Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am planning on selling my Canon 6D II and getting an A7III in the coming months and wanted some advice. 

 

I was considering getting the Metabones V but I rather use the native lenses (I will probably add the new Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 once released and if it is good) so I'm thinking the MC-11 may be the better option. The reason for this is, the only lenses I plan to adapt is the 16-35 f/4L and 100L which both are used for static objects and don't require fast AF (long exposures, landscapes and still life) and would rather save money being that Metabones is twice the cost. 

 

I don't really shoot any fast paced action shots, just mostly landscapes, still life and the odd portrait. Does this plan seem logical and like a good idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jaf-Photo

No, I don't think it's a good idea. If you use adapters to cripple the native functions of a Sony mirrorless camera, it's just a sensor in a box. It won't perform a lot better than your 6DII.

 

Sony only used to emphasise adapters back when their lens line was inadequate. It's not actually a realistic way of doing photography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I don't think it's a good idea. If you use adapters to cripple the native functions of a Sony mirrorless camera, it's just a sensor in a box. It won't perform a lot better than your 6DII.

 

Sony only used to emphasise adapters back when their lens line was inadequate. It's not actually a realistic way of doing photography.

 

When it comes to IQ, how would I be crippling the A7III using adapters? If I am shooting landscapes I use manual focus so AF reliability isn't as issue. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jaf-Photo

Lens adapters cause misalignment, which can affect IQ. Even if the misaligment is microscopic, it can reduce sharpness in the image. Digilloyd and Lensrentals have tested it and written about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have sold essentially all of my Canon glass because native just works better.  Having said that I kept my Sigma 18-35 1.4 Canon mount with King adapter (was $80 years ago and actually out performed mc-11 and metabones III); but I don't think you can find the King available anymore.  It was/is a great adapter for $80!  The 18-35 works well, fast focus including fast eye autofocus.  As a result I sold my Metabones III, and IV...the King was just better with the lens selection and needs I had.  If you can find a King you will save $$$$.post-2648-0-95648700-1524941247_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

`     

   

 

"Lens adapters cause misalignment, which

can affect IQ. Even if the misaligment is

microscopic, it can reduce sharpness in the

image. Digilloyd and Lensrentals have

tested it and written about it."   

 

 

Link to the article mentioned above:   

   

https://wordpress.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters/   

   

   

Too many members of the forum will read

that Lensrentals has written about how ...

  

.... adapters are hugely

and totally useless .... 

     

without comprehending that it says they are 

totally useless for use on an optical bench, 

but failing to realize what that means.   

     

The adapters absolutely failed to be precise 

enuf to serve as an integral component of

an optical bench. BTW they are also totally

useless as hockey pucks. Both these facts  

are equally meaningless to photographers. 

Lensrentals does a disservice to the photo 

community by discussing optical bench use. 

   

Thaz like saying the drugs that save your 

life ... chemicals that are USP phama-pure, 

have absolutely and totally failed to be pure 

and precise enuf to be used as analytical

reagents by research chemists. BTW that is 

generally the case. That is why chemicals 

come in three grades: Reagent, USP, and 

Industrial. Do not put industrial in your body. 

But USP is for USE in your Body. Reagent 

is waaaaay too pure and precise and costly 

to waste on human consumption. It is for 

research analysts, and must be ultra perfect

so as to have no tiny trace element that will 

bring error into test reactions. Likewise an 

optical bench is a TESTING device, and so  

every element of it must be 99.999...99% 

error-free. True, adapters are not that pure.  

    

An Optical Bench is not for making actual

photographs. It's for ultra accurate testing.

IOW it needs "reagent" grade components, 

waaaaay closer to absolute perfection than 

the USP quality that you use on your body, 

IOW on your camera body. 

   

Adapters are not good for the devices that 

TEST lenses. They are quite suitable for 

devices that USE lenses to record images.  

   

This all spelled out in the linked story if you 

know how to objectively READ it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 8:17 AM, Guest Jaf-Photo said:

No, I don't think it's a good idea. If you use adapters to cripple the native functions of a Sony mirrorless camera, it's just a sensor in a box. It won't perform a lot better than your 6DII.

 

Sony only used to emphasise adapters back when their lens line was inadequate. It's not actually a realistic way of doing photography.

Actually it's only the ability to adapt to such a wide variety of lens mounts that interest some of us. It's given me a wide variety of lenses to choose from for less than the cost of a single native lens. While the native lens line up has increased dramatically it still doesn't have options that match the capabilities of some of my toys. Coupled to a rangefinder lens a mirrorless camera will manage much better than a DSLR.

Sony's longest lens is 400mm, I have 500mm, 600mm & even 1000mm options even without using teleconverters. There are a couple of native tilt shift lenses from 3rd party manufacturers, but they are fully manual too so don't offer much advantage over adapting with a tilt/shift adapter...

I don't use AF when adapting lenses, but there's even an adapter that allows ANY lens to AF on later Sony bodies (the Techart Pro)

Sony may prefer us to all buy their lenses but using adapted lenses is quite realistic and far more fun.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By FLHTC
      Black Friday is now about 17 days from now.  Does B&H or Adorama offer some real good deals on this day, or is it all hype?  
       
    • By FLHTC
      Yesterday I ordered the Sony a7iii camera body.  As I was ordering it, several levels of insurance policies were offered, which I did not buy as money is tight.  My question is whether I should have bought one of them.  First camera, so not sure what is the norm.
    • By kalforever
      Hi everyone!
      I just acquired a couple of months ago the Sony a6000 to start into serious photography (I used to shoot IPhone and even if I love it, I've always looked for better and true stunning  photos), I paired it with the Sigma 16mm F1.4 and love the versatility and the results especially the image quality. I've used primarily as an all-round, travel, every day photography even environmental portraits in low light.
      I'm very excited since just received the A7III in addition to start in the FF world and I'm just trying to decide the first lens should I buy for, after reading and watching a lot of reviews I narrowed my search to the following candidates:
      Sony 24-105mm F4 G, very useful focal length range and super sharp, F4 aperture may be compensated by increasing ISO in low light situations. Tamron 28-75mm F2.8, standard zoom lens for landscape, portrait and street photography, the F2.8 and apparently good sharpness is something really gets me. Sony Zeiss 50mm F1.4 / 55mm F1.8 standard primes, the overall performance and good perks of the 55mm are great, but the reviews about the stunning pop ("like magic") of the 50mm image quality really wants me to incline for this lens, is that really good? Sony 24mm F1.4 G Master, in pre-order right now but I really expect an excellent performance and to be a go-to for landscape photography and overkill the previous experience with the Sigma 16mm 1.4 (APS-C). I can just afford 1 lens this year (I won't be buying another lens even after savings) and don't mind to be walking in or out to get the perfect composition, I just want to get the best experience and image quality and start building my lens kit after time.
      Thank you for the feedback!
    • By Al Pha
      Does anyone know why Sony (or 3rd parties) can't make a better adapter for their A-mount SSM and SAM lenses? For example, the relatively inexpensive Sony 28-75 f2.8 is a really good lens. I've tried several copies and they make sharp, contrasty images. However, the AF on my E-mount bodies (a9 & a6500) is hampered by the paucity of focus points. The limiting factor is obviously not the bodies, and I don't think it's the lenses. It seems to be the adapter!
    • By RLimaging
      Long story short I only need 1 lens to work and function a certain way. I do NOT need autofocus. But it's the new Sigma 14-24mm for Nikon that just came out a little while ago, not many people have it on their radar. I just need it to work on aperture priority mode and be able to bracket photos as well. But i shoot on manual focus at infinite. I'm wondering if only the more expensive adapters like the commlite will work with this function or if the cheaper 99 dollar ones will let me control aperture as well. I care about image quality but if the more expensive adapters are only that pricey because of autofocus I could care less. Any info would be appreciated, thanks!
×