Adapters good for Techart Pro AF adapter LM-EA7

I received message from "npires" , in fact, another reader "tammons" had asked me similar things before, I think posting the adapters I had for LM-EA7 may help, as it seems Techart Pro has started to release the 2nd lot of the AF adapter now.

Here are two photos of adapters I had:

Adapters that have no interefere problem with LM-EA7

From left to right, rear to front : LR-LM, PK-LM, OM-LM, M42-LM, C/Y-LM and Nikon-LM, these are adapters that do not interfere with LM-EA7. In fact, I had one more adapter : N/S-LM, i.e. the Nikon rangerfinder mount ( same as Contax rangefinder mount) to LM which is also has no problem. For these you can buy as less expensive as possible to be used on LM-EA7.

Adapters that have issues with LM-EA7

These adapters has issues with LM-EA7 and some can be resolved ( again left to right, and rear to front):

1. N/K - LM: This type of Nikon F to LM adapter has a ring to lock the aperture lever on the older version Nikon lens, the locking ring on the adapter interferes with LM-EA7, cannot fit.

2. FD-LM: All FD to LM adapter are having a locking ring to lock and to push the lens aperture lever, and will interefere with LM-EA7.  What I did is to remove the locking ring, and to mill down the two rims, then it now can be used for the newer version of FD lens ( some older version may need to have the ring on the adapter, but nFD have the locking on the lens), but will need to use tape to tape the aperture lever on the lens, otherwise aperture will only be wide open.

3. CRX-LM: This is the Contarex to LM adapter that need to have the locking ring and aparture control for the lens aperture movement, then need to mill down half of the ring on the adapter to avoid the intereference with LM-EA7.

4. EOS-LM: This is inexpensive adapter available, but need to mill down some section of the adapter before it can be used on LM-EA7. Since I have many lenses modified to EOS mount before, so I have did a few of these for my own usage.

5. MA-LM: This is Sony A mount ( Minolta A mount) to LM which is only vailable from Kipon. However, it is still interfere with LM-EA7, so I have to removed the ring on it ( very easy by remove three screws), the aperture control lever still on the adapter and still operates. The good thing of this adapter is for the Minolta ( or Sony) famous S.T.F. 135mm f2.8 lens to be able to be AF now, see photo below:

Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 ( T4.5) lens with semi-AF ability

RavenSight wrote:

Interested to know more about the lenses being tested! Also interested to know what companies made the adapters OP is talking about, doesn't specify much about which one is from who so buyers can make the right decision.
On a side note, I'm looking forward to seeing someone auto focusing with 135mm f2 Samyangs/Rokinons!

All of these adapters are bought in China in the Tao Bao website which only have them in Chinese language. Those with marking of "Leicaist" is from the supplier of Techart Pro web site adapters which are of better quality and  sure can fit the LM-EA7.

I don't have the SamYang 135 f2, but I do have another new and interesting lens: Laowa S.T.F 105 f2.0 ( T3.2) that I ordered since November 2015 and just received three weeks ago. A new design from a Chinese enthusiast who produced three lenses so far. This S.T.F.105 f2 is selling at TaoBao for about US$ 600, it is very sharp at f 2.0 ! It has the similar design of the Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 but I can see that it is sharper wide open at f2.0 and the Bokeh is very smooth! I only tested this lens two times, first time a few weeks ago when shooting birds, then tonight inside a shopping mall. Again, thanks for the LM-EA7 to provide a semi AF when using such S.T.F lens which were only can MF before!

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2 at 2.0 + LM-EA7

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2.0 at f2.0

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2.0 at f2.8

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

I  think posting the adapters I had for LM-EA7 may help,

Yes; great service.  BTW, I'm planning on designing a full set of 3D-printable adapters (to post free on Thingiverse) to fit, starting with all those that are a problem commercially.  Haven't gotten started yet....

... The good thing of this adapter is for the Minolta ( or Sony) famous S.T.F. 135mm f2.8 lens to be able to be AF now, see photo below:

Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 ( T4.5) lens with semi-AF ability

Wait a second -- that shouldn't work. The problem with the STF lens is that the apodizing element makes phase detection fail to match the pattern for AF, which is why Minolta (later, Sony) didn't bother with AF hardware in the lens. It should work fine with contrast detection, but does the Techart Pro really manage to pull that off?

What is the AF behavior you see with the 135 STF?

ProfHankD wrote:

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

I think posting the adapters I had for LM-EA7 may help,

Yes; great service. BTW, I'm planning on designing a full set of 3D-printable adapters (to post free on Thingiverse) to fit, starting with all those that are a problem commercially. Haven't gotten started yet....

... The good thing of this adapter is for the Minolta ( or Sony) famous S.T.F. 135mm f2.8 lens to be able to be AF now, see photo below:

Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 ( T4.5) lens with semi-AF ability

Wait a second -- that shouldn't work. The problem with the STF lens is that the apodizing element makes phase detection fail to match the pattern for AF, which is why Minolta (later, Sony) didn't bother with AF hardware in the lens. It should work fine with contrast detection, but does the Techart Pro really manage to pull that off?

What is the AF behavior you see with the 135 STF?

I have both the Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 and the new Laowa S.T.F 105 f2.0, as mentioned, I use the LM-EA7 as a semi AF, i.e. manually turn and focus the object to a almost focued point then let the LM-EA7 to finish and lock on the AF point, so far this is very good and accurate. I saw some people worry that with different focusing system lenses ( floating element, etc) the LM-EA7 cannot work, but if the user manually turn and focus to a close point, I don't think that affect the focusing and image quality at all.

So far the only AF issue I cannot overcome is when I use the LM-EA7 on the tilt/shift lens such as the Canon FD TS-E 35 f2.8, if I tilt the lens just a little bit, then the Sony PDAF cannot lock even at the center point ( s-size), I don't know why, if there is zero tilt, then it is OK at the center point to AF.

The other cases are for use with lenses over 1000mm, the AF motor in LM-EA7 when moving to hunt for focus, it creates vibrations to the camera and the AF is more difficult to lock.

I have quite many very long mirror lenses such as  the Nikon RF 2000 f11 and the Carl Zeiss Jena 1000 f5.6 , (see photos below) that I use to shoot small birds now also can have semi AF !

A7rII + Nikon RF 2000 f11, with LM-EA7 and wireless remote shutter control

A7rII + Carl Zeiss Jena RF 1000 f5.6 with LM-EA7 and wireless remote shutter control

2. FD-LM: All FD to LM adapter are having a locking ring to lock and to push the lens aperture lever, and will interefere with LM-EA7. What I did is to remove the locking ring, and to mill down the two rims, then it now can be used for the newer version of FD lens ( some older version may need to have the ring on the adapter, but nFD have the locking on the lens), but will need to use tape to tape the aperture lever on the lens, otherwise aperture will only be wide open.

I glued a pin (a screw) to the lock position. That way you can attach the lens with a little care and use the aperture, without tape.

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

What is the AF behavior you see with the 135 STF?

I have both the Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 and the new Laowa S.T.F 105 f2.0, as mentioned, I use the LM-EA7 as a semi AF, i.e. manually turn and focus the object to a almost focued point then let the LM-EA7 to finish and lock on the AF point, so far this is very good and accurate. I saw some people worry that with different focusing system lenses ( floating element, etc) the LM-EA7 cannot work, but if the user manually turn and focus to a close point, I don't think that affect the focusing and image quality at all.

The issue with the STF lenses is not one of possible IQ problems, but that the apodization element literally forces the PDAF computational feature alignment process to fail. PDAF literally cannot work, because the views from different sides of the lens don't tonally match (PDAF is basically simplified stereo matching of different viewpoints taken from within the same lens). However, the latest Sony bodies actually do a hybrid, essentially reverting to CDAF when focus is close... it's great to hear that the "nearly in focus" CDAF works even for lenses where the PDAF is totally inoperative. That's not shocking, but it is honestly a pleasant surprise....

So far the only AF issue I cannot overcome is when I use the LM-EA7 on the tilt/shift lens such as the Canon FD TS-E 35 f2.8, if I tilt the lens just a little bit, then the Sony PDAF cannot lock even at the center point ( s-size), I don't know why, if there is zero tilt, then it is OK at the center point to AF.

Very much like the STF lens, the tilt should cause the PDAF alignment process to fail. However, the STF lens apodization causes less discrepancy as you get closer to the focus point... whereas tilt might not.  I'd expect AF from nearly in focus to work only with very small amounts of tilt.

The other cases are for use with lenses over 1000mm, the AF motor in LM-EA7 when moving to hunt for focus, it creates vibrations to the camera and the AF is more difficult to lock.

I have quite many very long mirror lenses such as the Nikon RF 2000 f11 and the Carl Zeiss Jena 1000 f5.6 , (see photos below) that I use to shoot small birds now also can have semi AF !

The primary issue with mirror lenses is that the views from different sides of the lens are normally taken from what would be the edge of the aperture at between f/2.8 and f/5.6 -- and most mirror lenses are not that fast. However, it is possible to detect this and allow PDAF with closer viewpoints, f/8 or even closer... which I believe is why the Minolta/Sony 500mm f/8 AF mirror lens works ; there is also the fact that a true f/8 mirror has a wider aperture than an f/8 refractor because it's missing the central area of the reflecting mirror... so the f/5.6 outer rays might still make it through.

It wouldn't shock me if such lenses on the Techart Pro adapter basically end up reverting to CDAF... which would explain the hunting.  There is also a potential secondary issue in the aperture shape is very different on the left/right sides of a mirror lens, but I that would again mostly affect PDAF, not CDAF.

Anyway, very interesting observations you have there... and they line-up with about as good as theory says they could be.  

LesPickstock wrote:

Ref " adapters which are of better quality and sure can fit the LM-EA7."

What is 'LM-EA7' ?

Adapter "LM-EA7" is the name called by  Techart Pro for their Leica M mount to Sony E mount auto focus adapter.

ProfHankD wrote:

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

What is the AF behavior you see with the 135 STF?

I have both the Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 and the new Laowa S.T.F 105 f2.0, as mentioned, I use the LM-EA7 as a semi AF, i.e. manually turn and focus the object to a almost focued point then let the LM-EA7 to finish and lock on the AF point, so far this is very good and accurate. I saw some people worry that with different focusing system lenses ( floating element, etc) the LM-EA7 cannot work, but if the user manually turn and focus to a close point, I don't think that affect the focusing and image quality at all.

The issue with the STF lenses is not one of possible IQ problems, but that the apodization element literally forces the PDAF computational feature alignment process to fail. PDAF literally cannot work, because the views from different sides of the lens don't tonally match (PDAF is basically simplified stereo matching of different viewpoints taken from within the same lens). However, the latest Sony bodies actually do a hybrid, essentially reverting to CDAF when focus is close... it's great to hear that the "nearly in focus" CDAF works even for lenses where the PDAF is totally inoperative. That's not shocking, but it is honestly a pleasant surprise....

So far the only AF issue I cannot overcome is when I use the LM-EA7 on the tilt/shift lens such as the Canon FD TS-E 35 f2.8, if I tilt the lens just a little bit, then the Sony PDAF cannot lock even at the center point ( s-size), I don't know why, if there is zero tilt, then it is OK at the center point to AF.

Very much like the STF lens, the tilt should cause the PDAF alignment process to fail. However, the STF lens apodization causes less discrepancy as you get closer to the focus point... whereas tilt might not. I'd expect AF from nearly in focus to work only with very small amounts of tilt.

The other cases are for use with lenses over 1000mm, the AF motor in LM-EA7 when moving to hunt for focus, it creates vibrations to the camera and the AF is more difficult to lock.

I have quite many very long mirror lenses such as the Nikon RF 2000 f11 and the Carl Zeiss Jena 1000 f5.6 , (see photos below) that I use to shoot small birds now also can have semi AF !

The primary issue with mirror lenses is that the views from different sides of the lens are normally taken from what would be the edge of the aperture at between f/2.8 and f/5.6 -- and most mirror lenses are not that fast. However, it is possible to detect this and allow PDAF with closer viewpoints, f/8 or even closer... which I believe is why the Minolta/Sony 500mm f/8 AF mirror lens works ; there is also the fact that a true f/8 mirror has a wider aperture than an f/8 refractor because it's missing the central area of the reflecting mirror... so the f/5.6 outer rays might still make it through.

It wouldn't shock me if such lenses on the Techart Pro adapter basically end up reverting to CDAF... which would explain the hunting. There is also a potential secondary issue in the aperture shape is very different on the left/right sides of a mirror lens, but I that would again mostly affect PDAF, not CDAF.

Anyway, very interesting observations you have there... and they line-up with about as good as theory says they could be.

The different adapters ( LM-EA7, Metabones IV and MC-11) that using the Sony on sensor PDAF will not change to use CDAF at all, this can be observed in the AF area on the A7rII as in below photos:

With PDAF type adapters, the AF area selections are limited inside the big bracket

When using native lenses, with CDAF + PDAF, the AF area can be selected to the very corner of the sensor

There are two observations:

1. When using both CDAF + PDAF, sometime you can find AF "hunting" (the displayed image quickly moving back and forth) on the native lenses, it seems there are some cases when both AF systems at work, there is conflict in the resulted causing such AF to be "not steady" and switching between the two systems.

2. When using the PDAF only ( such as LM-EA7), for very wide aperture lenses such as Nikon Nikkor Noct AIs 58 f1.2 and Konica M-Hexanon 50 f1.2 which do have very sharp image in the center area at wide open ( f1.2) but if selected to AF at the mid to corner ( inside the big bracket, as you will not be able to move outside) area where the image is not so sharp, then AF cannot locked and have hunting. In other words, when the image inside the AF area is bur, then PDAF will not work. However, on native lenses ( Batis 25 and 85), since it is using CDAF + PDAF, even selecting the very corner edge for focusing at wide open, the AF will still able to lock on.

Thanks for taking the time to post your findings and what you did to get the lenses working. I unfortunately got a nasty surprise when I went to fit my KF concept FD-LM and MD-LM adapters to find they don't fit.

Annoyingly I ordered those adapters back when I preordered the Techart and can no longer return them even though they're unused and new having been sat in the box since February.

Unfortunately I don't have the luxury of access to special tools to convert that FD adapter. But from what I can tell is if it had chamfered edges it would have fitted on the Techart.

I was a bit annoyed at Techart because had I known you needed to buy their specially made LM adapters I could have saved myself some money and time.

I did also tell them to update their page description as I can see I'm not the only one who's spent extra money on adapters to find they can't use them on the Techart.

My question is now what would be the best way to get FD on Techart? After complaining to Techart they said they'd allow me to purchase the additional adapters but seeing as I've spent extra on adapters I can't use I'm a bit reluctant.

Would buying their Techart EOS-LM adapter then a glassless FD-EOS adapter work? Or would the Techart fail to focus?

That's a risk I don't want to spend more money on until I know it will work

npires wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to post your findings and what you did to get the lenses working. I unfortunately got a nasty surprise when I went to fit my KF concept FD-LM and MD-LM adapters to find they don't fit.

Annoyingly I ordered those adapters back when I preordered the Techart and can no longer return them even though they're unused and new having been sat in the box since February.

Unfortunately I don't have the luxury of access to special tools to convert that FD adapter. But from what I can tell is if it had chamfered edges it would have fitted on the Techart.

I was a bit annoyed at Techart because had I known you needed to buy their specially made LM adapters I could have saved myself some money and time.

I did also tell them to update their page description as I can see I'm not the only one who's spent extra money on adapters to find they can't use them on the Techart.

My question is now what would be the best way to get FD on Techart? After complaining to Techart they said they'd allow me to purchase the additional adapters but seeing as I've spent extra on adapters I can't use I'm a bit reluctant.

Would buying their Techart EOS-LM adapter then a glassless FD-EOS adapter work? Or would the Techart fail to focus?

That's a risk I don't want to spend more money on until I know it will work

I have similar frustration as you, as I also bought many LM adapters way before the Techart Pro AF adapter delivered. My advantage is in China that I can easily access to some machine workshop that can help modify the adapters for me inexpensively. For using glassless FD-EOS adapter, normal one will extend the distance ( like using extended tube) so it becomes a macro use only lens which is not useful. So far, there is only two thin/modified adapters for FD to EOS in eBay, but it will need to modify the FD lenses one by one and become expensive when you have more FD lenses. Also, as I pointed out even for EOS-LM adapter, it will need to mill off some section of the adapter to not interfere with LM-EA7, so I think it is better to find a way to modify your existing FD-LM adapter to clear the area of interference. it seems not as difficult, by first unscrew and remove the locking ring and then file out the rims that will interfere, then find some mean to lock the aperture lever on the lens.

Hi Thomas KP

i'm really interested to know how was your experience with this combo. I have the Techart on order, and I'm planning to buy the Laowa. How is the focusing ? Can you focus with the center point only ? Is the lens not too heavy ? (it seems to be at the limit of the capacity of the adapter at 750g)

BTW which mount did you buy ?

Thanks !

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

RavenSight wrote:

Interested to know more about the lenses being tested! Also interested to know what companies made the adapters OP is talking about, doesn't specify much about which one is from who so buyers can make the right decision.
On a side note, I'm looking forward to seeing someone auto focusing with 135mm f2 Samyangs/Rokinons!

All of these adapters are bought in China in the Tao Bao website which only have them in Chinese language. Those with marking of "Leicaist" is from the supplier of Techart Pro web site adapters which are of better quality and sure can fit the LM-EA7.

I don't have the SamYang 135 f2, but I do have another new and interesting lens: Laowa S.T.F 105 f2.0 ( T3.2) that I ordered since November 2015 and just received three weeks ago. A new design from a Chinese enthusiast who produced three lenses so far. This S.T.F.105 f2 is selling at TaoBao for about US$ 600, it is very sharp at f 2.0 ! It has the similar design of the Minolta S.T.F. 135 f2.8 but I can see that it is sharper wide open at f2.0 and the Bokeh is very smooth! I only tested this lens two times, first time a few weeks ago when shooting birds, then tonight inside a shopping mall. Again, thanks for the LM-EA7 to provide a semi AF when using such S.T.F lens which were only can MF before!

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2 at 2.0 + LM-EA7

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2.0 at f2.0

A7rII + Laowa STF 105 f2.0 at f2.8

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

The different adapters ( LM-EA7, Metabones IV and MC-11) that using the Sony on sensor PDAF will not change to use CDAF at all, this can be observed in the AF area on the A7rII as in below photos:

Hmm. I just tested with an LA-EA3 on my A7II and you're right about the region it will let you select in PDAF mode (vs. the region in CDAF mode: Menu>Custom Settings>AF System), but that would still make sense if doing hybrid, because it could never be PDAF outside that region.

I'm honestly shocked if PDAF alone manages to focus a lens much past f/5.6 at all. My understanding was that the body dropped to CD if it either (1) knows the lens aperture is too small for PDAF or (2) was nearly in focus, in which case CD would yield better accuracy. Certainly, that's how Sony should be doing it, but I can't remember where I read something that made me think it works this way, and I can't find anything authoritatively saying it does or doesn't.

There are two observations:

1. When using both CDAF + PDAF, sometime you can find AF "hunting" (the displayed image quickly moving back and forth) on the native lenses, it seems there are some cases when both AF systems at work, there is conflict in the resulted causing such AF to be "not steady" and switching between the two systems.

I think the hunting is just an artifact of the AF algorithm, but you could be right. There are lots of ways to implement a hybrid focus control algorithm and, short of Sony telling us what they did in some detail, it's hard to distinguish cause from correlation... or even from effect.

2. When using the PDAF only ( such as LM-EA7), for very wide aperture lenses such as Nikon Nikkor Noct AIs 58 f1.2 and Konica M-Hexanon 50 f1.2 which do have very sharp image in the center area at wide open ( f1.2) but if selected to AF at the mid to corner ( inside the big bracket, as you will not be able to move outside) area where the image is not so sharp, then AF cannot locked and have hunting. In other words, when the image inside the AF area is bur, then PDAF will not work. However, on native lenses ( Batis 25 and 85), since it is using CDAF + PDAF, even selecting the very corner edge for focusing at wide open, the AF will still able to lock on.

PDAF basically does the same kind of thing you do when you use a rangefinder: it tries to align images from two different points of view. The trick is that these points of view are extracted from a single lens -- this is also the trick that enables plenoptics like Lytro or my single-shot single-lens anaglyph capture to work. Trying to align detail-free images makes every possible alignment look valid... but it also would yield no contrast spike for CDAF. You could try using the LM-EA7 with the camera body in CDAF mode, which I would expect to fail similarly. I suspect the Batis lenses are just pretty good lenses, producing good contrast right into the corners; I don't think AF locking on has much to do with PDAF vs. CDAF in that case.

Again, it's hard to know for certain what's happening inside the body. Sony has never published details, and I know they changed their AF algorithms more than once without mentioning that they did it (mostly in terms of the sequencing of movements and how much they trust that the lens has moved as it was expected to), so even if they told us the AF algorithm, there would still be the question of in which bodies and what firmware versions with what adapters/lenses.

gwenhael appere wrote:

Hi Thomas KP

i'm really interested to know how was your experience with this combo. I have the Techart on order, and I'm planning to buy the Laowa. How is the focusing ? Can you focus with the center point only ? Is the lens not too heavy ? (it seems to be at the limit of the capacity of the adapter at 750g)

BTW which mount did you buy ?

Thanks !

I received the TechartPro Leica M to E AF adapter ( LM-EA7) for almost two months and used it a lot! Also I used it on very long and heavy lenses too, so far, no major problem. The LM-EA7 do have weaknesses:

1. According to some initial users as well as feedback from the designer, when use this adapter for wide angle lenses ( such as wider than 21mm) and for shooting buildings, may discover "decentering", the designer said, because of the motion of the AF ( moving 4.5mm) and there is clearance of the concentric tube, this clearance is not possible to be same as non moving adapters, so there is no solution to such issue. My opinion is that for people using ultra wide angle lenses, it would be better to use manual focus, not AF, so such lenses should install with the conventional adapters, with no moving parts. So far, I used this AF adapter mostly long tele lenses, as for motion objects that are difficult to MF ( even with peaking level).

2. Occasionally, this AF adapter may shut down and there is about 10 seconds before it re-start again by itself, plus the 3 seconds of the A7rII to start up, so once it shuts down, will need to wait for some 13 seconds. Turning down power on the camera do not help and may create other issue ( such as file corruption), so I just have to wait. In the version 1.0 firmware, this re-start process need to be done manually, in version 2.0 firmware it becomes automatic. However, I felt that I can re-set and restart the camera faster than the 13 secs. But version 2.0 also improved on the focusing speed and less noisy, so I just have to let it stay at version 2.0.  According to the Techart Pro rep, the shut down is during an off range forcing the AF to focus, so supposely when user get use to the pre manual focus to a close range before using the AF on the adapter, it will help to have less chance to have the shut down. But so far, for me, I still experience shut down, perhaps because I am using a lot with multi frames shooting on long tele lenses and for birds.

I saw they start to ship in May the 2nd lot of LM-EA7 Adapters ( after the first thousand units) and there is some change on the hardware and the firmware is called v1.0 ( mine is the 1st lot and with firmware update to v2.0) but it is a newer firmware. Some users said it focus slightly slower, so I think Techart Pro is still collecting feedbacks and do improvements. A representative of Techart Pro in China said the designer also considering to provide various versions of firmware to let user to choose which version to best suit their own usage!

Regarding the Laowa STF 105 f2.0, it is definitely a very good lens in such a price tag. So far, I used it in two cases : one time for shooting birds ( the birds were close, but it was a cloudy days that I need wider aperture for speed), another was portrait in indoor shopping mall. I feel the IQ is very good and bokeh is real smooth. The good thing of using this STF lens is that even at f2.0, the DOF is still thick enough for a close up protrait, not like using f1.2 or f1.4 lenses that at f2.0 or f2.5 when shooting close up, not the whole face will be sharp, and need to use f4.0 or smaller aperture. AF is easy as I have get used to do the manual prefocus first, and let the adapter to finish the final AF lock on.

I will be travelling a week after for 12 days in the northwest of China for shooting peoples ( minority races) and definitely I will carry this lens as one of the lenses I will be carrying and to be used and leave the Batis 85/1.8 at home.

Sorry almost forgot your question about weight, the Laowa STF 105/2 is slightly less than 1Kg, with the A7rII together is 1.68kg. It is still comfortable to carry around. The limit said for the LM-EA7 of 0.7Kg for lenses is not that important, as mentioned, I used it on very heavy lenses, such as  the below Nikon RF 1000 f11 to shoot birds, which have a total weight of 2.7 Kg ( I would say this is easily carryable handheld longest combo ( the max tele range can be set on A7rII IBIS is 1000mm!) and never have any problem after using it for many hours!

A7rII + Nikon RF 1000mm f11 + LM-EA7

Shoot with A7rII + Nikon RF 1000mm f11 + LM-EA7 on a sunny day

Sorry, forgot one question from you, I bought the Canon EOS mount version of the Laowa STF 105 f2.0 lens, as I have been using Canon camera too. However, some others may advise that buying the Nikon mount version will be the most flexible, as there is inexpensive Nikon to EOS adapter available.  I would not recommend to buy E mount version, as it is most unflexible for the future.

Thanks for this detailed explanation. The Laowa photos look sharp and punchy. Nice to see you're having fun with this combo !

I'll definitely look to add the Canon EF-Leica M add-on to the Techart adapter...

Thomas KP Lee wrote:

Sorry, forgot one question from you, I bought the Canon EOS mount version of the Laowa STF 105 f2.0 lens, as I have been using Canon camera too. However, some others may advise that buying the Nikon mount version will be the most flexible, as there is inexpensive Nikon to EOS adapter available. I would not recommend to buy E mount version, as it is most unflexible for the future.