voronspb
Senior Member
Hi everyone! I'd like to share some observations regarding the adapted lenses on mirrorless cameras.
Let's first assume that the AF experience of EF-R adapter will be 100% native, without any drawbacks to genuine RF-mount lenses. Note that this may not be true with all EF lenses, especially the older ones. Still there are still two purely physical problems with using the adapter.
First, the adapter adds a degree of bulkiness to the lens and camera. The genuine mirrorless lens is generally smaller than DSLR equivalent, and always A LOT smaller than the latter with installed adapter.
As a result, the mirrorless camera with adapted DSLR lens becomes really huge in comparison to native option, even larger than your old DSLR with the same lens. It's well illustrated in case with my old Tamron 45/1.8 and new Sony 55/1.8 (basically the same lenses in terms of quality):
Canon EOS 6D w/Tamron 45/1.8, Sony A7 w/adapted Tamron 45/1.8, Sony A7 w/Sony 55/1.8
Imagine that you have in your bag a number of small genuine lenses and a two times larger DSLR lens with attached adapter, and the only advantage of such a huge lens is cheap price or current availability.
That was the major reason which led me to abandoning the idea of using the adapted glass — the camera becomes huge, while with equivalent native lens it's really small.
The second problem, related to physics, is the adapter itself. The micron tolerances in its build may lead to corner degradation on hi-MP bodies. In this video it's clearly seen:
(the link leads to exact scene at 08:54).
There were two genuine Sigma MC-11 adapters (200-250$ each), one of them gives poor corners, another one is fine. Additionally there's one more contact surface which doubles the possible misalignment due to manufacturing tolerances and wear & tear.
With modern bodies and lenses any misalignment leads to tilting of focus plane with subsequent deterioration of image corners. This may be okayish with consumer optics and cheap body, but getting poor (worse than before) corners from 2K+ body with matching L-lens is ridiculous.
The bottom line: don't expect too much from the adapters. Treat them as a temporary measure for seamless transition to native lens setup. I hope this post will help someone to make the weighted decision.
--
Vladimir Gorbunov
Let's first assume that the AF experience of EF-R adapter will be 100% native, without any drawbacks to genuine RF-mount lenses. Note that this may not be true with all EF lenses, especially the older ones. Still there are still two purely physical problems with using the adapter.
First, the adapter adds a degree of bulkiness to the lens and camera. The genuine mirrorless lens is generally smaller than DSLR equivalent, and always A LOT smaller than the latter with installed adapter.
As a result, the mirrorless camera with adapted DSLR lens becomes really huge in comparison to native option, even larger than your old DSLR with the same lens. It's well illustrated in case with my old Tamron 45/1.8 and new Sony 55/1.8 (basically the same lenses in terms of quality):
Canon EOS 6D w/Tamron 45/1.8, Sony A7 w/adapted Tamron 45/1.8, Sony A7 w/Sony 55/1.8
Imagine that you have in your bag a number of small genuine lenses and a two times larger DSLR lens with attached adapter, and the only advantage of such a huge lens is cheap price or current availability.
That was the major reason which led me to abandoning the idea of using the adapted glass — the camera becomes huge, while with equivalent native lens it's really small.
The second problem, related to physics, is the adapter itself. The micron tolerances in its build may lead to corner degradation on hi-MP bodies. In this video it's clearly seen:
There were two genuine Sigma MC-11 adapters (200-250$ each), one of them gives poor corners, another one is fine. Additionally there's one more contact surface which doubles the possible misalignment due to manufacturing tolerances and wear & tear.
With modern bodies and lenses any misalignment leads to tilting of focus plane with subsequent deterioration of image corners. This may be okayish with consumer optics and cheap body, but getting poor (worse than before) corners from 2K+ body with matching L-lens is ridiculous.
The bottom line: don't expect too much from the adapters. Treat them as a temporary measure for seamless transition to native lens setup. I hope this post will help someone to make the weighted decision.
--
Vladimir Gorbunov
Last edited:
They could have been close to that if they decided to keep the current mounts instead of inventing anew.
