Viltrox EF-M2 for MFT - First Impressions

First, I may get some things wrong as I only got this adapter about 3 hours ago. So, I apologize in advance! I am posting early because I was impressed by this adapter for MFT that does a good job at AF! And you don't have to pay a lot for the MB to get good performance.

Yesterday, I placed an order for the Viltrox EF-M2 to be delivered the following day for U$196. It arrived before lunch and I was surprised at the delivery. This model is a focal reducer/speedbooster. It has a 0.71x magnification and you get a boost of 1 stop in aperture.

The adapter comes in a white box. It comes with a simple manual, but is not really instructive on a lot of things, especially how to calibrate infinity or update the firmware. It has one allen wrench to remove the tripod mount, and a screw driver which I still have to figure out what it's for. At first I thought it was for the infinity focus, but there is a a slider switch and groove on the lens that is supposed to do that. With that, it seems simpler to adjust the lens.

The adapter also comes with a usb port with a nice rubber tab to keep the dust off. I still don't know how to go about the update. I may have to google this process later on.

- Build

The adapter is well built. Metal mount, with metal parts mostly. The glass and body look clean and solid. The gold electrical contacts well made. The adapter is not so heavy. Just right for something with 4 elements of glass.

- Operation

I used my g85 to test this this morning. My GF has the GX7, and I'll test it when I have it.

The EF-M2 is supposed to take in EF lenses only. EF-s lenses will not mount as the protruding lens/rubber at the back will hit the glass of the adapter. I did try to mount it by popping off the rubber cap on the rear of the EF-s lenses. The 10-22 worked well, but you cannot use the 10mm as the rear glass will still hit the adapter glass. You can probably use it at around 12mm and up. Then I mounted the 18-135 stm, again, removing the rear rubber cap on the rear element. This does not work at all. No AF. No electricity to the lens, so it won't even AF, nor manual focus (STM are focus by wire). So, that lens cannot be used at all. But the 10-22 will, and there is no vignetting, or any other issues except in focus a bit far, the 10-22 at the widest FLs, it can miss AF and go to infinity when it needs only to focus 7-10 feet. So be very careful and check your focus. Since this is ring usm, focus is fast. So, if you want to use this for EF-S, it is possible but with limitations. Some will work, and it may limit the FL in some. This should not be a problem because this adapter is really not for EF-s lenses. I just tried it out of curiosity.

Focusing is very fast with either ring usm, or stm, though the former is the fastest. It focus just about as fast as native MFT lenses. All will pulse or "breathe" as the CDAF hunts for the right focus. It will rack and go over then come back to lock on the sharpest image. It is a bit annoying, though for photos, this can be very quick with ring USM. The 50mm stm, did not focus as fast vs the 85 f1.8 usm and even the 70-200 f2.8L IS mark 1.

I have even tried my old Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 and it works. The AF is noisy (DC motor), but it also works!

What one will be surprised is to see the aperture opening faster by 1 stop! It is a thing to see f2.0 on the huge and heavy 70-200 f2.8L IS! Or to see f1.3 on the 50mm f1.8 and 85 f1.8!

touch AF seems to be working too. You touch in an area, it focuses there. AF seems faster if you use less AF points. Though I found out that you have to find out which your lenses prefer or subjects you shoot. The safest bet is to still to use a few AF points (maybe 6-12). Single AF point may be good in some situations. So with the size of the AF point. Just experiment.

One thing I noticed though is with my Tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 Di. I got an f2.0 opening on 17mm. But zooming onto 35mm, I still get an f2.0 reading! I don't know how to explain this. But I am not complaining.

IS seems to be working too so, if the camera has it, you can use it. Though a good IBIS may be a better one to use. Just test it and disable one that is the least effective.

- AF Not good for video

Sadly, if you use the AF in video, you will not be happy. The breathing and racking focus that is so abrupt as the AF hunts for the target/subject is not a good sight to see in a video footage. It is jerky and sudden. No slow ar gradual blur to sharp transitions. It is made even worse when the AF overshoots the focus and racks back!

I don't know if a future firmware can fix this. Since this was released only last Dec and arrived in our country about a week ago, it is still too early to tell. Also, I still have to figure out how to upgrade the firmware. Anybody who can help me out, let me know!

- Conclusion

I have often wondered why there is no adapter that is much talked about for MFT cameras. But I let it pass because I am not in need of one, except maybe for my 10-22. The 7-14 and other wide angle native lenses are very expensive. So, I got a focal reducer for that that is manual focus and manual aperture. No big deal because I don't really need shallow DOF for that. I just need a wide fro group pictures in case the location is a small room or I have to fit in a large number of people in the frame.

But since early January, there has been a buzz and out of stock reports in the USA of this Viltrox EF-M2. I looked at youtube and was amazed at the AF on the 50 f1.4 and some lenses. There were about 2-3 reviews that were good that shows the potential of this adapter. Last week, one local vensor used an OLy camera and showed a video of how fast this adapter works. So, I knew that this thing really works well.

For video, it is not very good. That pulsing focus is going to be a nuisance! For photos, it can be very good. AF is very quick. Not as quick as native lenses but not slow either. You'll never know the difference in most situations as the difference can be minute fraction of a second.

If you have lots of EF lenses, or you like some EF lenses to cover your range and avoid the high cost of the the MFT equivalent, this Viltrox EF-M2 may work for you. The AF is fast. Really fast as if you are using a PDAF dslr!

But one can also use this to extend ones range or get wides angles for a lower cost and not lose AF from 3rd party lenses that has those FL but you have to go manual. For example, the Oly 75 f1.8 which is about U$750 in our country, I could get a 100 f2.0 usm for U$500 and get 141mm f1.4! Or a 50mm f1.4 usm and get a 71mm f1.0 usm for about U$380 only! For wides, I can use my 10-22 and get a 14mm-31mm f2.5-3.2 zoom (you just have to pop the rear cover because it will hit the glass and you can't mount the lens).

It's too early for me to say, I'd recommend this one. But most likely it will be good. I read somewhere that it is around U$225 in the USA now. And in some stores it is out-of-stock. I guess some people know something is good and are buying in droves. It got me curious. Now that I have one, it makes me very pleased. Except for my 18-135 stm (I don't need this range anyway as I already have a weather sealed Oly 14-150 ii) , I can use any canon or canon mount lens in my Panasonic cameras from now on.

For those who are curious, I think this is a good buy.

The slider where one can adjust/calibrate the infinity focus.

stateit wrote:

Thanks for the write-up of your first impressions.

This interests me. I have not used a focal reducer before and am not fully aware of their intricacies:

Are you able to say how this affects the minimum focal distance of the Canon 100mm f2.8?

Thanks.

I don't have the 100 f2.8 macro. Macro's tend to be difficult to focus up close due to the shallow DOF. I am not sure how MFT or my G85 will handle it. Except for my ef-s 18-135 stm, all else seem to be working. I'll know more in the coming days.

For MFT, it makes sense to go this route rather than let it go and double the FOV, unless you really want to go the distance of having that narrower FOV. But for most, the problem is not having enough on the wide end.

I think this one is not a dud or with serious gochas. As it is now, I am glad I didn't buy the U$649 MB speedbooster! It's just a mystery of the process of updating the firmware. It's not listed what must be done in their website. For now, all is good (so far). Just tested it in low light. AF was still good. Compared it to my M6 with the EF-EF-M adapter and they are about even, and in some cases, the Lumix + Viltrox even better. In fact, when it comes to ring USM (like in the 85 f1.8 usm), it focuses very fast even in low light.

That sounds good but...

If, like the MB speed booster, you have to stop down to regain the quality loss and then crop the crummy edges, is there any gain over just purchasing an inexpensive wide angle lens?

Hi, upgrade is very easy. The speedbooster had to be disconnected from the camera. Just connect it by the usb to your computer. It will be recognized as a removable disk. Drop the file on that disk and ready you are set to go.

gh5FAN wrote:

Hi, upgrade is very easy. The speedbooster had to be disconnected from the camera. Just connect it by the usb to your computer. It will be recognized as a removable disk. Drop the file on that disk and ready you are set to go.

Thank you!

I suspected as much. At first I thought that maybe the downloaded file is an executable file. But it was too small. Reading the "manual" in the box, I suspected that maybe if you attach the usb cable, the adapter becomes a drive (as you said). The instructions were not clear but I suppose that I could try that route later. But you saved me the time!

Thank you again!

Geo Wharton wrote:

That sounds good but...

If, like the MB speed booster, you have to stop down to regain the quality loss and then crop the crummy edges, is there any gain over just purchasing an inexpensive wide angle lens?

I don't think there's a cheaper equivalent for the 7-18 range. And the cheaper versions do have their issues (CA, some a bit soft at the corners, etc). You have to buy their PRO or more expensive version to solve those issues. We're talking over U$1,000 now. Many Canon lenses are cheap. I put my 10-22 instead into the adapter. It's not supposed to take in EF-S mount. My copy was a good one. I didn't see any difference in IQ at the corners vs mounting it on a canon aps-c body. I think the optics is good enough (4 elements only). I think if the lens you attach to it is good to the edges, it should be the same. But focal reducers tend to make the image sharper, so it should be better if not the same. They act like magnifying glass. But as they say, Garbage-in-garbage-out. Put a good lens there, and you should get a good image.

As I mentioned in my post, some MFT lenses can be expensive. In our country, the 7-14 is around U$750. I could get a canon 10-18 f4 IS STM for only U$350. That's a hefty U$400 savings. Of course, I trade size and a bit of a weight. I still say that if you tend to use a certain FL or zoom range 80-95% of the time, it is best to get the native lens. The time and often use of that lens will be justified.

But it's not always that easy. If the lens is too expensive to be bought now, then you could spend months or even years (yes, I did wait about 4-5 years before I could buy a used 70-200 f2.8L IS mark 1). But with an adapter, I could use the cheaper Canon lens equivalent. You might even get IS with it.

There's also some lenses that you don't often use. The Oly 75 f1.8 costs about U$750 in our country. I won't use that maybe 95% for me to buy it. But one could buy a 100 f2.0 usm, and get a 140mm (close enough to 150mm equiv) f1.4!  I already have the cheaper U$380 85 f1.8 which will give me 120mm f1.3. Not exactly 140mm equiv, but now I have something above 100mm equiv at f1.3 costing me only U$220 used. It AF's very fast too.

And there are some lenses that MFT does not have. For example, you want to use the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 canon mount. Or the Sigma 50-150 f1.8 for Canon. Yes, there is a 40-150 f1.8 but think of the cost, and think  being able to go f1.3 effective with the adapter!

Also, if you already have existing Canon lenses, you can use them with MFT. Again, not exactly small or light especially if they are L lenses. But they can be used as an interim if need be, till one can save up for the native version.

For my own uses, I own 3 systems/brands - Canon, Sony, and Panasonic. Now I can share the 85 f1.8 and 10-22 amongst the 3 bodies. No need to have separate lenses. No need to carry those lenses which adds to the volume and weight to the overall package in a pro gig. Less to worry about or lose.

The downsides are there as I have mentioned before. You just have to weigh in which you can trade for. Adapters are good compromises if you know which ones you are willing to trade. They also don't seem to AF smoothly with MFT. The AF pulses being CDAF. Not good in your footage. But for photos, they can be very good alternatives.

stateit wrote:

Geo Wharton wrote:

That sounds good but...

If, like the MB speed booster, you have to stop down to regain the quality loss and then crop the crummy edges, is there any gain over just purchasing an inexpensive wide angle lens?

I'm been wanting the Metabones for my EF 100mmm macro. The focal reducer aspect of this would pitch it at a good FL in my mind for my purposes. Plus it's cheaper than the non-focal reducer Metabones price.
The few video reviews I've seen of this vs the Metabones make it look a good prospect.

I'm sure I'll have fun using it with some of my other EF lenses, up to 300mm, plus when the two of us are out photographing, there might be less fighting over focal lengths!

So I reckon it seems OK value.

Actually, that's what made me buy this. The demo AF is good. Then the local vendor did their own video with an Oly camera and it was good. About 2 weeks ago, the top videographer in our country posted his manual adapter for sale. He just bought it about 2-3 weeks earlier. I first thought, maybe he didn't like it. I have the same one he has, but of different brand name. It was a decent and good one. But manual focus, and manual aperture and no exif data recorded. No current for STM to work.

Then the U$200 turned to U$225-250 for sale in the USA, with many stores out-of-stock. I found it strange nobody talked about that adapter here. But  I think this one is good, and for U$196, I took a calculated risk based on what is happening. And true enough, the Viltrox performed well. I don't know what the MB speedbooster's performance. But that thing costs U$649.

If I remember correctly, your 100 f2.8 macro is listed in the Viltrox website as compatible with this adapter. But really, it seems to work with those not listed there, except the 18-135 stm, which is not supposed to be used there anyway since it is clearly for EF lenses only (no EF-s).

Thanks Caterpillar, I'm hope it crack up to be that way.  Please keep us updated on how your experience with this goes.

George

Geo Wharton wrote:

Thanks Caterpillar, I'm hope it crack up to be that way. Please keep us updated on how your experience with this goes.

George

George, if I have the time, I would shoot a video to show how that AF is. But what I found in the youtube is not far off the AF I am getting. And it varies from lens-to-lens. The 50 f1.8 stm for example, using a shorter STM rail does not AF as fast. But that is the limitation of the lens. The 85 f1.8 and the 70-200 f2.8L IS mk1, AF's quickly. It loves those ring USMs. I tried it with the tamron 17-35 f2.8-4.0 and it focuses like it was without it as it uses the old dc-motors. Bottom line is, you AF is as good as the native AF was/is.

Optically, I see no degradation. At least from my eyes. In any case focal reducers are supposed to increase sharpness not lessen it. Or at least be on par. Same as AF. The IQ is as good as the lens is.

But for sure, I can get some photos out. Later.

brian wrote:

Geo Wharton wrote:

That sounds good but...

If, like the MB speed booster, you have to stop down to regain the quality loss and then crop the crummy edges, is there any gain over just purchasing an inexpensive wide angle lens?

The Speed Booster Ultra measurably improves the mtf of a Zeiss Otus all the way out to the edges, even as it raises the aperture from f/1.4 to f/1.0. Just curious - where did you get the impression that MB gives "crummy edges"?

Thanks Brian,  that is great to hear.  It's good to hear someone on here actually using the gear.  I read that a couple of years ago in an article comparing several different adaptors.  I haven't been able to locate the particular article.  To read that review, you would think all such adaptors were born in He11!

George

Just drop the file and you're ready. Afterwards you can check the version on your camera itself and you'll notice that it will state 2.2. Before dropping the file there was no number.

Mine should be arriving next week - had been watching it on eBay and Amazon, and when one appeared on the latter (sold by Viltrox and fulfilled by Amazon) I snapped it up right away.

I can test with a Sigma 24-35/2, Sigma 50/1.4EX and Canon 85/1.2L II and will share my thoughts.

I have done some very quick and dirty tests with GX80 + EF-M2 (ver 2.2 firmware) + Sigma 24-35 F/2 ART (34-50mm equiv.). Everything had to be done after work, so please excuse the poor lighting and high ISO handheld - but that made it a good stress test as low light is kinda what I like shooting anyway. I'll try to confirm Caterpillar's findings or fill in additional information that I didn't see in his/her post.

Overall impression

• My overwhelming first impression is that expectations should be tempered, in terms of optics and AF - unfortunately mine were unreasonably high so I was a little disappointed.
• From the short 30min or so that I have spent with the lens, so far, I don't see it becoming the workhorse set-up that I envisioned it could become (as my Oly 12-40/2.8 and Oly 25/1.2 currently fulfil) - accurate AF being the main limitation - but could see it being fun way to shoot creative stills or videos once you are aware of and can work around the limitations.

Image quality

• One poster commented that with the Metabones Speedbooster, it is usually necessary to stop down by 1-stop to regain lost sharpness. I can't comment on the MB but can confirm this is true of the Viltrox EF-M2, with my Sigma 24-35. This lens is virtually faultless wide open at all focal lengths when used natively on my Canon 5D; it is still impressively sharp wide open if I mount it on my Panasonic GX85 using a naked (non-optical) EF/M43 mount adapter. Mounted on the EF-M2 however, all sorts of aberrations that were not there before suddenly appear - on the Sigma 24-35/2 this presents wide open (F/1.4 converted aperture) with a more dreamy look / noticeably reduced contrast across the frame, slightly but noticeably reduced sharpness in the centre, really quite reduced corner sharpness and increased CA, slightly poorer bokeh quality, slightly increased coma around the corners. In short it probably renders like a kit lens except only at F/1.4.

25mm @F/1.4

Stopped down to F/2, much improved

• I suspect but can't confirm that flare resistance is worsened. E.g. the neon shop sign for Marks & Spencers appears to be in focus but looks smeared in the wide open shot, this smearing is gone when I stopped down to F/2. I will explore again with the UV filter removed to see if this makes any difference.

The Pantheon 18mm @ F/1.4. Smeared neon sign and lights in the shop - but appears to be in focus judging by the text on the shop entrance door

A much cleaner image @F/2

• In general, stopping down to F/2 and certainly F/2.8 clears up most aberrations - to the extent I would feel quite comfortable optically at these aperture settings for more critical applications - edge/corner sharpness less so (it does improve but as it is worse than the other issues it presumably requires stopping down further to get a good result).
• I would say F/1.4 seems usable in a pinch, and is perfectly adequate for the kind of low-light street photography I enjoy. Simpler scenes, such as this shot will work fine as long as focus is nailed (see below), busier/texture heavy scenes maybe not so much. Actually, with suitable PP (e.g. my favourite Lightroom Fuji Velvia film preset) the result can look really nice.

Minimal PP shot (17mm @ F/1.4). Manual focused on "curb" sign on taxi

Same shot with a Lightroom Fuji Velvia 100 preset

• One does question the utility of gaining one stop with the EF-M2 in the first place if optical quality degrades so much, but on reflection I would say the converted Sigma 24-35/2 wide open is no worse (probably marginally better) than the OM Zuiko 21/2 which I used to have and love.
• The good news is that purple fringing doesn't seem to increase at all beyond how a lens would perform natively - I couldn't detect any in this stress-test shot of a motorbike.

17mm @F/1.4, probably didn't quite nail the AF

• The 0.71x focal length reduction is real enough, and for the most part bokeh quality for non-challenging subjects (i.e. railings or criss-crossing tree branches, or coma-inducing point light sources) should be almost as good as what the lens can offer natively.

AF locked onto the gong. Not the sharpest but really lovely bokeh. 17mm @F/1.4

Much sharper at F/2 but the dramatic difference in DOF/bokeh surprised me.

• I know I am also spoilt by the Oly 25/1.2 which is very capable (if imperfect) wide open, I'll try to do a head-to-head comparison soon - conveniently the long end of the 24-35mm converts to 25mm (50mm equiv on full frame).
• I have not tried shooting video, this may have reduced sharpness demands than stills. But then 4K is not that much downsampled than 16mp.

AF performance

This both made me laugh and cry.

• Using AFS, focusing seems to work fine for close-ups, both in terms of speed and accuracy. Unsurprisingly, easy high-contrast targets such as black text on a light solid background works pretty well (duh).

Focusing appeared to have locked on accurately left side of the board (smearing of Yalla Yalla text probably edge sharpness issue). Note coma bokeh in top-left and top-right of frame.

• Indeed when it did work, the AF felt surprisingly snappy on the Sigma 24-35/2. In low-light, using AF assist on a flashgun helps.
• I noticed some inaccuracy - e.g. here I used 9-point AF clustered on the mannequin left of frame, but it appeared to have backfocused, in the centre of frame.

Mannequins 17mm @F/1.4. Backfocused?

Mannequins @F/2.8. Bitingly sharp textures on the fabric.

• What I hadn't really got to work, and this actually disappointed me more than the IQ, was that I could hardly get the AF to lock on in a wide angle street scenes; cars and buildings near or at infinity. I tried different AF settings - 49-area AF using 9 points, 1-area AF with different sized points - and none seemed to work better than any other, most of the time the lens just hunted back and forth and gave up focusing so I had to resort to MF.
• MF works as well as any native lens on any given M4/3 body. On the GX80 I would say the MF implementation is very mature, focus peaking helps and the magnified picture-in-picture helps a lot.
• I have not tried pinpoint AF - from experience this tends to work better in very low light for native M4/3 lenses - or focusing in good light. But again, poor low light performance makes the proposition less attractive for me, as why am I using fast lenses in the first place?
• I have not dared to tried AFC/AFS...
• YMMV on a modern Olympus body, can't comment as I don't have access to one.

Other observations

• I was rather impressed that the converted true focal length (i.e. 0.71x multipler) and aperture values (1-stop gain) appear to be accurately reported to the camera, and therefore EXIF metadata. On Lightroom I can see that even the lens name is preserved - ".724-35mm F2..."
• My copy of the Sigma 24-35/2 had been tweaked using the Sigma USB dock prior to this test shoot - it had been frontfocusing on my Canon 5D which I fixed - I have no idea if this is affecting the contrast detection AF on the GX80 + EF-M2 combo in any way.
• I tried to mount a Canon 85/1.2L II onto the EF-M2, listed as compatible by the manufacturer, and oddly the screen/viewfinder is pitch dark but the lens motor is focusing back and forth by itself like a headless chicken. When I half-press shutter for AF, the viewfinder brightens up to normal. No idea what is happening, shall explore further.
• 17mm @F/1.4 is a really nice focus length and aperture combination, it's giving me GAS and tempting to get an Oly 17/1.2 so I can do it natively LOL

Some more samples - all shot handheld using RAW, auto ISO, processed in Lightroom 6 using default settings (including sharpening 25). Focal legnths given are converted (i.e. 0.71x multiplier applied to native focal lengths). Different apertures using aperture bracketing which takes 3 shots in rapid succession.

Obligatory brick wall shot - 17mm @F/1.4, F/2, F/2.8.

AF attempted on the pair on the left but seems to have focused on the right. 17mm @F/1.4

Same story, contrast and sharpness improves quite significantly even one stop down at F/2

Wide open works fine for this kind of application as long as you nail the focusing. In this instance the AF happened to work (see text on stack of newspapers). 25mm @F1.4

Same shot F/2

F/2.8

Hi Caterpillar,

I wonder if you might be able to shed light on a couple of issues :

1) for some reason, on my GX80 with the adapter the camera seems to insist on continuously adjusting AF in photo mode (i.e. even when I haven't half pressed shutter), despite choosing AFS. Do you have this issue? I believe it may be causing the problem I'm having with the Canon 85L and also it is a pain with Tokina lenses (as they have no separate AF/MF switch, and I don't want to risk damaging the AF gears if the wheel is spinning by its own accord...)

2) my Tokina also appears to require calibration as it doesn't focus to infinity on the adapter, any ideas how the switch works as it appears to do nothing for me?

Thanks

Ryan