Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

I recently upgraded the original A7r and I want a new adapter as well. The Commlite CM-EF-E HS seems to be the way to go in the affordable line, but reviews are 6 to 9 months old. So what's up ? Any experience with this or with other adapters?

This Commlite High Speed as they call it, has a newer version recognizable by the USB plug inside and no longer on the rim. It seems to be compatible with all my lenses except the 100-400, which is annoying. But if at least the opening works, I could do with it.

TIA for any insight.

Paul

Sony a7R Sony a7R II
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
2

alpshiker wrote:

I recently upgraded the original A7r and I want a new adapter as well. The Commlite CM-EF-E HS seems to be the way to go in the affordable line, but reviews are 6 to 9 months old. So what's up ? Any experience with this or with other adapters?

This Commlite High Speed as they call it, has a newer version recognizable by the USB plug inside and no longer on the rim. It seems to be compatible with all my lenses except the 100-400, which is annoying. But if at least the opening works, I could do with it.

TIA for any insight.

Paul

My .guess is that the Committee is effective with APSC applications. But most EF to fullframe e-mount users are getting the best results with either the Sigma MC 11 or Metabones IV / V adapters.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
1

alpshiker wrote:

I recently upgraded the original A7r and I want a new adapter as well. The Commlite CM-EF-E HS seems to be the way to go in the affordable line, but reviews are 6 to 9 months old. So what's up ? Any experience with this or with other adapters?

This Commlite High Speed as they call it, has a newer version recognizable by the USB plug inside and no longer on the rim. It seems to be compatible with all my lenses except the 100-400, which is annoying. But if at least the opening works, I could do with it.

TIA for any insight.

Paul

I'm biased: an earlier Commlite EF=>FE adapter was my worst adapter ever (reflections, light leaks, inaccurate AF with some lenses), so I'd be a bit wary with the brand.

Metabones IV or V and Sigma MC-11 work very well. The metabones might need shimming for use with some wide lenses.

OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

I'm biased: an earlier Commlite EF=>FE adapter was my worst adapter ever (reflections, light leaks, inaccurate AF with some lenses), so I'd be a bit wary with the brand.

Metabones IV or V and Sigma MC-11 work very well. The metabones might need shimming for use with some wide lenses.

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

captura wrote:

My .guess is that the Committee is effective with APSC applications. But most EF to fullframe e-mount users are getting the best results with either the Sigma MC 11 or Metabones IV / V adapters.

In a test on YT, the Commlite and MC-11 come close. It is a full frame design. If I was promised near native AF speed and acuracy, I would start saving for the Metabones, but from what I heard, it is still a lame horse?

captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
1

alpshiker wrote:

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

I'm biased: an earlier Commlite EF=>FE adapter was my worst adapter ever (reflections, light leaks, inaccurate AF with some lenses), so I'd be a bit wary with the brand.

Metabones IV or V and Sigma MC-11 work very well. The metabones might need shimming for use with some wide lenses.

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
1

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

That "review" is a notorious example of incompetent testing (they didn't check the adapter length for accuracy), which has led to persistent legends about Canon wides "not working well" with Sony sensors and talk of "bad air" inside the adapters or that the lens' curvature of field doesn't exactly match that of the different brand sensor (!!!)... Absolute rubbish!

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

It's the Metabones which sometimes or often (or always?) needs to be shimmed. I shimmed mine.

The MC-11 has the reputation of being the right length. I didn't need to shim mine.

Based on just one sample of each, I can't really say what the chances are of needing to shim one of those adapters when using wides having floating elements.

In any case, neither have caused freezing or other problems when used with (quite a number of) Canon lenses.

And, yes, my Canon 16-35 4.0 L works beautifully (very sharp corners) at 16mm with both adapters (the Metabones having been shimmed).

captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

My .guess is that the Committee is effective with APSC applications. But most EF to fullframe e-mount users are getting the best results with either the Sigma MC 11 or Metabones IV / V adapters.

In a test on YT, the Commlite and MC-11 come close. It is a full frame design. If I was promised near native AF speed and acuracy, I would start saving for the Metabones, but from what I heard, it is still a lame horse?

I get native speed with Metabones IV on my A7, SAF.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

That "review" is a notorious example of incompetent testing (they didn't check the adapter length for accuracy), which has led to persistent legends about Canon wides "not working well" with Sony sensors and talk of "bad air" inside the adapters or that the lens' curvature of field doesn't exactly match that of the different brand sensor (!!!)... Absolute rubbish!

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

It's the Metabones which sometimes or often (or always?) needs to be shimmed. I shimmed mine.

The MC-11 has the reputation of being the right length. I didn't need to shim mine.

Based on just one sample of each, I can't really say what the chances are of needing to shim one of those adapters when using wides having floating elements.

In any case, neither have caused freezing or other problems when used with (quite a number of) Canon lenses.

And, yes, my Canon 16-35 4.0 L works beautifully (very sharp corners) at 16mm with both adapters (the Metabones having been shimmed).

Correct. But TN does say, at the beginning, that his Metabones IV is the better adapter, all around.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
ZeBebito
ZeBebito Regular Member • Posts: 405
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
1

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

alpshiker wrote:

I recently upgraded the original A7r and I want a new adapter as well. The Commlite CM-EF-E HS seems to be the way to go in the affordable line, but reviews are 6 to 9 months old. So what's up ? Any experience with this or with other adapters?

This Commlite High Speed as they call it, has a newer version recognizable by the USB plug inside and no longer on the rim. It seems to be compatible with all my lenses except the 100-400, which is annoying. But if at least the opening works, I could do with it.

TIA for any insight.

Paul

I'm biased: an earlier Commlite EF=>FE adapter was my worst adapter ever (reflections, light leaks, inaccurate AF with some lenses), so I'd be a bit wary with the brand.

Metabones IV or V and Sigma MC-11 work very well. The metabones might need shimming for use with some wide lenses.

I would also recommend the MC-11. I have the first Commlite AF adapter which works ok with my Sony A7Rii + Canon 40mm 2.8, however, when I put the 50mm 1.4 on it, the lens AF motor stops moving and now the lens is completely dead, not even working with my 5D.

-- hide signature --

Focus on what's important

 ZeBebito's gear list:ZeBebito's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Leica M8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Leica M Typ 240 Sony a7R II +12 more
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

captura wrote:

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

That "review" is a notorious example of incompetent testing (they didn't check the adapter length for accuracy), which has led to persistent legends about Canon wides "not working well" with Sony sensors and talk of "bad air" inside the adapters or that the lens' curvature of field doesn't exactly match that of the different brand sensor (!!!)... Absolute rubbish!

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

It's the Metabones which sometimes or often (or always?) needs to be shimmed. I shimmed mine.

The MC-11 has the reputation of being the right length. I didn't need to shim mine.

Based on just one sample of each, I can't really say what the chances are of needing to shim one of those adapters when using wides having floating elements.

In any case, neither have caused freezing or other problems when used with (quite a number of) Canon lenses.

And, yes, my Canon 16-35 4.0 L works beautifully (very sharp corners) at 16mm with both adapters (the Metabones having been shimmed).

Correct. But TN does say, at the beginning, that his Metabones IV is the better adapter, all around.

Given his "thoroughness", what TN says really is inconsequential for me.

Also, TN's and Brian Smith's reviews are both several years old now: several generations of FW ugrades (both good and less good) have appeared since, substantially changing the behaviour of those adapters.

Anyway, the meaning of "better adapter" is hard to define. First their performance is a moving target, substantially changing between adapter FW updates, camera models (and their FW updates), the lenses being used and camera settings, not to mention the different modes the Metabones adapter can use.

Generally speaking, Metabones may be more versatile, has a built in tripod foot, officially "supports" a number of Canon lenses and may (or may not, dpending on FW, camera, lens, settings, etc.) have slightly better AF performance.

The Sigma MC-11 is cheaper, lighter, slimmer (no tripod foot) and has a greater chance of not needing to be shimmed when used with certain wides. Canon lenses aren't officially supported, but, apart from a period they released some Canon-unfriendly FW, Canon lenses tend to work as well (not measuring ms. level speed differences or any features) as on the Metabones.

captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

captura wrote:

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

That "review" is a notorious example of incompetent testing (they didn't check the adapter length for accuracy), which has led to persistent legends about Canon wides "not working well" with Sony sensors and talk of "bad air" inside the adapters or that the lens' curvature of field doesn't exactly match that of the different brand sensor (!!!)... Absolute rubbish!

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

It's the Metabones which sometimes or often (or always?) needs to be shimmed. I shimmed mine.

The MC-11 has the reputation of being the right length. I didn't need to shim mine.

Based on just one sample of each, I can't really say what the chances are of needing to shim one of those adapters when using wides having floating elements.

In any case, neither have caused freezing or other problems when used with (quite a number of) Canon lenses.

And, yes, my Canon 16-35 4.0 L works beautifully (very sharp corners) at 16mm with both adapters (the Metabones having been shimmed).

Correct. But TN does say, at the beginning, that his Metabones IV is the better adapter, all around.

Given his "thoroughness", what TN says really is inconsequential for me.

Also, TN's and Brian Smith's reviews are both several years old now: several generations of FW ugrades (both good and less good) have appeared since, substantially changing the behaviour of those adapters.

Anyway, the meaning of "better adapter" is hard to define. First their performance is a moving target, substantially changing between adapter FW updates, camera models (and their FW updates), the lenses being used and camera settings, not to mention the different modes the Metabones adapter can use.

Generally speaking, Metabones may be more versatile, has a built in tripod foot, officially "supports" a number of Canon lenses and may (or may not, dpending on FW, camera, lens, settings, etc.) have slightly better AF performance.

The Sigma MC-11 is cheaper, lighter, slimmer (no tripod foot) and has a greater chance of not needing to be shimmed when used with certain wides. Canon lenses aren't officially supported, but, apart from a period they released some Canon-unfriendly FW, Canon lenses tend to work as well (not measuring ms. level speed differences or any features) as on the Metabones.

The MC11 often hesitated before acquiring focus. The Metabones does not.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

captura wrote:

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

captura wrote:

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

alpshiker wrote:

captura wrote:

Yes I have read some comments in that sense about Commlite. But some say that the one with the latest firmware is better than the previous, also a tighter fit.

The Sigma MC-11 is said to produce soft corners with some wide angles. I have the 4/16-35. Maybe shimming it like you suggest would solve that, if doable. Some also report regular freezes with some Canon Lenses since it is in fact designed for Sigma lenses in EF mount. But seeing the photos, it is no doubt another build quality than the rest of the bunch.

Maybe you remember wrongly? It's Metabones which needs to be shimmed.

Or maybe both, according to this review .

That "review" is a notorious example of incompetent testing (they didn't check the adapter length for accuracy), which has led to persistent legends about Canon wides "not working well" with Sony sensors and talk of "bad air" inside the adapters or that the lens' curvature of field doesn't exactly match that of the different brand sensor (!!!)... Absolute rubbish!

But we know that with very wide angles, the focussing distance has also a great impact on far corners sharpness.

It's the Metabones which sometimes or often (or always?) needs to be shimmed. I shimmed mine.

The MC-11 has the reputation of being the right length. I didn't need to shim mine.

Based on just one sample of each, I can't really say what the chances are of needing to shim one of those adapters when using wides having floating elements.

In any case, neither have caused freezing or other problems when used with (quite a number of) Canon lenses.

And, yes, my Canon 16-35 4.0 L works beautifully (very sharp corners) at 16mm with both adapters (the Metabones having been shimmed).

Correct. But TN does say, at the beginning, that his Metabones IV is the better adapter, all around.

Given his "thoroughness", what TN says really is inconsequential for me.

Also, TN's and Brian Smith's reviews are both several years old now: several generations of FW ugrades (both good and less good) have appeared since, substantially changing the behaviour of those adapters.

Anyway, the meaning of "better adapter" is hard to define. First their performance is a moving target, substantially changing between adapter FW updates, camera models (and their FW updates), the lenses being used and camera settings, not to mention the different modes the Metabones adapter can use.

Generally speaking, Metabones may be more versatile, has a built in tripod foot, officially "supports" a number of Canon lenses and may (or may not, dpending on FW, camera, lens, settings, etc.) have slightly better AF performance.

The Sigma MC-11 is cheaper, lighter, slimmer (no tripod foot) and has a greater chance of not needing to be shimmed when used with certain wides. Canon lenses aren't officially supported, but, apart from a period they released some Canon-unfriendly FW, Canon lenses tend to work as well (not measuring ms. level speed differences or any features) as on the Metabones.

The MC11 often hesitated before acquiring focus. The Metabones does not.

My MC-11 doesn't behave obviously differently in most cases.

Which FW, cameras, lenses, settings, etc. do you use?

OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Thanks to everyone for your constructive inputs.

As you mentioned:

“Anyway, the meaning of "better adapter" is hard to define. First their performance is a moving target, substantially changing between adapter FW updates, camera models (and their FW updates), the lenses being used and camera settings, not to mention the different modes the Metabones adapter can use.”

That's why I mentioned that particular Commlite model with the latest FW, in case someone was using it with the A7rII and could comment on it.

Now, I'd be considering either the Metabones V or the MC-11 if there are real plusses, and it looks like there are. But what do you mean exactly by “shimming”, talking about the Metabones? I first thought that corners had to be filed not to vignette, but as I understand it now, it's a matter of shortening the whole assembly by a few microns? But how you do that? Do you resort to precision machining, or just sanding-filing some part?

Looking either at the MC-11, or the MB-V, would anyone report success using it on A7RII with Canon EF :

4.0/16-35 (Captura, thanks for your good report)

1.4/ 35mm

1.4/ 50mm

1.8/ 85mm

1.2/ 85mm M1

2.0/ 135 w and wo 1,4x extender

100-400 M1

Thanks so far

Paul

OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

… Forgot to mention the main lens:

4.0/ 24-105 M1

Rol Lei Nut Veteran Member • Posts: 4,493
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
1

alpshiker wrote:

Now, I'd be considering either the Metabones V or the MC-11 if there are real plusses, and it looks like there are. But what do you mean exactly by “shimming”, talking about the Metabones? I first thought that corners had to be filed not to vignette, but as I understand it now, it's a matter of shortening the whole assembly by a few microns? But how you do that? Do you resort to precision machining, or just sanding-filing some part?

Many adapters are made slightly too short (typically by 0.1-0.3mm), often intentionally, so that all lenses, even those slightly out of spec, can reach infinity focus.

When using unit focusing primes, the only problem that brings is that the focusing scale doesn't correspond accurately with the effective focusing distance.

When using lenses having floating elements (CRC, IF, many zooms), though, it means that the positions of the lens' optical elements are optimised for the wrong distance. Especially with WA and UWA lenses, that can cause visible problems (typically softer corners).

A rough test for a too short adapter is easy. Take the lens(es) with the shortest FL(s) you have, carefully focus on something far away (=infinity) and look at the lens' distance scale: if the scale is on or near the infinity mark, you're probably o.k. If the scale is closer to the 1 or 2 meter mark, the adapter is probably short. If you've used the lens(es) for this test with other cameras (Canon in your case), you have a reference for where the infinity mark should be on your individual lens samples when focused to "infinity".

Shimming usually involves unscrewing and removing the adapter's lens bayonet, adding some material of the correct thickness (often 0.1-0.3mm) and putting the lens bayonet back on. Then repeat the infinity test as above to see if you got the correct thickness. You can do it more technically, measuring with calipers, etc., but I find just slowly adding thickness as needed easier.

The material used for shimming is a matter of preference: some use adhesive tape (better stiff than soft), oiled paper, various metal foils, washers. If you have a set of feeler calipers, cutting a little material off one or more blades makes excellent spacers.

Looking either at the MC-11, or the MB-V, would anyone report success using it on A7RII with Canon EF :

I can vouch for the following EF lenses working well* with both the MB IV T and MC-11 on the A7RII:

70-200 4.0 L

70-200 4.0 L IS

70-300 L (also with Kenko 1.4)

400 5.6 L

100-400 L II can search & not lock with large focusing distance changes, esp. in poor light. Latest MB firmware seems to have improved that.

100-300 5.6 L (old, slowish & noisy!)

16-35 4.0 L

24-70 4.0 L

200 2.8 L

100 2.8 Macro USM

24 2.8 IS

TS-E 24 3.5 II and TS-E 90 2.8 I (no AF, of course)

The teles also with a 1.4x Extender III

*By "working well" I mean accurate and reasonably fast AF using AF-S with not too dim light.

captura Forum Pro • Posts: 27,196
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

alpshiker wrote:

Thanks to everyone for your constructive inputs.

As you mentioned:

“Anyway, the meaning of "better adapter" is hard to define. First their performance is a moving target, substantially changing between adapter FW updates, camera models (and their FW updates), the lenses being used and camera settings, not to mention the different modes the Metabones adapter can use.”

That's why I mentioned that particular Commlite model with the latest FW, in case someone was using it with the A7rII and could comment on it.

Now, I'd be considering either the Metabones V or the MC-11 if there are real plusses, and it looks like there are. But what do you mean exactly by “shimming”, talking about the Metabones? I first thought that corners had to be filed not to vignette, but as I understand it now, it's a matter of shortening the whole assembly by a few microns? But how you do that? Do you resort to precision machining, or just sanding-filing some part?

Looking either at the MC-11, or the MB-V, would anyone report success using it on A7RII with Canon EF :

4.0/16-35 (Captura, thanks for your good report)

1.4/ 35mm

1.4/ 50mm

1.8/ 85mm

1.2/ 85mm M1

2.0/ 135 w and wo 1,4x extender

100-400 M1

Thanks so far

Paul

At the time, I had the choice of getting the MC-11, or buying a used Metabones IV at the same price, and I chose the latter.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Sony a7 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +3 more
voronspb Senior Member • Posts: 1,112
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?
2

I've owned all three: MBV, CM EF-E HS and MC-11. There's no such thing as a perfect adapter. Neither is 100% equivalent to native glass. And also it may happen that you'll need both MBV and MC-11 to ensure the optimum operation of all your EF lenses.

For example, MBV works quite poorly with EF8-15L (and it's not about the shimming), while MC-11 is fine with that lens (minus IBIS). On the other hand, MC-11 doesn't allow using Tamron 70-300 SP (camera displays F--), while its support in MBV is present (though limited at telephoto end).

Commlite EF-E HS may be fine with certain lenses, but with that adapter I experienced camera freezing at times, and also its list of supported lenses isn't that large. With unsupported lenses it uses extremely slow CDAF. Also the mount on adapter is a bit loose.

I'd strongly recommend starting from MC-11 (look for discounts when its price is as low as 150$), having in mind that it may not work with every lens you have, and you may need MBV.

-- hide signature --

Vladimir Gorbunov

 voronspb's gear list:voronspb's gear list
Sony a6300 Sony a7 III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 Sony FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS +5 more
OP alpshiker Regular Member • Posts: 455
Re: Commlite HS Canon EF to A7R II?

Rol Lei Nut wrote:

Many adapters are made slightly too short (typically by 0.1-0.3mm), often intentionally, so that all lenses, even those slightly out of spec, can reach infinity focus.

When using unit focusing primes, the only problem that brings is that the focusing scale doesn't correspond accurately with the effective focusing distance.

When using lenses having floating elements (CRC, IF, many zooms), though, it means that the positions of the lens' optical elements are optimised for the wrong distance. Especially with WA and UWA lenses, that can cause visible problems (typically softer corners).

Right. Now I get the whole picture, if I can say.

A rough test for a too short adapter is easy. Take the lens(es) with the shortest FL(s) you have, carefully focus on something far away (=infinity) and look at the lens' distance scale: if the scale is on or near the infinity mark, you're probably o.k. If the scale is closer to the 1 or 2 meter mark, the adapter is probably short. If you've used the lens(es) for this test with other cameras (Canon in your case), you have a reference for where the infinity mark should be on your individual lens samples when focused to "infinity".

Shimming usually involves unscrewing and removing the adapter's lens bayonet, adding some material of the correct thickness (often 0.1-0.3mm) and putting the lens bayonet back on. Then repeat the infinity test as above to see if you got the correct thickness. You can do it more technically, measuring with calipers, etc., but I find just slowly adding thickness as needed easier.

The material used for shimming is a matter of preference: some use adhesive tape (better stiff than soft), oiled paper, various metal foils, washers. If you have a set of feeler calipers, cutting a little material off one or more blades makes excellent spacers.

I get the point. By chance the adjustment of the length must be done by prolonging and not by shortening the whole assembly, which should not be a problem.

Looking either at the MC-11, or the MB-V, would anyone report success using it on A7RII with Canon EF :

Thanks a lot for that helpful information and for your lenses report.

Paul

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads