Using Canon EF Lenses on m43

[jwilliams]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

The adapter is pretty expensive at around $400. That would get me about halfway to the cost of a new 24MP canon crop camera (currently have 6D and SL1). Cropping down to an image area equal to m43 sensor size would give me approx 15 MP left so pixel size is almost same as m43. It might just make more sense to get a new Canon camera.

I have 2 m43 tele zooms (Oly 40-150 cheapo and Panny 45-200) and both are just fair at best compared to my Canon tele lenses. It seems the only real good options for tele lenses in m43 are Oly 40-150/2.8, PanaLeica 100-400 and Oly 300/4. All too pricey. The Oly 75-300 and Panny 100-300 haven't really impressed me from what I have seen on-line and both are slow (Oly does seem to be pretty god until 200). If I'm missing a good option let me know.

Anyway back to original topic - has anyone used any of these lenses on a m43 camera with the metabones adapter?

--
Jonathan

 

[ahaslett]

I use the 300mm f/4 on my EM1. I'm afraid you are going to have to borrow an MB4 T Smart with the latest firmware. The EM1 has PDAF and Canon lenses work well on it. Not sure about the EM5 and CDAF.

Someone out there use the combo the OP is interested in?

Andrew

 

[Danielvr]

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56956402

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56522437

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56541845

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57428237

 

[MarkLeeds2k5]

I've recently been thinking about the same thing, using a long telephoto adapted to the EM1.

What ultimately stopped me from going down this route was that you are completely dependent on the manufacturer of the adapter to keep updating the firmware. Any time the camera manufacturer updates the camera firmware, there is a significant chance it will impact the functionality of the adapter. Similarly if you replace your EM5 in the future, there is no guarantee the adapter will work with the next generation of cameras.

Metabones and Kipon adapters are NOT cheap. Good Canon telephotos are NOT cheap. I ultimately decided it was too much money to spend on something that could stop working when I upgrade either the firmware or model of camera. It's not just a theoretical issue; the last time olympus updated the EM1 firmware, it changed the behavior of the kipon adapter (don't know about the metabones). They in turn updated their firmware, but will that always be the case in the future? There's no way of knowing for sure.

Of course it's down to personal opinion how comfortable you are with the risk. Since you already own the lenses, the financial risk is obviously less for you. But the adapters still aren't cheap.

 

[jwilliams]

I've recently been thinking about the same thing, using a long telephoto adapted to the EM1.

What ultimately stopped me from going down this route was that you are completely dependent on the manufacturer of the adapter to keep updating the firmware. Any time the camera manufacturer updates the camera firmware, there is a significant chance it will impact the functionality of the adapter. Similarly if you replace your EM5 in the future, there is no guarantee the adapter will work with the next generation of cameras.

Metabones and Kipon adapters are NOT cheap. Good Canon telephotos are NOT cheap. I ultimately decided it was too much money to spend on something that could stop working when I upgrade either the firmware or model of camera. It's not just a theoretical issue; the last time olympus updated the EM1 firmware, it changed the behavior of the kipon adapter (don't know about the metabones). They in turn updated their firmware, but will that always be the case in the future? There's no way of knowing for sure.

Of course it's down to personal opinion how comfortable you are with the risk. Since you already own the lenses, the financial risk is obviously less for you. But the adapters still aren't cheap.

I agree with your concerns. $400 or so is a lot for an adapter and you are now counting on 3 companies (camera maker, adapter maker and lens maker) to NOT change something that will break everything.

I shoot both Canon and m43 and often just want to take my m43 gear with me, but I really don't have any decent telephoto lenses. I have the Oly 40-150 (cheap one) and Panny 45-200 and both are just fair at best on the long end. The Panny 100-300 and Oly 75-300 don't really impress me and after buying the other 2 teles I don't want to throw away my money any more. Buying the f 2.8 40-150 or Panaleica 100-400 are too much money and if I wanted lenses that big I have L series teles for my Canon gear so there's no point in using m43 anymore.

The lens that I wish Oly/Panny would make an equivalent of is the Canon 55-250 STM. It is light, reasonably compact and has very very good IQ at the long end. At 250 mm this thing blows away my 2 m43 teles by miles and they are shorter FL lenses. Hence my desire to adapt it to the EM5.

People always say that m43 has such a great lens selection, but in reality a lot of the really good lenses are very expensisive and often so big that they defeat the point of m43. The lack of a quality reasonably priced tele zoom is the biggest glaring whole in my opinion. For many years i have been waiting for m43 to get to the point where I would want to get rid of my Canon DSLR gear, but it looks like that day will never happen. It may make more sense to keep the big DSLR gear and compliment it with something like a a 1" superzoom or compact when I don't want to carry a lot of gear.

--
Jonathan

 

[jwilliams]

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56956402
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56522437
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56541845
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57428237

Thanks for the info. I found one person who used an adapter on an EM5. Seems most are using them on panny or EM1 cameras. The EM5 seemed to do Ok but they didn't test the lenses I have unfortunately.

 

[jwilliams]

I use the 300mm f/4 on my EM1. I'm afraid you are going to have to borrow an MB4 T Smart with the latest firmware. The EM1 has PDAF and Canon lenses work well on it. Not sure about the EM5 and CDAF.

Someone out there use the combo the OP is interested in?

Andrew

 

[MarkLeeds2k5]

The lens that I wish Oly/Panny would make an equivalent of is the Canon 55-250 STM. It is light, reasonably compact and has very very good IQ at the long end. At 250 mm this thing blows away my 2 m43 teles by miles and they are shorter FL lenses. Hence my desire to adapt it to the EM5.

If you're willing to buy used, the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 can be found for a decent price now. Not so much on ebay, but I've seen them listed in smaller camera shops' "used" lists for relatively low prices. It also has high enough image quality that you can use the 1.4 teleconverter to get 210mm f4 reach. Adds to the cost, but again used can be much cheaper.

Hardly super telephoto, but if 250mm on full frame works well for you, maybe 210mm on m43 would too?

I strongly suspect Olympus are going to release a 100-400mm f4-f5.6 with the same quality as their Pro line, which will work with the teleconverter to give 560mm f8. But I bet it's 2 years away and will be damned expensive... Neither of which helps right now.

If you do go down the adapted route, please post about it. I for one would be very interested.

 

[jwilliams]

The lens that I wish Oly/Panny would make an equivalent of is the Canon 55-250 STM. It is light, reasonably compact and has very very good IQ at the long end. At 250 mm this thing blows away my 2 m43 teles by miles and they are shorter FL lenses. Hence my desire to adapt it to the EM5.

If you're willing to buy used, the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 can be found for a decent price now. Not so much on ebay, but I've seen them listed in smaller camera shops' "used" lists for relatively low prices. It also has high enough image quality that you can use the 1.4 teleconverter to get 210mm f4 reach. Adds to the cost, but again used can be much cheaper.

Hardly super telephoto, but if 250mm on full frame works well for you, maybe 210mm on m43 would too?

I strongly suspect Olympus are going to release a 100-400mm f4-f5.6 with the same quality as their Pro line, which will work with the teleconverter to give 560mm f8. But I bet it's 2 years away and will be damned expensive... Neither of which helps right now.

If you do go down the adapted route, please post about it. I for one would be very interested.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I already have Canon L lenses and cameras to use with big tele lenses. The 55-250 STM is an EFS (APSC only) lens so you get an effective FL of 88-400 on Canon APSC or 110-500 on m43. It is about the same size as my panny 45-200, but lighter. This is about the size/weight I want to carry with m43. If I was going to go with the f2.8 zoom I might as well carry my Canon gear which I already have.

I appreciate the suggest though. If I ever got rid of the Canon gear I would do as you suggest. I just don't see that happening anytime soon.

--
Jonathan

 

[tkbslc]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

All pretty nice lenses, although I think you could replace the 55-250 with a Panasonic 45-175mm without any complaints. I've owned both. Obviously the 70-200 and 300mm f4 have expensive counterparts in m4/3.

The adapter is pretty expensive at around $400. That would get me about halfway to the cost of a new 24MP canon crop camera (currently have 6D and SL1). Cropping down to an image area equal to m43 sensor size would give me approx 15 MP left so pixel size is almost same as m43. It might just make more sense to get a new Canon camera.

I think that's the crux of the matter here. What's your goal? What would using these lenses on an E-M5 offer you vs using them on a native Canon body? Often one uses long and fast telephotos for sports and wildlife. Even native m4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies have trouble keeping up with SLRs for AF tracking. Adding an adapter into the mix and you are even farther behind.

If you had one lens and were going to get rid of Canon altogether, maybe it makes sense to adapt. But with multiple lenses and bodies from Canon already, I don't know why you'd use the Canon lenses on the Olympus.

Also, is the 18MP of the SL1 not cutting it for you? What are you hoping the 24MP camera would do for you? Cropping the 18MP SL1 to 2x crop equivalent still leaves 12 MP, which is still more than enough for most output media.

 

[Pete Berry]

I use the 300mm f/4 on my EM1. I'm afraid you are going to have to borrow an MB4 T Smart with the latest firmware. The EM1 has PDAF and Canon lenses work well on it. Not sure about the EM5 and CDAF.

Someone out there use the combo the OP is interested in?

Andrew

 

[jwilliams]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

All pretty nice lenses, although I think you could replace the 55-250 with a Panasonic 45-175mm without any complaints. I've owned both. Obviously the 70-200 and 300mm f4 have expensive counterparts in m4/3.

There's a pretty good gap between 175 and 250, but if I thought the 45-175 would be significantly better than the 40-150 or 45-200 I'd replace them with that lens. Not sure there is that big of a difference though. So you're saying the IQ of the 45-174 at 175 is equal to the 55-250 at the long end?

The adapter is pretty expensive at around $400. That would get me about halfway to the cost of a new 24MP canon crop camera (currently have 6D and SL1). Cropping down to an image area equal to m43 sensor size would give me approx 15 MP left so pixel size is almost same as m43. It might just make more sense to get a new Canon camera.

I think that's the crux of the matter here. What's your goal? What would using these lenses on an E-M5 offer you vs using them on a native Canon body? Often one uses long and fast telephotos for sports and wildlife. Even native m4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies have trouble keeping up with SLRs for AF tracking. Adding an adapter into the mix and you are even farther behind.

Main goal is to at least sometimes just take the m43 gear along. Right now I have no decent tele lenses if I do that.

If you had one lens and were going to get rid of Canon altogether, maybe it makes sense to adapt. But with multiple lenses and bodies from Canon already, I don't know why you'd use the Canon lenses on the Olympus.

Also, is the 18MP of the SL1 not cutting it for you? What are you hoping the 24MP camera would do for you? Cropping the 18MP SL1 to 2x crop equivalent still leaves 12 MP, which is still more than enough for most output media.

SL1 is a good camera. No complaints. Basically the equal of 16MP m43 cameras as far as IQ goes.

I find myself more and more taking my SL1 as my light setup instead of the m43 stuff. If I take that camera along with the 18-135 STM and 55-250 STM, I have a very good general pupose zoom and tele lens. If I think I might want to go real wide I add the 10-22. Even with all 3 lenses its a fairly compact and lightweight setup.

My most used m43 camera recently is the GM1 with the 12-32. I love this setup and it is significantly smaller than anything I can make with the Canon gear. I'd love to be able to compliment this with my EM5 and a decent tele lens, but I'm just not finding any real good alternatives.

i've been thinking for several years I would eventually replace all Canon SLR gear with m43, but I just don't see that happening with the current state of things.

 

[tkbslc]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

All pretty nice lenses, although I think you could replace the 55-250 with a Panasonic 45-175mm without any complaints. I've owned both. Obviously the 70-200 and 300mm f4 have expensive counterparts in m4/3.

There's a pretty good gap between 175 and 250, but if I thought the 45-175 would be significantly better than the 40-150 or 45-200 I'd replace them with that lens. Not sure there is that big of a difference though. So you're saying the IQ of the 45-174 at 175 is equal to the 55-250 at the long end?

It's not 175 vs 250, it's 350mm equiv vs 400mm equiv. That's only a like a 12% difference.

I think so. Although I will admit I did not own them at the same time. I certainly have no complaints about the 45-175 other than the electronic zoom is not my favorite. 55-250 is a great lens, though, and cheap. SL1 with a 55-250 isn't really any bigger than E-M5 with 45-175, though, so maybe not worth the hassle.

The adapter is pretty expensive at around $400. That would get me about halfway to the cost of a new 24MP canon crop camera (currently have 6D and SL1). Cropping down to an image area equal to m43 sensor size would give me approx 15 MP left so pixel size is almost same as m43. It might just make more sense to get a new Canon camera.

I think that's the crux of the matter here. What's your goal? What would using these lenses on an E-M5 offer you vs using them on a native Canon body? Often one uses long and fast telephotos for sports and wildlife. Even native m4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies have trouble keeping up with SLRs for AF tracking. Adding an adapter into the mix and you are even farther behind.

Main goal is to at least sometimes just take the m43 gear along. Right now I have no decent tele lenses if I do that.

But, again, why? Is your goal to use the m4/3 gear or is it to take pictures of stuff? If the m4/3 is worse for taking pictures of stuff with your telephotos, then why use it?

If you had one lens and were going to get rid of Canon altogether, maybe it makes sense to adapt. But with multiple lenses and bodies from Canon already, I don't know why you'd use the Canon lenses on the Olympus.

Also, is the 18MP of the SL1 not cutting it for you? What are you hoping the 24MP camera would do for you? Cropping the 18MP SL1 to 2x crop equivalent still leaves 12 MP, which is still more than enough for most output media.

SL1 is a good camera. No complaints. Basically the equal of 16MP m43 cameras as far as IQ goes.

I find myself more and more taking my SL1 as my light setup instead of the m43 stuff. If I take that camera along with the 18-135 STM and 55-250 STM, I have a very good general pupose zoom and tele lens. If I think I might want to go real wide I add the 10-22. Even with all 3 lenses its a fairly compact and lightweight setup.

I have experience with most of that gear and I would agree.

My most used m43 camera recently is the GM1 with the 12-32. I love this setup and it is significantly smaller than anything I can make with the Canon gear. I'd love to be able to compliment this with my EM5 and a decent tele lens, but I'm just not finding any real good alternatives.

There are GREAT alternatives, it's just that they cost a lot and you already have some great Canon lenses at your disposal, so it might not make sense. 40-150MM Pro and an 1.4x TX could replace both your 70-200 f4 and 300mm f4 if you really wanted.

i've been thinking for several years I would eventually replace all Canon SLR gear with m43, but I just don't see that happening with the current state of things.

And that's fine! Use what works for what you shoot. No need to force yourself into one system or one way of shooting.

 

[jwilliams]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

All pretty nice lenses, although I think you could replace the 55-250 with a Panasonic 45-175mm without any complaints. I've owned both. Obviously the 70-200 and 300mm f4 have expensive counterparts in m4/3.

There's a pretty good gap between 175 and 250, but if I thought the 45-175 would be significantly better than the 40-150 or 45-200 I'd replace them with that lens. Not sure there is that big of a difference though. So you're saying the IQ of the 45-174 at 175 is equal to the 55-250 at the long end?

It's not 175 vs 250, it's 350mm equiv vs 400mm equiv. That's only a like a 12% difference.

350 vs 500 (250x2) equivalent in m43 terms.

I think so. Although I will admit I did not own them at the same time. I certainly have no complaints about the 45-175 other than the electronic zoom is not my favorite. 55-250 is a great lens, though, and cheap. SL1 with a 55-250 isn't really any bigger than E-M5 with 45-175, though, so maybe not worth the hassle.

I might just try the 45-175. I have read similar things about the lens from others. Don't think I would like the E Zoom either, but I'm sure I could adapt to it.

The adapter is pretty expensive at around $400. That would get me about halfway to the cost of a new 24MP canon crop camera (currently have 6D and SL1). Cropping down to an image area equal to m43 sensor size would give me approx 15 MP left so pixel size is almost same as m43. It might just make more sense to get a new Canon camera.

I think that's the crux of the matter here. What's your goal? What would using these lenses on an E-M5 offer you vs using them on a native Canon body? Often one uses long and fast telephotos for sports and wildlife. Even native m4/3 lenses on m4/3 bodies have trouble keeping up with SLRs for AF tracking. Adding an adapter into the mix and you are even farther behind.

Main goal is to at least sometimes just take the m43 gear along. Right now I have no decent tele lenses if I do that.

But, again, why? Is your goal to use the m4/3 gear or is it to take pictures of stuff? If the m4/3 is worse for taking pictures of stuff with your telephotos, then why use it?

Simplification. I just want to bring one brand of gear with me (especially when traveling). Have all lenses and bodies interchangeable. I like the m43 gear for a lot of the stuff I do using shorter FL. Just one good compact tele zoom would be nice.

If you had one lens and were going to get rid of Canon altogether, maybe it makes sense to adapt. But with multiple lenses and bodies from Canon already, I don't know why you'd use the Canon lenses on the Olympus.

Also, is the 18MP of the SL1 not cutting it for you? What are you hoping the 24MP camera would do for you? Cropping the 18MP SL1 to 2x crop equivalent still leaves 12 MP, which is still more than enough for most output media.

SL1 is a good camera. No complaints. Basically the equal of 16MP m43 cameras as far as IQ goes.

I find myself more and more taking my SL1 as my light setup instead of the m43 stuff. If I take that camera along with the 18-135 STM and 55-250 STM, I have a very good general pupose zoom and tele lens. If I think I might want to go real wide I add the 10-22. Even with all 3 lenses its a fairly compact and lightweight setup.

I have experience with most of that gear and I would agree.

My most used m43 camera recently is the GM1 with the 12-32. I love this setup and it is significantly smaller than anything I can make with the Canon gear. I'd love to be able to compliment this with my EM5 and a decent tele lens, but I'm just not finding any real good alternatives.

There are GREAT alternatives, it's just that they cost a lot and you already have some great Canon lenses at your disposal, so it might not make sense. 40-150MM Pro and an 1.4x TX could replace both your 70-200 f4 and 300mm f4 if you really wanted.

As far as the lenses go I agree. There really are no m43 gear that could replace my 6D though.

I could probably sell all the Canon stuff and get the high end m43 cameras and gear and have a workable system for me. Probably going to cost me some money and a lot of hassle offloading all the Canon stuff.

i've been thinking for several years I would eventually replace all Canon SLR gear with m43, but I just don't see that happening with the current state of things.

And that's fine! Use what works for what you shoot. No need to force yourself into one system or one way of shooting.

Truth is I have camera/lens combos that can do just about everything I want. Its just that it is spread across 3 manufacturers (Canon, Oly and Panny) and 3 image formats.

For about 20 yrs I shot all Canon and life was simple. Ah the good old days.

 

[ahaslett]

I use the 300mm f/4 on my EM1. I'm afraid you are going to have to borrow an MB4 T Smart with the latest firmware. The EM1 has PDAF and Canon lenses work well on it. Not sure about the EM5 and CDAF.

Someone out there use the combo the OP is interested in?

Andrew

 

[amtberg]

Main goal is to at least sometimes just take the m43 gear along. Right now I have no decent tele lenses if I do that.

If you're going to take those big honkin' lenses it probably wouldn't be that big a deal to throw in a Canon body as well.

 

[tkbslc]

I'm not generally a fan of doing this sort of thing, but I've been thinking if it is worth it to adapt some of my Canon glass to my EM5. I'm mainly interested in the telephoto lenses I have. Trying to get some more reach with them and also would like a good tele option to take along with my m43 cameras. I would use the Metabones T Smart Adapter without any optics. The lenses I would be interested in using are the 70-200/4L IS, 300/4L IS and 55-250 IS STM.

All pretty nice lenses, although I think you could replace the 55-250 with a Panasonic 45-175mm without any complaints. I've owned both. Obviously the 70-200 and 300mm f4 have expensive counterparts in m4/3.

There's a pretty good gap between 175 and 250, but if I thought the 45-175 would be significantly better than the 40-150 or 45-200 I'd replace them with that lens. Not sure there is that big of a difference though. So you're saying the IQ of the 45-174 at 175 is equal to the 55-250 at the long end?

It's not 175 vs 250, it's 350mm equiv vs 400mm equiv. That's only a like a 12% difference.

350 vs 500 (250x2) equivalent in m43 terms.

I think we were comparing different things, sorry. I was thinking 55-250 on the SL1 vs 45-175 on the E-M5.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

So many Canon lenses ...

The 70-200mm f2.8, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6, 200mm f2.0, 400mm f2.8, 180mm f3.5 Macro all work fine on the E-M1 and GX7 with both Ultra Focal reduction and glassless adapter.

As far as I know here are only a very few lenses that still cause problems.

Olympus CDAF came slower to the Metabones adapters but is up and running well at the latest version.

Up to close on oem peformance can be had but only S-AF works properly.

The AF performance on M4/3 is better than Sony MkI series or any of their bodies that rely on CDAF. As regards the MkII bodies the M4/3 perfomance is at par of better.

As with all electronic adapters to the vast range of Canon EF lenses the performance between lenses varies somewhat and there is almost a set of lens feedback that is necessary with each firmware iteration.

 

[jwilliams]

Main goal is to at least sometimes just take the m43 gear along. Right now I have no decent tele lenses if I do that.

If you're going to take those big honkin' lenses it probably wouldn't be that big a deal to throw in a Canon body as well.

Main goal was using with the 55-250. About the size of the Panny 45-200. The other lenses would be nice if they worked, especially at about $400 for an adapter.

Secondary goal would be to get a little more reach from the lenses if I really needed it.

--
Jonathan

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I've recently been thinking about the same thing, using a long telephoto adapted to the EM1.

I am sorry Mark, but maybe I would not get out of bed if I was so worried. Worried that Olympus might get involved with a 4/3 mount and then suddenly change it to M4/3. That Canon would drop the EF mount as they dropped the FD mount or that Samsung would stop making digital cameras and leave their loyal NX mount lens owners hanging on to increasingly obsolete camera bodies.

What ultimately stopped me from going down this route was that you are completely dependent on the manufacturer of the adapter to keep updating the firmware. Any time the camera manufacturer updates the camera firmware, there is a significant chance it will impact the functionality of the adapter. Similarly if you replace your EM5 in the future, there is no guarantee the adapter will work with the next generation of cameras.

No guarantee, but Metabones and others make their living by making their adapters as compatible with the cameras that they service. They initially had their EF - M4/3 adapter as MF only then made the AF on the Panasonic bodies as good as perfect for everything except AF-C across at least 95% of Canon EF mount lenses. Then they picked up Olympus PDAF for the E-M1 and since then Olympus CDAF has also become available. The prognosis seems quite good.

Metabones and Kipon adapters are NOT cheap. Good Canon telephotos are NOT cheap. I ultimately decided it was too much money to spend on something that could stop working when I upgrade either the firmware or model of camera. It's not just a theoretical issue; the last time olympus updated the EM1 firmware, it changed the behavior of the kipon adapter (don't know about the metabones). They in turn updated their firmware, but will that always be the case in the future? There's no way of knowing for sure.

I am not sure that it makes sense to actually buy a cheap Canon EF lens in an effort to save money on buying a suitable more expensive M4/3 mount lens. But for those who already have Canon EF lenses using electronic adapters is a very natural thing to do. It also opens an opportunity door as owning lenses suitable only for the 4/3 sensor only could be a bigger risk than owning Canon EF lenses as the latter can continue to be used on Canon EF mount as well as Sony E/FE and M4/3 mounts (there is a fall-back position). Should Olympus and Panasonic cease making M4/3 mount bodies then all M4/3 mount lenses would be orphans. Such a possibility might be remote but then Samsung abandoned its NX lens owners without a word in parting.

Of course it's down to personal opinion how comfortable you are with the risk. Since you already own the lenses, the financial risk is obviously less for you. But the adapters still aren't cheap.

Yes there is a risk and the adapters are not cheap, but even getting up in the morning opens the door for the risks of daily life ....