The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

  • Recently, there has been an increased activity from spammers, which may result in you receiving unwanted private messages. We are working hard to limit this activity.

A7rII with Canon AF database reference.

Aphoto

New member
That is "my" list now:

Canon EF 15mm: yes
Canon EF 20 2,8: yes
Canon EF 35 1,4L: yes
Canon 40 2.8 STM : yes
Canon EF 50 1,8: no
Canon EF 50 1,4: no
Canon EF 50 2,5 Macro: no
Canon EF 50 1,2L : yes
Canon EF 85 1,8: no
Canon EF 85 1,2L II: yes
Canon EF 100L IS Macro: slow
Canon EF 100 Macro: no
Canon EF 135 2,0L: no
Canon EF 200 2,8L: no
Canon EF 16-35 2,8L: yes
Canon EF 16-35 4L: yes
Canon EF 17-40 4L: yes
Canon EF 24-70 2,8L II: yes
Canon EF 24-105L: yes
Canon EF 70-200/2.8L: very bad
Canon EF 70-200/2.8L II: yes
Canon EF 70-300DO: yes
Canon EF 100-400 II: bad (ok < 300mm)
SIGMA ART: 35mm 1,4: yes
SIGMA ART: 50mm 1,4: yes
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
This is a very valuable thread...... too bad that I just happen to own the Canon lenses that don't auto focus. I'm also assuming that this adapter (Metabones lll) is the only one that will set the aperture.... correct?

Victor
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
No, it's not the only one. Brian Smith has a good summary on his blog here.

Joe
Thanks Joe according to Brian's list the 135 and 200 version II work with the Viltrox adapter. This might be worth a try for someone that has those lenses.

I actually thought about buying the 200 and adpter myself and try it. Than reality hit me. Lol
 

ebbtide

New member
spence-- Unfortunately the 400 5.6L does not work. I can get it to lock on every once in a while, but thus far the 400 5.6 and the 100 2.8L macro are the only Canon lenses that do not work for me. Take what I say with a grain of salt because the a7rii just arrived a couple of hours ago and I've only been using it for about a half hour thus far.

Regarding the relative speed of the 24-70 2.8 ii, I think that brings up a good point; we are talking in a binary fashion that a lens just works or it doesn't, but there are of course degrees of how well it works. I have just cursory impressions but would say it is not as fast as using the 24-70 ii on the 5dmiii, but it's still quite good and quite usable for most purposes. Every once in a while, I get a very slight extra judder at the end for fine focusing. Maybe others can chime in who have used this lens with the a7rii for longer than the few minutes I've had it.

I'm going to try to shoot sports in the next few days-- probably kiteboarding or windsurfing (I'm in San Francisco)-- with the 70-200 2.8ii both with and without the 1.4 tc. This lens definitely "works" but does it work well enough for sports or other fast moving subjects? Obviously I didn't get the a7rii for sports, but I'm trying to move from Canon to Sony and I'm hoping I can shoot 80+% with Sony now (also have the a7s). Really the only reason I'd shoot Canon now are: long lens/sports (which I don't shoot often) and using speedlites (and this could just be what I'm used to).

btw, I'm really disappointed to hear about the 100-400 ii. I was thinking about getting this lens very soon. What are people doing for long lens choices?. Should I consider the 70-400 Sony with a sony adapter instead? (I know nothing about the sony adapters and A mount lenses).

Much of this is a repeat, but:
Works:
16-35L 2.8 ii
35mm 1.4
85mm 1.2L (slow on both Canon and Sony! but lovely)
24-70L 2.8 ii
24-105L f4
70-200L 2.8 ii

Doesn't work:
400L 5.6
100L 2.8 Macro
Zeiss 21mm ZE (kidding. . . )
 

spence

New member
Thank you ebbtide. The Canon 24-70 II sounds like it might be a winner. Keep us posted as you continue to shoot :)

Disappointing to hear the 400f5.6 is a no-go. Which adapter and firmware are you using?
 

jamato8

New member
Did some more work outside with the 11-24L. Sometimes on 24 it will hunt. I think that if Metabones for the IV, which is what I am using, does an update, which they haven't for the IV to A7RII, things could be better. Using the 11-24 on manual focus and the magnifier I can really focus just about as fast as the 5DIII with this lens and if I want something truly specific, the manual focus and magnification is even better. For general stuff the auto focus is working about 85 to 90 percent of the time and pretty fast.
 

akclimber

New member
Just tried my year or so old Commlite EF-NEX adapter + just rec'd A7R2 with the following lenses/results. Used AF-S center point medium.

1) 500 f/4 IS MK I - Inconsistent focusing. Works slowly with very high contrast subjects and not at all with other subjects. Electronic controls work. Did try AF-C on this lens. No go - doesn't work at all.

2) 300 f/4 IS (ancient version) - Doesn't AF at all. Forgot to check aperture control, etc.

3) 100-400 MK I (ancient version) - Doesn't AF at all. Didn't bother checking aperture control.

4) 70-400 f/4 IS - Interesting results. Very fast AF at longest focal length, slow, sort of stepped contrast detect AF at shortest focal length with AF speed improving as focal length increases.

5) 24-105 f/4 IS - Same results as 70-200 f/4 IS.

6) 17 TSE - Electronic controls work.

7) 24 TSE MK II - Electronic controls work.

8) 12-24 Sigma MK II - Seems to work OK. AF not lightening fast but pretty quick and seemingly accurate. AF speed not focal length dependent as on Canons above. Full electronic control.

Hope somebody finds that useful!

Cheers!
 

sbay

New member
This is a great thread as I have a bunch of canon lenses. I'm still waiting on my camera (didn't preorder due to lots of traveling) so don't have anything to contribute yet.

One suggestion I have is to start a google docs spreadsheet and make it public.
 

ebbtide

New member
spence-- I'm using the metabones iv adapter with the latest firmware update.
Btw, I saw on the FM forum that someone linked to a review that stated that the 400 5.6L not only worked but was very fast. I just tried mine again to make sure I wasn't on crack and I still find that the 400 just hunts and does not work. I will take it and the 70-200 and the 24-70 out one day this week and try to see how it feels in normal shooting in different lighting conditions. Offhand, I've already found that lenses that work might have a little trouble here and there in different lighting but I think it's better to spend a little more time with them before trying to say anything definitive.

To be honest, I never used the 400 that often anyway and am going to sell it. It's sharp-- especially for the money. I just don't use that focal length enough. And the lack of IS was limiting at that focal length (for me anyway) and though it gets me nowhere close to 400mm, I would usually shoot with the 70-200 and 1.4 tc instead.
 

jamato8

New member
Have those using the Metabones IV adapter updated the firmware to the latest version?

It is V.42, when I updated my adapter my 300 F4 L would work to change aperture. Before the update it did not change aperture or focus. It also would auto focus but slowly. Will test with A7RII when it arrives.

Link to page on Metabones site. Firmware Window or Mac option on right.

I just tested a Canon 20mm F2.8L II, and a 50mm F1.4. Both change aperture and focus (slowly) with both the Metabones IV and Fotodiox adapters on an A7II. Based on what has been reported with pre-release sample A7RIIs those lenses should work with much improved AF on the A7RII. Adorama confirmed mine is in the que for shipping. Should get here Friday or Monday.
I find .41 but not .42. .41 was done before the A7RII was released so it is not optimized for the II.
 

dmward

Member
I find .41 but not .42. .41 was done before the A7RII was released so it is not optimized for the II.
Ops. That was a typo.
Current version is .41 and it was available before the A7RII.

My A7RII arrives Monday and testing with the EF-E adapters is one of the things I intend to address.
 

Rawfa

New member
2006?? That's terrible. One of the most awesome things about the A7RII was the fact that I could get a 28mm 1.8, a 50mm 1.4, an 85mm 1.8 and a 100mm 2.8 macro more or less for the price of a FE 35mm 1.4. None of these lenses was released after 2006.
 

jamato8

New member
I contacted Metabones and they have just gotten their hands on the A7RII so they will work on any FW updates but it will be a while with the Metabones IV for EF lenses, which is what I am using.
 

dmward

Member
A7RII arrived this afternoon.
I went through my collection of Canon lenses with Metabones IV and Fotodiox adapters.
Results similar to others. I did notice that several lenses changed performance characteristics when the AF was changed from Phase to Contrast in the menu.

In no case did it change a lens from poor to good. Maybe to less bad.

The one lens that seemed to work best was the 35mm F1.4L.
This is a lens that was designed well before 2006. With Phase AF it was quite fast. At least as good as on Canon. Contrast was not as good.

55mm Macro focused OK on Phase with Metabones, not at all with Fotodiox.

All the lenses had the aperture work so at least they are useable in MF.

The 100mm F2.8L Macro does not work. That lens is after 2006 so not sure how that date figures into the equation.

Tomorrow will spend some time in the field with camera and native lenses.
 

jamato8

New member
I don't know if I mentioned this. The 200L f2 works pretty well. But not like on a Canon. Not that a lot of people have this lens. It is a beauty though.
 

Timkr

Member
I am wondering if amyone has ahad any luck with the 400mm f5.6? I have the Fotodiox adapter and it works beautifully with 24-70II and my 70-200 f4 but it doesnt do anything with the 400. I believe the 400mm is only 4 years old. Thanks
 

spence

New member
I am wondering if amyone has ahad any luck with the 400mm f5.6? I have the Fotodiox adapter and it works beautifully with 24-70II and my 70-200 f4 but it doesnt do anything with the 400. I believe the 400mm is only 4 years old. Thanks
Ebbtide posted above that the 400 F5.6 was a no-go with his Metabones Mk IV. This guy though says his 400 F5.6 worked great with his Metabones Mk IV, but he's unable to test further any time soon. Another guy on that thread is renting a 400F5.6 to try himself.

Contadictory information so far, but it doesn't look too good. I guess there's still the Viltrox to try?
 

ebbtide

New member
Ebbtide posted above that the 400 F5.6 was a no-go with his Metabones Mk IV. This guy though says his 400 F5.6 worked great with his Metabones Mk IV, but he's unable to test further any time soon. Another guy on that thread is renting a 400F5.6 to try himself.

Contadictory information so far, but it doesn't look too good. I guess there's still the Viltrox to try?
Hi Spence, I just stumbled on this in the FM forum which I put in quotes below. It's about problems with the 100-400 ii, not the 400, but I'm wondering if a change in settings might affect AF on the 400 or any of the other lenses that might be problematic.

"I have a Metabones IV with current firmware and tried out my Canon 100-400 L MkII lens on the A7RII.

When I first set the 100-400 up on the A7RII I was disappointed with auto-focusing at distance with the mm set much beyond 300. While lock on was reliable at 100-200 - it started to hunt more as I moved from 200-300 and by 400 was hard to get a lock on contrasty subjects in daylight. If I first achieved near focus at 200mm, then zooming in somewhat worked - but was not reliable.

Just playing around with the camera, I noted that the Steadyshot was On but selecting it said "Invalid with this lens. If the lens has a Steady Shot switch, perform the operation from the lens". I thought this was curious as I expected the Integrated stabilization to work with non-Sony lenses.

In any case - selecting Steady Shot Setting and setting Steady Shot Adjust to Manual and the SS Focal length to 400mm seems to change the behavior of the autofocus at 400mm to the point where it will always focus - and do so quickly if the range is similar. Larger differences in range - such as 3 m to infinity will cause a slowish crawl to focus - but it always achieves focus.

I have no idea why this works, but I've played around with it a bit to check if it was not a happy illusion because I so dearly wanted the 100-400 to work on the A7RII.

I'd like to see if others with this combo experience the same. I note that handheld images of distant aircraft shot with this combo show amazing detail. (note I posted this in another dpreview thread in similar form)"
 
Top