MC-11

No hump! newer lenses, no losing 1/2-1/3 of a stop of light

Tamron 70-300 VC

Canon 100 2.8 Macro

Tokina 35 2.8 Macro (may not be able to focus)

Canon 28-135 USM

Canon 50 1.4 USM

Could buy 35 F2 Yongnuo for cheap fast 35

[Username]

Looking at all your concerns, and reading all the nightmare posts 

about adapters for EF lenses, and luxuriating in the trouble-free 

service from my two OEM Sony A-mount adapters ... I'd suggest 

the Sony adapter.  

  

Forget all your "pros-and-cons" lists. You wanna shoot pix and 

not waste your time on troublesome devices. Whatever possible 

shortcomings the Sony adapters have compared to the others

when writing your "pro-con" chart, the single Sony feature that

overrides every other feature is compatibility. 

   

You list "no hump" as a "pro" for the MC-11. Just more evidence 

that you can scrap your "pro-and-cons" regime. The "hump" is 

no problem at all for hand-held shots, and occasionally is even 

an advantage ... depending on your gripping habits. When on a 

tripod, the hump is a definite advantage, a better location. Of my 

four adapters, only one lacks a tripod mounting block and I really 

regret that [but it's OK, for me, cuz I have the other three].  

   

The tripod-unfriendly adapter was my first one. All subsequent 

adapters were intentionally chosen with tripod use in mind. 

   

_______________________________________________   

   

In the "money where your mouth is" department, I use about ten 

A-mount lenses via Sony adapters, +/- twenty ancient Nikkors 

via dumb adapters, and altho I have a dozen EF lenses, I have 

no plans to wade into that foul swamp :-(  

   

YMMV

[Username]

BTW some of your A-mount lenses may have 

good coverage well beyond APSC format and 

may be useful on your current LAEA2. Maybe 

the corners will be gone, but you still get close 

to the original FoV even after slight cropping.  

  

For OOC jpegs, I use the Clear Image Zoom 

of the a7-II to crop away dark corners during 

the original shoot, and CIZ maintains the full 

24MP. It does that by interpolation, which you 

can also do in post if you don't do it in-camera 

[as when you shoot raw, cuz CIZ is jpeg-only].  

   

Coverage varies with lens design so you hafta 

check visiually. And BTW, don't insult your 28-

85 by calling it a "kit lens". It's faster, sharper, 

and waaaaay better built [like a tank] :-) 

[ZytaZiouZ]

Thanks for the advice!  I did not mean to insult to the 28-75, it is definitely a very solid lens, but at least on APS-C my 18-105 negated it's usefulness.

 

The A7ii should be here tomorrow, so I plan on testing it out with my LAEA2, and as soon as I get a chance drag everything to a local camera store that has the MC-11 to test out.  Plug and play simplicity sounds great, but I don't mind testing out something if it means being able to use what are generally the sharper set of lenses.  Usable AF is just a requirement for most situations.

 

As for the hump being advantageous, it's the same hump as the LA-EA2 I already have.  It is great for tripod use, but hand held and especially in and out of a case it is more of a pain than not.  Then again I'm one who loves the size of my A6000 and even my old deceased Nex3.

[ZytaZiouZ]

Just information for anyone who might come across this with an A7ii.  After getting the0 MC-11 and testing it out on the A7ii with my lenses, I'm extremely happy with the results.  Just information for how the lenses I tested work:

 

Tamron 70-300 VC        Works amazingly.  Even with a cheap 1.4x teleconverter

Canon 100 2.8 Macro   Works better than on my old 50D. Extremely fast

Tokina 35 2.8 Macro     Sadly doesn't fit on the adapter at all.

Canon 28-135 USM      Worst of the bunch, but still usable autofocus with AF-C. worse case maybe 1 second, best near instant.  once you focus it stays in focus

Tamron 18-250             Better autofocus than on a canon body, even using the cheap 1.4x teleconverter to turn it inoto a full frame lens

Sigma 10-20 HSM         Works great, again even with the 1.4x teleconverter to cover the whole frame to use it as a full frame

Canon 50 1.4 USM       can't test it yet