Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro on Micro 4/3rds (MFT) - "Redux"

[newmy51]

Hello DPReview,

At the risk of asking a question already posed (but insufficiently answered) elsewhere, I am starting this thread to do what this older one endeavored to before it was sent off on several interesting but ultimately non-topical tangents:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67095537

Namely, what options exist for adapting the MP-E to a MFT body (in my case a new used OM-D E M1X). I'm personally more interested in electronic adapters than manual ones, as I wish to retain aperture control, and boy howdy would it be sweet to have actually working Image Stabilization on this bazooka.

The options I can find, at the time of writing (Q2 2023), that seem like they possibly to probably offer this functionality, are the following:

Fotodiox Pro Fusion Smart AF Adapter - Canon EOS (EF / EF-S) to MFT

FotodioX Pro Fusion Redux Smart AF Adapter - Canon EF to MFT

Metabones Canon EF Lens to EFM Mount T Speed Booster ULTRA 0.71x (EOS M)

Vello Lens Adapter for Canon EF/EF-S Lenses to Micro Four Thirds Mount Cameras (Version II)

VILTROX EF-M2 II Focal Reducer Speed Booster Adapterfor Canon EF Mount Series Lens to M43 Camera

I'm including the Metabones for posterity/thoroughness' sake, as I have no intention of purchasing one at the astronomical prices they are offered for, especially when rumors have it (citation needed) that at least one of these alternatives is bound to provide the same or better functionality/compatibility for a fraction of the price.

My understanding is that some (most? all?) of these adapters have crop factor/magnification/aperture compensation, so that the MP-E doesn't just double in every value when placed on a MFT body, but rather doubled and then multiplied by 0.71x, or thereabouts. That would mean rather than being a 130mm 2x-10x f/5.6 (however length changes things on a lens without infinity focus; a question I am genuinely curious about... twice the minimum working distance?), it's a 92.4mm 1.42x-7.1x f/4. Speaking personally, I'm ambivalent on this being a benefit for this lens, leaning lightly towards it actually being a detriment. My shiny new 90mm f/3.5 M.Zuiko Macro IS PRO goes to 2x natively with an upsetting amount of bells and whistles. Having the MP-E handle 2x all the freaking way to 10x makes for a tidy expansion to the magnification range of my rig, having one lens pick up where the other leaves off, "magnificationally" speaking

The question then is how are all these adapters different from one another, aside from their prices? Which ones does this list leave out? What the hell is the difference between the Fotodiox and the Fotodiox "Redux," and Version I versus Version II of the Vello? Which adapters actually enable the use of electronic aperture adjustment at least, and camera-based Image Stabilization at best, on the OM-D E1M1X, or on any body with that feature? Which ones have weird quirks or shortcomings and which ones work like a dream? I realize others will have their own bodies they are curious about, but at the very least, my hope is that this thread, unlike its predecessor, can remain confined to the topic of this one lens (MP-E) on this one sensor (MFT).

Thank you in advance for your contributions.

Yours in Spores,

-newmy51

 

[Adrian Harris]

Hello DPReview,

At the risk of asking a question already posed (but insufficiently answered) elsewhere, I am starting this thread to do what this older one endeavored to before it was sent off on several interesting but ultimately non-topical tangents:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67095537

Namely, what options exist for adapting the MP-E to a MFT body (in my case a new used OM-D E M1X). I'm personally more interested in electronic adapters than manual ones, as I wish to retain aperture control, and boy howdy would it be sweet to have actually working Image Stabilization on this bazooka.

The options I can find, at the time of writing (Q2 2023), that seem like they possibly to probably offer this functionality, are the following:

Fotodiox Pro Fusion Smart AF Adapter - Canon EOS (EF / EF-S) to MFT

FotodioX Pro Fusion Redux Smart AF Adapter - Canon EF to MFT

Metabones Canon EF Lens to EFM Mount T Speed Booster ULTRA 0.71x (EOS M)

Vello Lens Adapter for Canon EF/EF-S Lenses to Micro Four Thirds Mount Cameras (Version II)

VILTROX EF-M2 II Focal Reducer Speed Booster Adapterfor Canon EF Mount Series Lens to M43 Camera

I'm including the Metabones for posterity/thoroughness' sake, as I have no intention of purchasing one at the astronomical prices they are offered for, especially when rumors have it (citation needed) that at least one of these alternatives is bound to provide the same or better functionality/compatibility for a fraction of the price.

My understanding is that some (most? all?) of these adapters have crop factor/magnification/aperture compensation, so that the MP-E doesn't just double in every value when placed on a MFT body, but rather doubled and then multiplied by 0.71x, or thereabouts. That would mean rather than being a 130mm 2x-10x f/5.6 (however length changes things on a lens without infinity focus; a question I am genuinely curious about... twice the minimum working distance?), it's a 92.4mm 1.42x-7.1x f/4. Speaking personally, I'm ambivalent on this being a benefit for this lens, leaning lightly towards it actually being a detriment. My shiny new 90mm f/3.5 M.Zuiko Macro IS PRO goes to 2x natively with an upsetting amount of bells and whistles. Having the MP-E handle 2x all the freaking way to 10x makes for a tidy expansion to the magnification range of my rig, having one lens pick up where the other leaves off, "magnificationally" speaking

The question then is how are all these adapters different from one another, aside from their prices? Which ones does this list leave out? What the hell is the difference between the Fotodiox and the Fotodiox "Redux," and Version I versus Version II of the Vello? Which adapters actually enable the use of electronic aperture adjustment at least, and camera-based Image Stabilization at best, on the OM-D E1M1X, or on any body with that feature? Which ones have weird quirks or shortcomings and which ones work like a dream? I realize others will have their own bodies they are curious about, but at the very least, my hope is that this thread, unlike its predecessor, can remain confined to the topic of this one lens (MP-E) on this one sensor (MFT).

Thank you in advance for your contributions.

Yours in Spores,

-newmy51

Would it be worth you buying a cheap adapter just to see how well you get on with the canon mpe on a m43. Because that much magnification may be very difficult to work with.

 

[finnan haddie]

Hello DPReview,

At the risk of asking a question already posed (but insufficiently answered) elsewhere, I am starting this thread to do what this older one endeavored to before it was sent off on several interesting but ultimately non-topical tangents:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67095537

Namely, what options exist for adapting the MP-E to a MFT body (in my case a new used OM-D E M1X). I'm personally more interested in electronic adapters than manual ones, as I wish to retain aperture control, and boy howdy would it be sweet to have actually working Image Stabilization on this bazooka.

The options I can find, at the time of writing (Q2 2023), that seem like they possibly to probably offer this functionality, are the following:

Fotodiox Pro Fusion Smart AF Adapter - Canon EOS (EF / EF-S) to MFT

FotodioX Pro Fusion Redux Smart AF Adapter - Canon EF to MFT

Metabones Canon EF Lens to EFM Mount T Speed Booster ULTRA 0.71x (EOS M)

For MFT you'd need the Metabones Canon EF Lens to MicroFourThirds Mount T Speed Booster ULTRA 0.71x. I got the BT4 version.

Or the Metabones Canon EF Lens to MicroFourThirds Mount T Smart Adapter. No glass in it, but with electronic support. My version is BT2.

Vello Lens Adapter for Canon EF/EF-S Lenses to Micro Four Thirds Mount Cameras (Version II)

VILTROX EF-M2 II Focal Reducer Speed Booster Adapterfor Canon EF Mount Series Lens to M43 Camera

I'm including the Metabones for posterity/thoroughness' sake, as I have no intention of purchasing one at the astronomical prices they are offered for, especially when rumors have it (citation needed) that at least one of these alternatives is bound to provide the same or better functionality/compatibility for a fraction of the price.

Two things come to mind:

• You get what you pay for.
• There is no free lunch.

Disclaimer: I don't own any of the knock-offs you listed.

My understanding is that some (most? all?) of these adapters have crop factor/magnification/aperture compensation, so that the MP-E doesn't just double in every value when placed on a MFT body, but rather doubled and then multiplied by 0.71x, or thereabouts.

There are adapters with compensation (focal reducers, speed boosters) and other without glass (Metabones calls them smart adapters if they support the electronic lens contacts).

That would mean rather than being a 130mm 2x-10x f/5.6 (however length changes things on a lens without infinity focus; a question I am genuinely curious about... twice the minimum working distance?),

Nope, the working distance is not changed in any way. Just the angel of view is different.

it's a 92.4mm 1.42x-7.1x f/4. Speaking personally, I'm ambivalent on this being a benefit for this lens, leaning lightly towards it actually being a detriment. My shiny new 90mm f/3.5 M.Zuiko Macro IS PRO goes to 2x natively with an upsetting amount of bells and whistles. Having the MP-E handle 2x all the freaking way to 10x makes for a tidy expansion to the magnification range of my rig, having one lens pick up where the other leaves off, "magnificationally" speaking

Nope.

With a 0.71x speed booster the AOV is widened, thus image magnification with the MPE65 is reduced to the range from 0.71x to 3.55x.

With a simple mechanical or electronic adapter the magnification range stays at 1x-5x, but on and MFT sensor you get what is equivalent to an 50% (or is it 200%?) crop of an FF Image. Thus your subject appears twice as big on an MFT photo as on an FF photo at the same (!) magnification.

The question then is how are all these adapters different from one another, aside from their prices? Which ones does this list leave out?

See above.

What the hell is the difference between the Fotodiox and the Fotodiox "Redux," and Version I versus Version II of the Vello? Which adapters actually enable the use of electronic aperture adjustment at least, and camera-based Image Stabilization at best, on the OM-D E1M1X, or on any body with that feature? Which ones have weird quirks or shortcomings and which ones work like a dream?

I don't have any issues with my Metabones adapters (0.64x, 0.71x, 1x).

I realize others will have their own bodies they are curious about, but at the very least, my hope is that this thread, unlike its predecessor, can remain confined to the topic of this one lens (MP-E) on this one sensor (MFT).

Thank you in advance for your contributions.

Yours in Spores,

-newmy51

--
Moving to https://dprevived.com

 

[Diswantsho]

I purchased a MPE specially to use on my PEN-F, and sold it soon after for two reasons.

1. If you go for this, I would advise against the Metabones adapters as I had a bad experience with ugly green internal reflections on the image. I think it is the speed booster glass that did not play well with the lens. I played around with the positioning of my lighting and the reflections moved, but never got totally rid of the reflection. Your experience might be better with a simple pass-through adapter without glass. I never tried that.

2. Despite some excellent examples online, I was not overly impressed with the sharpness of the MPE. A cheap microscope objective I purchased from WeMacro produced a sharper image at 5x. I think I was spoiled with the 60mm Olympus level of sharpness, and the MPE design is several years older. I think today, if cost is not an issue, rather adapt the 90mm Olympus lens with tubes, tele converters or close-up filters.

I traded the MPE in to move back to Nikon and got a 2.5x-5x Venus lens which does really well on Nikon. As I traded the MPE in, I am unable to compare them.

If you need to go to 5x magnification or beyond consider using an Olympus or Mitutoyo microscope objective on a tube with a Raynox filter as transfer lens. Superiority of that combination over the MPE is well documented. You will also find it easier to illuminate the subject as these objectives are much smaller than the MPE, leaving more room for a light.

 

[newmy51]

with all due respect, it is exactly this line of reasoning that this post is expressly not interested in pursuing. your or anyone else's DOF difficulties at higher magnifications is not germain to the OP. no offense.

 

[newmy51]

Thanks for this. The more I read about speed boosting, the more I want nothing to do with it, and this comment is a good example of why. It sounds like it will also save in adapter cost to not have an extra piece of glass, which sounds like it's liable to cause problems anyway.

All of Venus'/Laowa's offerings have been on my radar since the inception of the company. That includes the 2.5-5x, which I may end up going with in the event that the MP-E proves unusable on MFT. Right now I think it's at least worth a shot. If I'm being honest, part of the reason for this pursuit is sentimentality. It will be hard to actually say goodbye to this lens, if that's what it comes to. Curious about these IQ comparisons that beat out the MP-E every time. I hadn't heard of such a thing. Looking now...

EDIT: the more I understand about (and foolish I feel for) the mistake of equating crop factor with increased magnification, the more I see the point of having a speed booster, but if the only way to own one that works and works well is by paying Metabones prices, then forget it.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I have one of these lenses and have adapted it to M4/3. I cannot remember the actual test but this chart I produced some time ago does not appear to have found any issues from a number of different brands of adapter. It does not include focal reduction adapters but I see no reason why it should not work with them.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64144177

I note that you have this lens and will be aware of its difficulty to use well.

However for others and without beating a dead horse on this issue I have to note that this is a very specialised 'proper' macro lens that is very difficult to use and does not focus to infinity - it is only really useful for very close focus work and with infinite patience and good lighting. A focusing rail is highly recommended.

However its use with mirrorless bodies is far more practical than its use on its intended dslr hosts. WYSIWYG is very helpful for this type of lens.

I have found it on the too difficult side for my use but would really like to find the patience (and the subject matter) to really exercise it obvious very high level of imaging capability.

Noteworthy it really needs good light and wide open its dof is tiny. Image stacking with patience could place this lens in its true element.

--
Tom Caldwell

 

[newmy51]

Disclaimer: I don't own any of the knock-offs you listed.

it sounds like what you mean by knockoff is "any company other than the highest priced one," as opposed to something fake/counterfeit/of poor build quality. the fact that you don't own and have zero experience with any of the other makes/models listed makes your automatic negative judgement of them ring hollow.

Nope, the working distance is not changed in any way. Just the angel of view is different.

good to know, thanks.

With a simple mechanical or electronic adapter the magnification range stays at 1x-5x, but on and MFT sensor you get what is equivalent to an 50% (or is it 200%?) crop of an FF Image. Thus your subject appears twice as big on an MFT photo as on an FF photo at the same (!) magnification.

Let me see if I'm understanding this correctly: "appears twice as big at the same magnification" means it's just cropping, and when/where this is equated to a magnification increase, that's incorrect, because it's "empty" magnification, like optical zoom. the closer MFT crop possesses a fraction of the resolution/# of pixels as its FF equivalent. so a non-speed-boosted, electronically adapted MP-E on MFT would appear 2x-10x, but it's really a +200%/-50% cropped 1x-5x. are all of those statements true?

 

[newmy51]

Thanks Tom, and regarding the dead horse beating, I am asking the repliers here to assume that everyone reading the thread is someone who, like me, is already somewhat to thoroughly familiar with this lens, what it can and can't do, how it does and doesn't work, and what it needs and doesn't need for the user to get the results they want. I can and have stacked with this lens handheld at 2x and higher. I'm aware that if I were to hand my camera to any other photographer sitting in front of the same subject, 99/100 of them would have no idea what to do to even get the subject in focus, much less shoot it, much less focus bracket it on, much less off, a tripod. The cautionary tale is, therefore, appreciated but not needed.

Checking out your comparison chart now. This is exactly the kind of information I was hoping to get here. Will post back with my findings/impressions. Thank you!

EDIT: What I'm missing from your otherwise very thoughtfully laid out chart is whether or not each/any of these adapters will permit electronic aperture adjustment, or communicate exif data, or work with in-camera IS. whether or not that information is in your chart (and if it is, forgive me for not seeing it), I would ask it you remember what your experience was when using these adapters with the MP-E, but you've already stated that you do not.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Thanks Tom, and regarding the dead horse beating, I am asking the repliers here to assume that everyone reading the thread is someone who, like me, is already somewhat to thoroughly familiar with this lens, what it can and can't do, how it does and doesn't work, and what it needs and doesn't need for the user to get the results they want. I can and have stacked with this lens handheld at 2x and higher. I'm aware that if I were to hand my camera to any other photographer sitting in front of the same subject, 99/100 of them would have no idea what to do to even get the subject in focus, much less shoot it, much less focus bracket it on, much less off, a tripod. The cautionary tale is, therefore, appreciated but not needed.

Sorry, I thought that you might have been getting conventional responses from those that were not owners of this lens. I was wrong, I have modified my post slightly since you read it.

I take my hat off to you for your patience and ability to make this lens work properly - if there was anything lens-related that would cause a 'carpenter' to blame his tools this lens would have to be a good candidate. I understand the difficulties but keep telling myself that I am going to go back and have another go after taking a course of patience pills.

Checking out your comparison chart now. This is exactly the kind of information I was hoping to get here. Will post back with my findings/impressions. Thank you!

I have other adapters not generally tested but even Commlite-level adapters that might give quite variable results for AF capability have no issues with the aperture control of a MF EF mount lens. Jintu in fact once were selling a MF-only EF-M4/3 adapter very cheaply and it worked very well to make any EF lens a MF-only lens with aperture control an invoked EF lens stabilisation where present. Not sure it this Jintu variant is still being sold. It was certainly better than the alternative adapters that were being sold with an inbuilt mechanical iris and not a lot more expensive at the time.

 

[Adrian Harris]

with all due respect, it is exactly this line of reasoning that this post is expressly not interested in pursuing. your or anyone else's DOF difficulties at higher magnifications is not germain to the OP. no offense.

With all due respect, you seem very confused about which adapter to buy to connect an mpe to a m43 camera. And give the impression of confusion regarding magnification.

Many adapters include optics of which some are incredibly expensive and even the best of those will lose some image quality.

Hence my suggestion of acquiring a relatively inexpensive straight non optical adapter to experiment for yourself.

My friend uses an mpe with a 2x teleconverter shooting focus bracketed bursts hand held, so am well aware of the intricacies involved in shooting macro at this level.

I'm not sure what a canon to m43 adapter non optical adapter costs, but my Sony to m43 adapter was only around $35 but that was about 6yrs ago.

 

[newmy51]

even Commlite-level adapters that might give quite variable results for AF capability have no issues with the aperture control of a MF EF mount lens. Jintu in fact once were selling a MF-only EF-M4/3 adapter very cheaply and it worked very well to make any EF lens a MF-only lens with aperture control an invoked EF lens stabilisation where present. Not sure it this Jintu variant is still being sold. It was certainly better than the alternative adapters that were being sold with an inbuilt mechanical iris and not a lot more expensive at the time.

This is useful, and serendipitous, as I just learned of this:

https://www.amazon.com/Commlite-Camera-Adapter-Electronic-Booster/dp/B07G193QFS?th=1

mere moments before reading your reply.

Is the Jintu you are referring to this one?

Amazon.com : JINTU EF-EOS M Auto-Focus AF Lens Mount Adapter Converter ring for Canon EF/EF-S Lens to Canon EOS-M (EF-M Mount) Mirrorless Camera EOS M M1 M2 M3 M5 M6 M50 M100 M200 : Electronics

Amazon.com : JINTU EF-EOS M Auto-Focus AF Lens Mount Adapter Converter ring for Canon EF/EF-S Lens to Canon EOS-M (EF-M Mount) Mirrorless Camera EOS M M1 M2 M3 M5 M6 M50 M100 M200 : Electronics

www.amazon.com

The more I learn about how all these concepts and components work with one another -- due in part to this thread -- the more I think what I'm after is the following:

0.71x (or better/lower) speed booster/focal reducer which enables electronic aperture control and in-camera image stabilization.

If this can be had for less than the cost of a (used) Laowa f/2.8 25mm 2.5-5x, then I think it's worth having/trying out.

I'm also going to update the OP with a list of both electronic and "manual" adapters, or maybe make a spreadsheet...

 

[Tom Caldwell]

even Commlite-level adapters that might give quite variable results for AF capability have no issues with the aperture control of a MF EF mount lens. Jintu in fact once were selling a MF-only EF-M4/3 adapter very cheaply and it worked very well to make any EF lens a MF-only lens with aperture control an invoked EF lens stabilisation where present. Not sure it this Jintu variant is still being sold. It was certainly better than the alternative adapters that were being sold with an inbuilt mechanical iris and not a lot more expensive at the time.

This is useful, and serendipitous, as I just learned of this:

https://www.amazon.com/Commlite-Camera-Adapter-Electronic-Booster/dp/B07G193QFS?th=1

mere moments before reading your reply.

Is the Jintu you are referring to this one?

https://www.amazon.com/JINTU-Auto-Focus-Adapter-Converter-Mirrorless/dp/B08N42Q828

Didn't look but from the link it is obviously being sold as an AF adapter which is their main product. I think I might have bought my MF-only Jintu during a short window of opportunity. They were priced somewhere between the price of a regular AF version and the price of a manual iris version. I bought mine from eBay and had to carefully read the listings when doing so to make sure. The Jintu and Commlite adapters are very similar and even have much the same boxes. The only different I could perceive was the different paint finish. If you really want a cheap MF-only one you might have to look further - maybe Alibaba?

In any case AF capability does not matter if you are dealing with a MF lens. It still gives aperture control, activates lens-IS only and probably EXIF (which I have never thought to test).

The more I learn about how all these concepts and components work with one another -- due in part to this thread -- the more I think what I'm after is the following:

0.71x (or better/lower) speed booster/focal reducer which enables electronic aperture control and in-camera image stabilization.

I cannot say that I have ever actually tested the MPE65 with a focal reduction (FR) adapter - but I can see no reason why FR would not work as expected.

Note that both my Commlite and Jintu adapters were not FR adapters. Commlite at least makes a FR version.

I emphasise that the adapters activate in-lens IS only and that it is unlikely that you get both (lens and body) but possibly it can be chosen. Certainly there is no in-lens IS on the MPE65 and you will be able to set in-body stabilisation manually.

If this can be had for less than the cost of a (used) Laowa f/2.8 25mm 2.5-5x, then I think it's worth having/trying out.

If you already have the lens then why not? Not so sure that I would recommend that someone should rush out and buy a MPE65 on speculation as we both know that the MPE65 is not for the faint hearted for casual use and needs some serious persistence and intelligent application to work its wonders. Something that I have always promised myself to find 'next month'.

I'm also going to update the OP with a list of both electronic and "manual" adapters, or maybe make a spreadsheet...

 

[Tom Caldwell]

with all due respect, it is exactly this line of reasoning that this post is expressly not interested in pursuing. your or anyone else's DOF difficulties at higher magnifications is not germain to the OP. no offense.

With all due respect, you seem very confused about which adapter to buy to connect an mpe to a m43 camera. And give the impression of confusion regarding magnification.

Many adapters include optics of which some are incredibly expensive and even the best of those will lose some image quality.

Hence my suggestion of acquiring a relatively inexpensive straight non optical adapter to experiment for yourself.

My friend uses an mpe with a 2x teleconverter shooting focus bracketed bursts hand held, so am well aware of the intricacies involved in shooting macro at this level.

I'm not sure what a canon to m43 adapter non optical adapter costs, but my Sony to m43 adapter was only around $35 but that was about 6yrs ago.

Adrian, were you talking about a completely dumb adapter? The MPE65 still needs an electronic adapter to work the internal aperture. There is no aperture ring.

 

[newmy51]

List in progress:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ztjsQjpcSBReGQAGVRJHnayFgzIzRPOJUQGBgMcl6PM/edit?usp=sharing

I'm back to being unsure about whether speed boosting/focus reducing is necessary/helpful for my use case, so I've included adapters both with and without it, while all possess electronic contacts and at least claim to offer electronic aperture control.

The whole one or more f-stops that are "lost" from adapting FF lenses onto a MFT body, I'm assuming that's lost light from there being more distance from the rear lens element to the sensor, as in the use of extension tubes, as opposed to "lost" via a the narrowing of actual aperture blades. I'm therefore also guessing that this "lost" adapter light does not translate into a depth of field increase. If it did, I'd say great. I practically never use the MP-E wide open anyway. If it's now an f/5.6, so be it, no big deal. But if it's not the same as f/5.6 on a FF sensor, in terms of DOF, only as dark as f/5.6 but with the DOF of f/2,8, that's completely different, and I might want to recover some of that light, and could see the benefit of this 0.71x aperture "boost."

I'm also still a bit confused about the effects of the focal reducer part of this equation, specifically when it comes to how much this will change how close to or far from my subject I will need to be with the MP-E. It's already a pretty seriously tight squeeze at higher magnifications with this lens. Am I correct to assume that I'll get double the working distance on MFT than on FF, and 1.42x (2 x 0.71) the working distance with a speed booster/focal reducer? In the case of the MP-E, I'd argue more would be better, but then I rather doubt that there is such thing as a speed booster which recovers light while leaving focal length alone...

 

[Adrian Harris]

with all due respect, it is exactly this line of reasoning that this post is expressly not interested in pursuing. your or anyone else's DOF difficulties at higher magnifications is not germain to the OP. no offense.

With all due respect, you seem very confused about which adapter to buy to connect an mpe to a m43 camera. And give the impression of confusion regarding magnification.

Many adapters include optics of which some are incredibly expensive and even the best of those will lose some image quality.

Hence my suggestion of acquiring a relatively inexpensive straight non optical adapter to experiment for yourself.

My friend uses an mpe with a 2x teleconverter shooting focus bracketed bursts hand held, so am well aware of the intricacies involved in shooting macro at this level.

I'm not sure what a canon to m43 adapter non optical adapter costs, but my Sony to m43 adapter was only around $35 but that was about 6yrs ago.

Adrian, were you talking about a completely dumb adapter? The MPE65 still needs an electronic adapter to work the internal aperture. There is no aperture ring.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

with all due respect, it is exactly this line of reasoning that this post is expressly not interested in pursuing. your or anyone else's DOF difficulties at higher magnifications is not germain to the OP. no offense.

With all due respect, you seem very confused about which adapter to buy to connect an mpe to a m43 camera. And give the impression of confusion regarding magnification.

Many adapters include optics of which some are incredibly expensive and even the best of those will lose some image quality.

Hence my suggestion of acquiring a relatively inexpensive straight non optical adapter to experiment for yourself.

My friend uses an mpe with a 2x teleconverter shooting focus bracketed bursts hand held, so am well aware of the intricacies involved in shooting macro at this level.

I'm not sure what a canon to m43 adapter non optical adapter costs, but my Sony to m43 adapter was only around $35 but that was about 6yrs ago.

Adrian, were you talking about a completely dumb adapter? The MPE65 still needs an electronic adapter to work the internal aperture. There is no aperture ring.

Yes Tom. My dumb adapter has no electric contacts, but has it's own mechanical aperture control.

It is obviously not completely dumb ...

 

[SiFu]

Hello!

Unfortunately, I have long abandonned my MPE and can not show you samples from the very lens in question, but these snaps should still give you an idea what a Speedbooster will do when used instead of a dumb adapter.

The setup is easy - I slapped the lens I replaced the MPE with (an old Canon as well) onto a Macro stand and focussed on a child's book. All other things unchanged, I once used my Nikon G dumb adapter of choice as well as a Metabones Speedbooster XL (0.64x) one the back of the bellows, lens wide open for both, auto metering (it is not about sharpness, exposure etc here, but the FOV change only):






dumb adapter


Speedbooster XL (0.64)

Hope this will give you an idea, what kind of FOV difference to expect when using a Speedbooster.

On topic again, I would strongly suggest investing in Metabones Speedboosters, as I have tried pretty much every make on the market and optically none could match the (brilliant) Metabones Speedboosters (Lens Turbo IIs are very, very close though). That said, I do not have Canon variants and can not comment on the "auto-features" there unfortunately.

Best,

Alex

PS: look for used Metabones Speedboosters - at least locally they show up often and mostly at vastly lowered prices

PPS: we are quite a bit beyond 1:1 above - just took another quick snap at 1:1 (with another Macro lens that has a hard stop at 1:1 and has proven to be precise about it) as well as with the bellows set up about the way it was for the snaps above (bellows draw was a bit longer here though, I am afraid, looking at the "pixel" size...) - both with the dumb adapter:




handheld at 1:1



--
carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

 

[Pedagydusz]

[...] it's really a +200%/-50% cropped 1x-5x. are all of those statements true?

Yes, that is what it really is. Like all the 1x (or whatever) FF lenses when adapted to MFT. But, I feel compelled to say, the result (if the optics are good) is outstanding. Because that is what happens with the 60 mm or the 90 mm macro lens.

 

[Pedagydusz]

My general answer (without going into detail of adapter quality or specificity) is: the MP-E was a great lens in its time. It is very bulky and heavy, and ALL of its functions can be achieved presently by the use of the Olympus Macro lenses and the Olympus Focus Bracketing techniques (which, to be thorough, can now be found in other cameras as well).

Some would consider it interesting to experiment with this lens with adapters, but it is only worthwhile for the sake of experimentation, for those so inclined.