Update: Since Firmware 0.43, PDAF for most Canon EF lenses are now supported for the A7RII + Metabones IV. The most recent firmware 0.46 improved speed and compatibility even further. The list below was posted a while back and it's not longer accurate. Please read the latest replies to this thread.
___________________
Here are the current reports. I will keep this list updated as we confirm more lenses. All tested with the latest Metabones IV (0.41). Other adapters may work differently.
1. AF with LA-EA4 for every lens, but has SLT mirror and its own AF mmodule, from the Sony a65. Three year old body af, clustered af points.
2. AF with LA-EA3 works only for Sony and Minolta SSM and SAM lenses. Uses the a7r af module, no SLT mirror. Unknown compatibility with Tamron USM and Sigma HSM.
My Sigma 24-70 A mount is working but I would not call it not good enough. A little slow and inaccurate AF. AFS is not bad but with the LAe4 it works very well but not with the LAe 3
dpap1978 wrote:
Which adapter are these based on? Metabones? I seem to recall reading on SAR that the fotodiox adapter somehow worked better for AF with the a7r2
Was just told that the Canon EF 85 1.8 hunts to find focus and when it finds, it's inaccurate. Similar to 135 f/2 and 200 f/2.8L II. Someone please confirm this.
I am getting the 11-24L to work better now. Not sure why but maybe the contacts weren't clean on the Metabones. I am using the normal EVF and it is fine, even for close-ups. I also tried the 135 Tele-Elmar and it is extremely sharp with this combo. Yes it isn't a Canon lens but I was surprised.
So the 11-24L works pretty good for me.
The 24-70L II
70-200L II
16-35L 2.8 II fast
Does anyone know if there is any difference between the Metabones IV other than the T being the flocked version?
I can add to this list that:
- Canon 40mm f2.8 pancake - very poor AF.
- Sigma 85mm f1.4 in Canon mount works well with my Metabones III.
- Canon 70-200mm f4L IS works moderately well with my Metabones III. OK outside, hunted inside.
dpap1978 wrote:
Fred, did you notice any difference in performance between the III and IV versions of the MB adapter? (I saw you have v3 on sale)
I bought IV because I thought AF would be faster and they reported better tilt and shift usability.
I never had a problem with my flocked Metabones III with tilt and shift and was surprised that AF speed was pretty much identical between both adapters with the lenses I tested.
jamato8 wrote:
I am getting the 11-24L to work better now. Not sure why but maybe the contacts weren't clean on the Metabones. I am using the normal EVF and it is fine, even for close-ups. I also tried the 135 Tele-Elmar and it is extremely sharp with this combo. Yes it isn't a Canon lens but I was surprised.
So the 11-24L works pretty good for me.
The 24-70L II
70-200L II
16-35L 2.8 II fast
Does anyone know if there is any difference between the Metabones IV other than the T being the flocked version?
According to them just flocking and it appears they will discontinue the un-flocked version. Their firmware is also the same.
