Reading mode: Light Dark

Is there any way to force stabilization on adapted lenses?

Go to last post
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
 
Metabones MB IV (and MC-11) work great with most lenses except for the first generation cameras (a6000 and a7). There are terrific vintage lenses out there which I am not buying because they are cheap (some are not) but because they offer certain properties that you do not find in modern lenses). Some perform as good or even better than modern lenses. The Canon EF-S 24mm was the best 24mm APS-C lens until the Tamron 24mm 2.8 (which unfortunately focusses slower than the EF-S 24mm with adapter). The Canon 70-200f4 IS USM does a fantastic job on my a6xxx (and my EOS R). The option of using lenses across systems is great.
 
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
For some people, it is very much a part of the hobby. For others, very nice results can be had with non-native lenses which a person either has anyway, or can buy much cheaper than the native auto-focus stuff. Lots of people can barely afford the hobby,but they can still enjoy.

Also, a fully manual lens, for instance, is a great teacher.
 
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
 
Dennis Bayer said:
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
Click to expand...
They couldn't be corrected in software back then.
 
Thad E Ginathom said:
Dennis Bayer said:
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
Click to expand...
They couldn't be corrected in software back then.
Click to expand...
That's what dark rooms were for.
 
Dennis Bayer said:
Thad E Ginathom said:
Dennis Bayer said:
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
Click to expand...
They couldn't be corrected in software back then.
Click to expand...
That's what dark rooms were for.
Click to expand...
Despite my age, I have very little darkroom experience, but... I'm thinking lens distortions. Back in the day, if a lens had distortions, so did the print. Here in this day, the lens can have quite considerable distortions, and we don't even see them in the OOC JPEG.

So I am thinking that distortions which are acceptable design compromises now, were not back then. And that some of those back-then lenses may be at least in that respect, better than those of today.

In practice, I'll take the modern lens, with its advanced auto focus and all. But a less lazy photographer might differ.
 
Thad E Ginathom said:
Dennis Bayer said:
Thad E Ginathom said:
Dennis Bayer said:
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
Click to expand...
They couldn't be corrected in software back then.
Click to expand...
That's what dark rooms were for.
Click to expand...
Despite my age, I have very little darkroom experience, but... I'm thinking lens distortions. Back in the day, if a lens had distortions, so did the print. Here in this day, the lens can have quite considerable distortions, and we don't even see them in the OOC JPEG.

So I am thinking that distortions which are acceptable design compromises now, were not back then. And that some of those back-then lenses may be at least in that respect, better than those of today.

In practice, I'll take the modern lens, with its advanced auto focus and all. But a less lazy photographer might differ.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. The Carl Zeis Jena 20f2.8 M42 is known for an almost total absence of distortion. It is not the sharpest lens towards the sides unless you stop down. But the rendering, the ability to get really close to the subject, and the distrotion correction make it special.
 
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
The EF-S 55-250mm IS STM is higher quality than the mediocre 55-210mm OSS that you use!

While this combo isn't perfect it did let me snag a few cool shots in Iceland that I wouldn't have gotten with my 18-135mm lens.

This was done by unstabilized manual focus. In the rain. Feel my pain.
This was done by unstabilized manual focus. In the rain. Feel my pain.



68facc72100241e193e058e1c63094c6.jpg

Granted, I should have rented a 70-300mm for that trip but would rather learn the adapter lesson with a $150 adapter and $150 refurb lens than more expensive glass. Either way, it seems silly to buy a dedicated lens for one specific photo-shoot.
 
Last edited:
Thad E Ginathom said:
Dennis Bayer said:
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous statement. Many 30-40 year old lenses with a $20 adapter are as good or better than their modern counterparts.
Click to expand...
They couldn't be corrected in software back then.
Click to expand...
Yes, they were optically corrected back then. Today with digital distortion correction, it is possible to reduce lens size and enhance other corrections, as well as reduce production costs.
 
BrentSchumer said:
So I did more testing:
  1. Stabilization does work in manual focus with the shutter button half-depressed.
  2. Stabilization does not appear to work in manual focus using focus assist.
Click to expand...
I've been dealing with this since I got the A6000 and a Metabones Smartadapter III to use with my Canon 100mm macro.

you have to set a custom button to focus assist, half press the shutter release button, press the custom button and then manual focus with the magnified view and the IS working. it is a pain, but it works. I've been using that for almost 6 years for macro photography.
 
snapa said:
BrentSchumer said:
mcslsk said:
MC-11 doesn't allow to mount EF-S lenses out of the box.
Click to expand...
Correct; you have to remove the plastic plate inside the unit. Then it works with both EF-S and EF lenses.
Click to expand...
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
would you stop peddling your tired old crappy opinion as fact?

doesnt matter how many times you say it ... doesnt mean its right
 
brilly said:
snapa said:
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
would you stop peddling your tired old crappy opinion as fact?

doesnt matter how many times you say it ... doesnt mean its right
Click to expand...
Please change my mind and opinion brilly.
  1. What adapters and old lenses do you use? (I bet you don't even have an adapter)
  2. Do they work just like native lenses? (AF speed, eye AF, FPS speed, IQ, sharpness)
  3. Do you have any masterpieces you would care to share to prove your point?
Do you even shoot with adapters and legacy lenses? If no, why did you bother post?

If yes, answer questions 2 & 3 to prove me wrong. If you don't shoot with adapters and can't backup your empty words with data or images, don't bother posting to me ever again. If you can answer all 3 questions (especially number 3!), I will never post anything negative about adapters and legacy lenses ever again, if that will make you happy.

The ball is in your court now, lets see what you come back with. It is time for you to either put up, or shut up. ;-)

--
Life is short, so make the best of it while you can!
http://grob.smugmug.com/
https://grob.smugmug.com/Wildlife-Pictures/
 
Last edited:
snapa said:
brilly said:
snapa said:
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
would you stop peddling your tired old crappy opinion as fact?

doesnt matter how many times you say it ... doesnt mean its right
Click to expand...
Please change my mind and opinion brilly.
  1. What adapters and old lenses do you use? (I bet you don't even have an adapter)
  2. Do they work just like native lenses? (AF speed, eye AF, FPS speed, IQ, sharpness)
  3. Do you have any masterpieces you would care to share to prove your point?
Do you even shoot with adapters and legacy lenses? If no, why did you bother post?

If yes, answer questions 2 & 3 to prove me wrong. If you don't shoot with adapters and can't backup your empty words with data or images, don't bother posting to me ever again. If you can answer all 3 questions (especially number 3!), I will never post anything negative about adapters and legacy lenses ever again, if that will make you happy.

The ball is in your court now, lets see what you come back with. It is time for you to either put up, or shut up. ;-)
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but you don't get it. Using adapted lenses is not about the fastest eye AF. Adapted lenses provide useful options. If you look at my gear list, your will see that I have exentsive experience adapting vintage lenses and EF lenses to Sony (and to the EOS R). They all have properties that I care for and that make them worhtwhile to use. The person without much or any experience with adapted lenses here seems to be you which begs the question why you feel qualified to post such a comment. But I may be wrong. So share your experience with adapted lenses - if any.
 
snapa said:
brilly said:
snapa said:
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
would you stop peddling your tired old crappy opinion as fact?

doesnt matter how many times you say it ... doesnt mean its right
Click to expand...
Please change my mind and opinion brilly.
  1. What adapters and old lenses do you use? (I bet you don't even have an adapter)
  2. Do they work just like native lenses? (AF speed, eye AF, FPS speed, IQ, sharpness)
  3. Do you have any masterpieces you would care to share to prove your point?
Do you even shoot with adapters and legacy lenses? If no, why did you bother post?

If yes, answer questions 2 & 3 to prove me wrong. If you don't shoot with adapters and can't backup your empty words with data or images, don't bother posting to me ever again. If you can answer all 3 questions (especially number 3!), I will never post anything negative about adapters and legacy lenses ever again, if that will make you happy.

The ball is in your court now, lets see what you come back with. It is time for you to either put up, or shut up. ;-)
Click to expand...
as someone already said, it is not just to get the best AF.

I have used adapted Canon glass, mostly the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS macro.

did AF work? not at all, but for macro AF is mostly useless. why have I been using this combo for 6 years? because before getting the A6000, I had a Canon 50D with a bunch of lenses, including that macro lens. when I got the A6000, the only macro lens for e-mount was the 30mm and its "useless" minimum focusing distance. so I decided to adapt. electronic aperture worked, IS worked and that was enough.

then Sony released the FE 90mm f/2.8 OSS macro, at that time my Canon macro still worked flawlessly, so I decided to keep using it and save that money for a different lens.
 
muvovum said:
snapa said:
brilly said:
snapa said:
Using adapters and/or removing plastic plates to make lenses work on cameras is a fool's errand, IMO. If you can't afford native lenses to get the most out of your cameras, you can't afford your hobby. I will never use an adapter, period!

I can't believe so many people waste so much money and wasted shots fooling around with adapters and super cheap, old, outdated, mediocre lenses. What a waste of time!

Life is way too short for that kind of foolishness.
Click to expand...
would you stop peddling your tired old crappy opinion as fact?

doesnt matter how many times you say it ... doesnt mean its right
Click to expand...
Please change my mind and opinion brilly.
  1. What adapters and old lenses do you use? (I bet you don't even have an adapter)
  2. Do they work just like native lenses? (AF speed, eye AF, FPS speed, IQ, sharpness)
  3. Do you have any masterpieces you would care to share to prove your point?
Do you even shoot with adapters and legacy lenses? If no, why did you bother post?

If yes, answer questions 2 & 3 to prove me wrong. If you don't shoot with adapters and can't backup your empty words with data or images, don't bother posting to me ever again. If you can answer all 3 questions (especially number 3!), I will never post anything negative about adapters and legacy lenses ever again, if that will make you happy.

The ball is in your court now, lets see what you come back with. It is time for you to either put up, or shut up. ;-)
Click to expand...
as someone already said, it is not just to get the best AF.

I have used adapted Canon glass, mostly the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS macro.

did AF work? not at all, but for macro AF is mostly useless. why have I been using this combo for 6 years? because before getting the A6000, I had a Canon 50D with a bunch of lenses, including that macro lens. when I got the A6000, the only macro lens for e-mount was the 30mm and its "useless" minimum focusing distance. so I decided to adapt. electronic aperture worked, IS worked and that was enough.

then Sony released the FE 90mm f/2.8 OSS macro, at that time my Canon macro still worked flawlessly, so I decided to keep using it and save that money for a different lens.
Click to expand...
I'll post some.

All taken with a $20 adapter. Manual focus, which I actually prefer unless something is moving fast, but I'll include some moving subjects for good measure. These are all Nikkor AI or AI lenses and they were are made 30-40 years ago. I had many already, but I bought the 80-200 f4 a couple years ago for $68 including a case, UV filter and shipping. Not a fool's errand in my mind, but perhaps it is for Snapa. To each his own I guess.



Nikkor 80-200 ais. $68 delivered with case and filter
Nikkor 80-200 ais. $68 delivered with case and filter

I



50mm f1.4 Nikkor about 35 years old
50mm f1.4 Nikkor about 35 years old

I



50mm f1.4 Nikkor f5.6
50mm f1.4 Nikkor f5.6





Nikkor 135mm f2.8 at f5.6. Lens is about 35 years old
Nikkor 135mm f2.8 at f5.6. Lens is about 35 years old

I



Nikkor 50mm f1.4 A Couple Days Ago When We Escaped The House For A Few Hours
Nikkor 50mm f1.4 A Couple Days Ago When We Escaped The House For A Few Hours

Snapa, do you need more? Do you only object to vintage lenses with adspters like these or do you also object to lenses like the Sigmas with mc-11 ad adapters. If so, I have photo taken with that adapter as well.

Not sure these images meet your stadards, but I'm fine with them.
 
BrentSchumer said:
So I have the Canon 55-250mm IS STM on an MC-11 and AF is...not fantastic. But when I try manual focus at long distances, the stabilization is not active and it is almost impossible to get good focus.

Is there a way to manually trigger stabilization?
Click to expand...
I'm not 100% sure that I'm understanding your question, but my exlerience is that by half pressing the shutter button while using the mc-11 with Sigma lenses, the image does stabilize in the view finder. But if I magnify the image for focus, and touch the shutter button it snaps back to full image view. However, on a vintage lens with a dumb adapter this isn't the case. I just tried an old Nikkor 135 f2.8 on my a6500 and I can magnify one or two times and the image stabilizes in the view finder if I half press the shutter and hold for a second or so. I have the a6500 set for back button focus.
 
Dennis Bayer said:
BrentSchumer said:
So I have the Canon 55-250mm IS STM on an MC-11 and AF is...not fantastic. But when I try manual focus at long distances, the stabilization is not active and it is almost impossible to get good focus.

Is there a way to manually trigger stabilization?
Click to expand...
I'm not 100% sure that I'm understanding your question, but my exlerience is that by half pressing the shutter button while using the mc-11 with Sigma lenses, the image does stabilize in the view finder. But if I magnify the image for focus, and touch the shutter button it snaps back to full image view. However, on a vintage lens with a dumb adapter this isn't the case. I just tried an old Nikkor 135 f2.8 on my a6500 and I can magnify one or two times and the image stabilizes in the view finder if I half press the shutter and hold for a second or so. I have the a6500 set for back button focus.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is my challenge. I can't stabilize and zoom-MF-focus at once.
 
BrentSchumer said:
Dennis Bayer said:
BrentSchumer said:
So I have the Canon 55-250mm IS STM on an MC-11 and AF is...not fantastic. But when I try manual focus at long distances, the stabilization is not active and it is almost impossible to get good focus.

Is there a way to manually trigger stabilization?
Click to expand...
I'm not 100% sure that I'm understanding your question, but my exlerience is that by half pressing the shutter button while using the mc-11 with Sigma lenses, the image does stabilize in the view finder. But if I magnify the image for focus, and touch the shutter button it snaps back to full image view. However, on a vintage lens with a dumb adapter this isn't the case. I just tried an old Nikkor 135 f2.8 on my a6500 and I can magnify one or two times and the image stabilizes in the view finder if I half press the shutter and hold for a second or so. I have the a6500 set for back button focus.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is my challenge. I can't stabilize and zoom-MF-focus at once.
Click to expand...
Use back-button focus. Disable AF with shutter button and assign AF to a button.
 
Last edited:
mcslsk said:
BrentSchumer said:
Dennis Bayer said:
BrentSchumer said:
So I have the Canon 55-250mm IS STM on an MC-11 and AF is...not fantastic. But when I try manual focus at long distances, the stabilization is not active and it is almost impossible to get good focus.

Is there a way to manually trigger stabilization?
Click to expand...
I'm not 100% sure that I'm understanding your question, but my exlerience is that by half pressing the shutter button while using the mc-11 with Sigma lenses, the image does stabilize in the view finder. But if I magnify the image for focus, and touch the shutter button it snaps back to full image view. However, on a vintage lens with a dumb adapter this isn't the case. I just tried an old Nikkor 135 f2.8 on my a6500 and I can magnify one or two times and the image stabilizes in the view finder if I half press the shutter and hold for a second or so. I have the a6500 set for back button focus.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is my challenge. I can't stabilize and zoom-MF-focus at once.
Click to expand...
Use back-button focus. Disable AF with shutter button and assign AF to a button.
Click to expand...
I tried that and believe it would not back button AF and focus assist at the same time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top