Reading mode: Light Dark

Using the Sony LA-EA5 adapter with following lenses

Go to last post
T

tcbarb

Well-known member
Messages
205
Solutions
1
Reaction score
44
Considering getting into mirrorless w Sony A7iii, but wondering how the Sony LA-EA5 adapter will work with the following lenses. I will probably get the new FE 24-70 G2 and FE 70-22 G, but will at a minimum the adapter needs to work with the remaining lenses below.

Sony 24-70 F2.8 G

Sony 70-200 F2.8G

Minolta 100mm Macro F2.8

Sony 85mm F1.4

Sony 400M F4.5 G

Thanks
 
Yes, mostly G lenses, or F2.8. As for the 24-70 you mention it is the Zeiss F2.8. I have loosely applied the "G" status to the 24-70 which technically is not named a G. It is just the best in the range at the time I was accumulating lenses.

I am trying to ease my way into mirrorless by using the adapter they made to do this, but some years ago there were comments it did not work well on all old lenses. As pointed out G lenses do go back to the A mount and the Minolta lenses. Thanks
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your very specific lens response.
 
Ahh, thanks for the list.
 
I see, thanks to all these posts I am probably headed to getting the A7iii and the new 24-70G2 and the 70-200 G for starters. I'll keep one A77ii for special 100 macro and 400mmG lens applications.

I am guessing I am better off with the 24-70 G2 E mount instead of the A77ii and 85 1.4 for bokeh on portraits and single item stills. Thanks
 
I go way back to the Minolta film cameras then digital too. But liked my A77ii's a lot so I got a second body. Now 10 years later I am thinking of mirrorless. The A7iv would be very nice but I don't think I need that many pixels. Thats why I am thinking the A7iii and not the a7riii. And the lower cost allows for a second lens. Which begs the question:

Is the lighter 20-70G as good with bokeh as the 24-70G or 24-70G2 ?
 
tcbarb said:
I go way back to the Minolta film cameras then digital too. But liked my A77ii's a lot so I got a second body. Now 10 years later I am thinking of mirrorless. The A7iv would be very nice but I don't think I need that many pixels. Thats why I am thinking the A7iii and not the a7riii. And the lower cost allows for a second lens. Which begs the question:

Is the lighter 20-70G as good with bokeh as the 24-70G or 24-70G2 ?
Click to expand...
I can't say anything about these lenses but IMHO, A7IV is much better just because of the novel menu system, much cleaner and logical compared to A7III or other previous generation Sony cameras. Not to mention full LA-EA5 functionality, which A7III lacks. LA-EA4r Monster adapter for instance doesn't work properly with SSM lenses if I recall right.
 
tcbarb said:
I go way back to the Minolta film cameras then digital too. But liked my A77ii's a lot so I got a second body. Now 10 years later I am thinking of mirrorless. The A7iv would be very nice but I don't think I need that many pixels. Thats why I am thinking the A7iii and not the a7riii. And the lower cost allows for a second lens. Which begs the question:

Is the lighter 20-70G as good with bokeh as the 24-70G or 24-70G2 ?
Click to expand...
You will not be able to autofocus with these lenses with a gen 3 body.

Minolta 100mm Macro F2.8
Sony 85mm F1.4
Sony 400M F4.5 G (If thats a prime lens. If you are talking 70-400mm, then it will work)
 
Last edited:
tcbarb said:
I go way back to the Minolta film cameras then digital too. But liked my A77ii's a lot so I got a second body. Now 10 years later I am thinking of mirrorless. The A7iv would be very nice but I don't think I need that many pixels. Thats why I am thinking the A7iii and not the a7riii.
Click to expand...
Well then the LA-EA5 will not cater for your screw drive A Mount lenses. Plus the A7IV has the new menu, better EVF, ....
tcbarb said:
And the lower cost allows for a second lens. Which begs the question:

Is the lighter 20-70G as good with bokeh as the 24-70G or 24-70G2 ?
Click to expand...
Which lenses do you actually mean by 24-70G or G2? As in FE lens land that would be the 24-70GM or GM2. You also begin to look like considering a bigger switch than originally? Be warned, the jump in IQ, AF and overall performance is contageous! ;-)

ignoring the above, on your question: What I can state as former user of the A Mount CZ 24-70 SSM I and the current E-Mount FE 20-70/4 G: Both lenses were reviewed as having rather busy bokeh. See OpticalLimits and photozone.de. OTOH, the FE GM2 is praised for its bokeh (for a standard zoom that is) at OpticalLimits. Three links for you:

https://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/600-zeiss2470f28ff?start=1

https://opticallimits.com/sony/sony-fe-24-70mm-f-2-8-gm-ii/

https://opticallimits.com/sony/sony-fe-20-70mm-f-4-g/#Bokeh_out_of_focus_blur

Fully aware of these optical character traits, I try to shoot around that weakness and do manage to get good bokeh out of the 20-70/4G nevertheless. Full size samples below from a recent trip to Trieste, Italy. Make sure to view full size and zoom in to drown in available detail ;-) ;-) ;-)

7124bdbfbfaa4631afe31a8def63434f.jpg

6664a0b00f9848b9ab8a9d4865929a9e.jpg

181ffbc981c144e2aa242a4245634132.jpg

1737f32f8e9644f789d77ffcd98ca5ae.jpg

Cheers,
Ralf
 
Last edited:
MediaArchivist said:
I've had much the same experience with the LA-EA5 and a7Rv. In particular, some of my lenses work better than on my a99ii. Everything I've used (so far) allows all the a7Rv AF points.

Excellent (better than a99ii)
  • Zeiss 50/1.4
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 works excellent. It has significant focus shift when stopped down, and sadly Sony forces all adapted lenses to focus wide open only, with no ability to do AF-adjustments.

This means it is almost impossible to nail focus stopped down with that lens. (Even in manual focus, as MF also only works wide open with the adapted)
MediaArchivist said:
  • Zeiss 24/2
  • Minolta 35/1.4G
  • Minolta beercan (barely)
  • Sigma 50/1.4 EX
  • Sigma 35/1.4 Art
  • Sigma 180/2.8 macro
Good, about the same as a99ii (AF-C w/tracking is "eh" at best)
  • Zeiss 135/1.8
  • Minolta 85/1.4G
  • Sigma 70/2/8 DG macro
I have some Tamron lenses that I have not found to work very well, but I have not used them very much so I don't find that definitive.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Something I don't understand in this thread is what is it your shooting? And why do you say that you don't need the resolution of 33mpx from A7iv but you're shooting 24mpx on APSC A77ii.

If you aim at shooting with telezoom, and I suppose it's the reason why you own a Minolta 400/4.5, it is clear that the A-mount remains the cheapest option. You could find second hand Sony 70-400 G ssm or Tamron 150-600 G1 under 600euros or Tamron 150-600 G2 under 800euros.

What is important if you're aiming at action photograph is that with adapting you'll have a trades off. You'd win for sure in AF, but finally you'd lose in fps and there is lag when triggering the shutter (not the best xp for action photo) ... So it has to be taken into account.

Though A7iii should be able to shoot @10fps now adapted if I recall, which is still very good.
 
On the topic of bokeh on the 20-70… taking the near/far approach and shooting with longer focal lengths allows much more success in creating background blur as you have shown. It’s far more challenging to do than with a faster lens however.
 
panther fan said:
MediaArchivist said:
I've had much the same experience with the LA-EA5 and a7Rv. In particular, some of my lenses work better than on my a99ii. Everything I've used (so far) allows all the a7Rv AF points.

Excellent (better than a99ii)
  • Zeiss 50/1.4
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 works excellent. It has significant focus shift when stopped down, and sadly Sony forces all adapted lenses to focus wide open only, with no ability to do AF-adjustments.

This means it is almost impossible to nail focus stopped down with that lens. (Even in manual focus, as MF also only works wide open with the adapted)
Click to expand...
Are you talking about the Zeiss 50mm, the one with SSM? I havent noticed any focus shifting on the lens.

The Sony 50mm Screw drive F1.4 was horrible with focus shifting though.



Sony Zeiss 50mm lens - F8 1/80
Sony Zeiss 50mm lens - F8 1/80
 
Last edited:
UncleVanya said:
On the topic of bokeh on the 20-70… taking the near/far approach and shooting with longer focal lengths allows much more success in creating background blur as you have shown.
Click to expand...
The FLs in the 4 shared samples are 58, 2 * 70 and 38mm in the last one. Sample 2 shows bokeh in a transition, not a "near/far" jump. 38mm is considered medium wide on 24*36mm "FF". Sample 1 even includes pointy light sources in its OOF part.

In a nutshell: It can be done.
UncleVanya said:
It’s far more challenging to do than with a faster lens however.
Click to expand...
"Fast" does not automatically mean a smooth bokeh warranted. There are "fast" lenses with "busy" bokeh as well which will need similar photographic skill application. And "fast" lenses are not always shot wide open, so near&far will help such lens as well when DoF required overrules maximum background blurr.
Cheers,
Ralf
 
Last edited:
tqlla said:
Are you talking about the Zeiss 50mm, the one with SSM? I havent noticed any focus shifting on the lens.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what lens panther was referring to, I was referring to the one you are, one of the last A mount lenses released by Sony. I have nothing but high praise for this lens on my a99ii, on my a7Rv with LA-EA5 it is about the same except with expanded focus points and higher resolution. It would still be my go-to lens except I now have the (better) 50/1.2GM :)
 
neuromantism said:
tcbarb said:
I go way back to the Minolta film cameras then digital too. But liked my A77ii's a lot so I got a second body. Now 10 years later I am thinking of mirrorless. The A7iv would be very nice but I don't think I need that many pixels. Thats why I am thinking the A7iii and not the a7riii. And the lower cost allows for a second lens. Which begs the question:

Is the lighter 20-70G as good with bokeh as the 24-70G or 24-70G2 ?
Click to expand...
I can't say anything about these lenses but IMHO, A7IV is much better just because of the novel menu system, much cleaner and logical compared to A7III or other previous generation Sony cameras. Not to mention full LA-EA5 functionality, which A7III lacks. LA-EA4r Monster adapter for instance doesn't work properly with SSM lenses if I recall right.
Click to expand...
LA-EA4r does support SSM. https://www.monsteradapter.com/products/la-ea4r-the-la-ea4-upgrade-kit
 
MediaArchivist said:
tqlla said:
Are you talking about the Zeiss 50mm, the one with SSM? I havent noticed any focus shifting on the lens.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what lens panther was referring to, I was referring to the one you are, one of the last A mount lenses released by Sony. I have nothing but high praise for this lens on my a99ii, on my a7Rv with LA-EA5 it is about the same except with expanded focus points and higher resolution. It would still be my go-to lens except I now have the (better) 50/1.2GM :)
Click to expand...
 
Nice bokeh. Thanks for the links.
 
Sorry for confusion.

I shoot the A77ii and was heavily considering the A7iii. However I am adjusting to the idea of an A7iv for all the reasons concerning the LA-EA5 adapters, and other considerations mentioned here. I am ok with the 33mp of the A7iv and I am ok with the current 24mp crop of the A77ii. I am guessing your point about the relative proximity of mp in both of these cameras. However, some how I managed to mix the A7iv and the A7Riv in this regard. I shoot a lot of lower light and I think the A7iv would serve me better that the higher pixel A.7Riv. The versitality in other regards of the A7iv over the A7iii is considerable.

I am now as I have time looking at how many lenses I would purchase with an A7iv. Because of my low light considerations I was originally going to just purchase the FE 24-70 GM and the FE 70-200GG. My old CZ 24-70 did well enough on the close distance shots to not need a macro. I have a crop 11-17mm variable lens that I never have used. And on medium distance, shots of people (note I didn't say portraits) were good so it became a go to lens most of the time. Same for the Minolta 70-200 G as it did OK even with a teleconverter on longer shots. I can't say I specialize in any particular discipline of photography, but everybody likes as sharp as they can afford. Most of my images come from vacations - national parks and such, but I try to get good landscape images and like to get situation shots of people in the environment. I make photo books and slide shows with accompanying music for family and friends. I have 1500 recent Glacier N.P. and Olympic N.P. images taken with my RX100 vii and I think I will find it is not enough for what I am looking for. (Weight has become an issue). I will compare the RX100 shots to some of the same shots I took with the A77ii CZ 24-70 F2.8 in the next couple weeks.

So that's probably more info than anyone wanted to know, but I started out clumsily on here explaining my interest in upgrading to an A7 mirrorless, so this post may help.

Thanks to all for posting. This is an educational and fun forum to venture into. The number of available lenses for the E mount exceeds my quick comprehension, and I am now trying to make good decisions on a few of them. Like maybe an FE20-70G instead of the FE24-70GM2 and such. I do like bokeh and sharp with detail though.
 
Last edited:
tcbarb said:
Sorry for confusion.

I shoot the A77ii and was heavily considering the A7iii. However I am adjusting to the idea of an A7iv for all the reasons concerning the LA-EA5 adapters, and other considerations mentioned here. I am ok with the 33mp of the A7iv and I am ok with the current 24mp crop of the A77ii. I am guessing your point about the relative proximity of mp in both of these cameras. However, some how I managed to mix the A7iv and the A7Riv in this regard. I shoot a lot of lower light and I think the A7iv would serve me better that the higher pixel A.7Riv. The versitality in other regardsof the A7iv over the A7iii is considerable.

I am now as I have time looking at how many lenses I would purchase with an A7iv. Because of my low light considerations I was originally going to just purchase the FE 24-70 GM and the FE 70-200GG. My old CZ 24-70 did well enough on the close distance shots to not need a macro. I have a crop 11-17mm variable lens that I never have used. And on medium distance, shots of people (note I didn't say portraits) were good so it became a go to lens most of the time. Same for the Minolta 70-200 G as it did OK even with a teleconverter on longer shots. I can't say I specialize in any particular discipline of photography, but everybody likes as sharp as they can afford. Most of my images come from vacations - national parks and such, but I try to get good landscape images and like to get situation shots of people in the environment. I make photo books and slide shows with accompanying music for family and friends. I have 1500 recent Glacier N.P. and Olympic N.P. images taken with my RX100 vii and I think I will find it is not enough for what I am looking for. (Weight has become an issue). I will compare the RX100 shots to some of the same shots I took with the A77ii CZ 24-70 F2.8 in the next couple weeks.

So that's probably more info than anyone wanted to know, but I started out clumsily on here explaining my interest in upgrading to an A7 mirrorless, so this post may help.

Thanks to all for posting. This is an educational and fun forum to venture into. The number of available lenses for the E mount exceeds my quick comprehension, and I am now trying to make good decisions on a few of them. Like maybe an FE20-70G instead of the FE24-70GM2 and such. I do like bokeh and sharp with detail though.
Click to expand...
If you are doing mostly photography, you can just use your current lenses with the LA-EA5 and the A7iv. Buy a 24-70mm E-mount when you find a deal.

The Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8 is still a sharp lens. The main weakness is how heavy it will feel on an A7iv body.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for enlightment.

It is clear that if you can stretch to A7iv, go for it for the smoothest transitioning from A to E

Now you say that you shoot low light, as for me I have never been satisfied by any f2.8 zoom lens in this department. You could easily profit of the fact that the E ecosystem provides f2 and faster lenses in this regard (thing that lacks a lot in the A system)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
  • Question Question
Will this work? A-mount lens + Tele + LA-EA5 on A7RV
Replies
4
Views
1K
GinAZ
G
T
  • Question Question
FE 85mm F1.4 GM lens vrs FE 100mm f2.8 STF GM OSS
Replies
18
Views
3K
Docno
Docno
G
A7RV 2nd Travel Lens Suggestions
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
7K
GinAZ
G
V
Sony E to Medium Format Adapter
Replies
12
Views
3K
ProfHankD
ProfHankD
T
  • Question Question
Sony FE 16-35mm f4 Vario-Tessar T* ZA OSS Lens Vrs the Sony 16-35 GM F 2.8
2
Replies
29
Views
16K
tcbarb
T

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