Canon 70-200 f/4 non IS and Tokina 11-16 on Sony a7rII?

[waxsatanic]

Hi, Folks,

Hi, Team,

I'm considering switching from Canon DSLR to mirrorless to take advantage of many of the mirrorless-only functions, most notably in body image stabilization, electronic viewfinder, and 4k video. I also need a solution for long-range indoor event photography. Something like a 70-200 with image stabilization (either in-lens or in-body) I've been shopping around quite extensively.

Here are my vitals:

• Current body: Canon 70D (aps-c DSLR)
• Lens collection: Tokina 11-16, Sigma 18-35, Canon 85mm non-L, Canon 100mm macro, Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS
• Shooting style: street, portrait, landscape, dabble in astro and architechtural
• I'd like to be able to video much easier and better than what my Canon 70D provides

Also of note I am not a full-time professional photographer. I would say I'm an advanced enthusiast who makes between 2k-3k on photography gigs a year. I want to spend less than 2k, if possible, on the immediate conversion costs, and swap out lenses over time.

I'm leaning towards the Sony A7rii for a few reasons:

• In body image stabilization
• Full frame, which will improve bokeh on portraits
• Enormous sensor which will improve landscapes
• 4k full frame video
• Electronic viewfinder
• Flippy screen

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

I'm also concerned with my Tokina 11-16mm for landscapes, astrophotography and indoor event photography. Will I suffer the smearing issue with extremely soft corners? Will the autofocus not work in low light?


I really can't spend 4-6k on converting to Sony. But I also don't want to move to full frame on Canon since the body's are lackluster.

What do you think is right for me? Can I do my work with the lenses I have on the AR7ii, plus a few strategic/budget Sony options? Is now a good time to convert? Should I stay on my current system, which I am pretty happy with?

Thanks for any consideration!

 

[Rol Lei Nut]

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

Quite well, actually.

It won't set any AF speed records, but for normal use quite o.k.

As you intend to use it for sports, it might not be ideal, but then, some of the best sports pictures ever taken were with manual focus cameras....

 

[waxsatanic]

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

Quite well, actually.

It won't set any AF speed records, but for normal use quite o.k.

As you intend to use it for sports, it might not be ideal, but then, some of the best sports pictures ever taken were with manual focus cameras....

Thank you for the response!

Is this with the MB4? And does this go for at max focal length, in low light, etc?

 

[Rol Lei Nut]

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

Quite well, actually.

It won't set any AF speed records, but for normal use quite o.k.

As you intend to use it for sports, it might not be ideal, but then, some of the best sports pictures ever taken were with manual focus cameras....

Thank you for the response!

Is this with the MB4? And does this go for at max focal length, in low light, etc?

I used it (now have the IS version) with a MB IV T and the MC-11.

How do you define low light? I got it to focus reliably at 200mm is a room lit by a single 60W (equivalent) lightbulb.

The only Canon lens I have which has problems at at the longer FLs is the 100-400 II, and that mostly when large focus shifts are attempted (changing from 2-3M to infinity & vice-versa). All the other will focus in the dimly lit room as above (I think the 70-200 managed even with the 1.4 extender there).

 

[waxsatanic]

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

Quite well, actually.

It won't set any AF speed records, but for normal use quite o.k.

As you intend to use it for sports, it might not be ideal, but then, some of the best sports pictures ever taken were with manual focus cameras....

Thank you for the response!

Is this with the MB4? And does this go for at max focal length, in low light, etc?

I used it (now have the IS version) with a MB IV T and the MC-11.

How do you define low light? I got it to focus reliably at 200mm is a room lit by a single 60W (equivalent) lightbulb.

The only Canon lens I have which has problems at at the longer FLs is the 100-400 II, and that mostly when large focus shifts are attempted (changing from 2-3M to infinity & vice-versa). All the other will focus in the dimly lit room as above (I think the 70-200 managed even with the 1.4 extender there).

That certainly works well enough for my needs! I just need it for indoor events where the rooms are light by lightbulbs and not the sun.

I think I read somewhere that the adapter causes about a 1 stop loss in light transmission. Is that true?

Do you have any experience with converting canon ultrawides?

 

[Rol Lei Nut]

I think I can get a Sony AR7ii and a metabones mk4 adapter used for around 2k, thanks to the new AR7iii and A9 coming out, and prices declining. But I'm very concerned that the Sony lens environment is too expensive for me and that my Canon lenses will not perform when I adapt them.

Ive seen youtube videos where Canon lenses just wont autofocus with the metabones, especially in low light or at long focal lengths. If I convert and rely on my current lenses for awhile, will I be left high and dry? For example, how will my Canon 70-200 f/4 non-IS function?

Quite well, actually.

It won't set any AF speed records, but for normal use quite o.k.

As you intend to use it for sports, it might not be ideal, but then, some of the best sports pictures ever taken were with manual focus cameras....

Thank you for the response!

Is this with the MB4? And does this go for at max focal length, in low light, etc?

I used it (now have the IS version) with a MB IV T and the MC-11.

How do you define low light? I got it to focus reliably at 200mm is a room lit by a single 60W (equivalent) lightbulb.

The only Canon lens I have which has problems at at the longer FLs is the 100-400 II, and that mostly when large focus shifts are attempted (changing from 2-3M to infinity & vice-versa). All the other will focus in the dimly lit room as above (I think the 70-200 managed even with the 1.4 extender there).

That certainly works well enough for my needs! I just need it for indoor events where the rooms are light by lightbulbs and not the sun.

I think I read somewhere that the adapter causes about a 1 stop loss in light transmission. Is that true?

The adapter? No, no light loss.

Did you mean the 1.4x extender? That yes.

The Sony LA-EA4 adapter for A mount lenses absorbs about 1/3 stop light, but that's the only one I can think of, otherwise adapters are basically hollow tubes.

Do you have any experience with converting canon ultrawides?

16-35 4.0 L, 24-70 4.0 L, 24 2.8 IS all work fine, with the usual caveat that you will have a hard time focusing on a flying ball...

 

[Jhw58]

Few things....

dont know if you can swing it but Sony has a promotion right now...instant $520 savings on A7rii puts it at $2400 mark. And A7ii is $1099 with $500 instant savings and there is an additional trade in type bonus....just for thoughts.

i use a Sigma MC-11 adapter with non IS 70-200/4. Also with a 2x extender. Also use with a 100 2.8L macro IS, 35/2 IS and 85 1.8 on my A7rii. Have not tried a Tokina

good luck with your choice.