I have the TSE II 24/3.5 which I want to adapt for a7 usage. However, having read about the Metabones tight-fit issues I shall not be going down that route - in my view this problem is unacceptable and inexcusable and a major error on Metabones' part. Of course, I neither want nor need AF capability when using this lens but I am certainly not going to risk the gold aperture contacts with a generic Chinese adapter. So I shall wait for the Novoflex adapter, as and when it arrives. I have a number of Novoflex adapters and they are excellent (although I did have to replace an OM-E because the fit was overly tight and it would not focus to infinity). I am really surprised at the dearth of EF-E adapters and can only imagine it is because the real need has only become apparent with the advent of the a7R. It is astonishing that Metabones has shot itself in the foot and sullied its good name by offering a variable quality item at such a premium price and also odd that Fotodiox has not upped its game - very poor commercial practice.
waterden wrote:
I have the TSE II 24/3.5 which I want to adapt for a7 usage. However, having read about the Metabones tight-fit issues I shall not be going down that route - in my view this problem is unacceptable and inexcusable and a major error on Metabones' part. Of course, I neither want nor need AF capability when using this lens but I am certainly not going to risk the gold aperture contacts with a generic Chinese adapter. So I shall wait for the Novoflex adapter, as and when it arrives. I have a number of Novoflex adapters and they are excellent (although I did have to replace an OM-E because the fit was overly tight and it would not focus to infinity). I am really surprised at the dearth of EF-E adapters and can only imagine it is because the real need has only become apparent with the advent of the a7R. It is astonishing that Metabones has shot itself in the foot and sullied its good name by offering a variable quality item at such a premium price and also odd that Fotodiox has not upped its game - very poor commercial practice....Show more →
I am using the 24/3.5 TSE lens on my A7R with Metabones III adapter without any problems. I did all kind of shifts and tilts in different light situations. I believe that the reflection issues described by using the Metabones adapter in combination with TSE lenses are much more rare than it might come across when reading about it.
I'm using the 17mm TSE with Metabones with no issues. You DO need to screen the adapter when you get it though based on other stories.
I think that Fred checked with Novoflex (see the long A7r thread in the Canon forum) and they said that their adapter would not be a smart adapter. Not very useful for many of us, but it might be a good idea to check with them.
Hello waterden, I understand 100% but after I have been working with the King factory on to improve there adapter I also have told them to test each unit and our last email last night was I think they will be do just that! Because of my costly issue it's important to understand that any items that must have high quality from China like these adapters should be tested and or QC checked.
My hope is a small company like King will step up and do that and a few ideas I gave them to improve the usage and design of the tripod will make it a better adapter.
I recall years ago something happening where the Canon body pins damaged the gold contacts on some lenses not sure if they were 3 rd party or not (that's how old I am).
I will update the progress on the King adapter so if anyone is thinking of getting the King adapter I will post more info and as for the Metabones III at $400 I had a poor QC on the lens flange that would not let me rotate any of my Canon lenses and when I told them of the issue I knew about it and sent a new flange that did fix the issue but at $400.00 they should be checking say 3-6 Canon mount lenses to know 100% they work or not before the customer get it!
waterden wrote:
I have the TSE II 24/3.5 which I want to adapt for a7 usage. However, having read about the Metabones tight-fit issues I shall not be going down that route - in my view this problem is unacceptable and inexcusable and a major error on Metabones' part. Of course, I neither want nor need AF capability when using this lens but I am certainly not going to risk the gold aperture contacts with a generic Chinese adapter. So I shall wait for the Novoflex adapter, as and when it arrives. I have a number of Novoflex adapters and they are excellent (although I did have to replace an OM-E because the fit was overly tight and it would not focus to infinity). I am really surprised at the dearth of EF-E adapters and can only imagine it is because the real need has only become apparent with the advent of the a7R. It is astonishing that Metabones has shot itself in the foot and sullied its good name by offering a variable quality item at such a premium price and also odd that Fotodiox has not upped its game - very poor commercial practice....Show more →
Disclosure: I am related to Metabones and my opinions may be biased. However it is somewhat necessary to clarify the tight fit issues circulated on the net.
It is really easy to make an adapter that smoothly fits onto every camera and every lens. Just make the fit loose enough, and everything will fit onto it. But then, you would run into a myriad of other problems such as optical alignment, focusing, infinity issues and increased aberrations.
Metabones' objective is to achieve a tighter fit than OEM. There are 2 reasons for this: 1, videographers want a tight fit to ensure that the lens does not move when the lens is focused or zoomed, and 2, there are now two mounting surfaces with an adapter instead of one, so we have to half the amount of variance to achieve the same optical performance.
The lens mount itself has tolerances so if we increase the tightness of the fitment there will be a small number of lenses which become too tight to fit, and the unhappy owners will most likely "spread the word" on the Internet.
The trade-off here is simply whether we want to make a small number of users unhappy because the fit is too tight, or to tolerate looseness issues for all users. Metabones is not afraid of the occasional return, if it means all the rest of the users benefit from a solid connection. Indeed, a very high level of capability is required to maintain the tight tolerances of an adapter that makes a solid connection with the lens and the camera body.
I think this is a very good and fair answer. However, for many of us the issue is that if we find the adapter is problematic we cannot simply go to our local camera shop, or even online dealer, and request an exchange. Instead it has to go back to Japan. This introduces unacceptable additions to cost plus postage and customs hassles. I imagine that if Metabones copied Novoflex and arranged international dealerships - for example, I buy all my Novoflex adapters from Speedgraphic here in the UK - then people would not be bothered about having to request a replacement. As things stand I am afraid that, notwithstanding this reasonable argument from Metabones, I shall still await the Novoflex solution. Of course, if Metabones arranges a UK dealership which allows me to buy the adapter here for a GPB denominated price and at local postage rates I shall be delighted to support them. cyberstudio wrote:
Disclosure: I am related to Metabones and my opinions may be biased. However it is somewhat necessary to clarify the tight fit issues circulated on the net.
It is really easy to make an adapter that smoothly fits onto every camera and every lens. Just make the fit loose enough, and everything will fit onto it. But then, you would run into a myriad of other problems such as optical alignment, focusing, infinity issues and increased aberrations.
Metabones' objective is to achieve a tighter fit than OEM. There are 2 reasons for this: 1, videographers want a tight fit to ensure that the lens does not move when the lens is focused or zoomed, and 2, there are now two mounting surfaces with an adapter instead of one, so we have to half the amount of variance to achieve the same optical performance.
The lens mount itself has tolerances so if we increase the tightness of the fitment there will be a small number of lenses which become too tight to fit, and the unhappy owners will most likely "spread the word" on the Internet.
The trade-off here is simply whether we want to make a small number of users unhappy because the fit is too tight, or to tolerate looseness issues for all users. Metabones is not afraid of the occasional return, if it means all the rest of the users benefit from a solid connection. Indeed, a very high level of capability is required to maintain the tight tolerances of an adapter that makes a solid connection with the lens and the camera body....Show more →
100% true waterden and that's also my point for $400 we should get a $400 piece of EQ, without these issues, I read the guy had the Metabones III and it was so tight putting on his Sony a7 body and when he sent a email to the company they sent him the flange for the canon side!
I did need to have them send me a Canon flange because my Canon EF lenses were too tight when mounting and I had 2 Metabones III 1 was fine and a newer batch had the too tight mount, so batch to batch does change.
So I agree I wished that each country in UK & USA would have a stocking service center so we could get the correct part or a full replacement! Are you listing Metabones??
cengell wrote:
Great akclimber, what lenses are you going to use on your Commlite adapter?
Christopher
I'm currently shooting both Canon and Nikon and ordered the Commlite for my remaining EF lenses. I'm most curious about how my 500 f/4 and 24 TSE MK II perform but will also test the 24-105 (a guilty pleasure lens - I have no idea why it gets such a bad rap for real world shooting), the 300 F/4 IS, the 70-200 f/4 IS, the 100-400 and the Sigma 12-24, both original and new versions. If anyone has any specific request for those lenses, let me know.
Wow nice a Canon 500 f/4 that will be sweet on the A6000. I read that the 24 TSE is great on the Sony A7/A7r body's.
I last Fri used my 24-105 with the Metabones III and it worked nice, and for a 1 lens works well, but at 24 has correctable distortion in Lightroom and at 105 is bit soft but a good all in one lens.
I like that in Lightroom you can use a Canon lens and with my A7r choose the lens and Lightroom corrects for it nice!
I think your 70-200 f/4 IS and the 100-400 will work 100%, not sure if the Sigma 12-24 and the older 300 f/4 IS will, but I was shocked that my 400 f/4 DO worked on my Metabones III adapter and auto-focused and with my 1.4 or 2x Canon tele.
Please report back and please be careful rotating your lenses on that Commlite and stop in instant you fell it getting tight.
cengell wrote:
Wow nice a Canon 500 f/4 that will be sweet on the A6000. I read that the 24 TSE is great on the Sony A7/A7r body's.
I last Fri used my 24-105 with the Metabones III and it worked nice, and for a 1 lens works well, but at 24 has correctable distortion in Lightroom and at 105 is bit soft but a good all in one lens.
I like that in Lightroom you can use a Canon lens and with my A7r choose the lens and Lightroom corrects for it nice!
I think your 70-200 f/4 IS and the 100-400 will work 100%, not sure if the Sigma 12-24 and the older 300 f/4 IS will, but I was shocked that my 400 f/4 DO worked on my Metabones III adapter and auto-focused and with my 1.4 or 2x Canon tele.
Please report back and please be careful rotating your lenses on that Commlite and stop in instant you fell it getting tight.
I'll make sure to let everyone know what I find. I too am not sure the Sigmas will work. Just curious. Curious too about the 300 f/4 IS since it is an old lens and mine is admittedly very old! My 500 f/4 IS is version 1 as well and pretty old. We'll see.....
Hello all, well I got the money to repair my 3 Canon lenses and I am happy about that and I feel other than the delay they are a honest ebay seller and hope they improve the King adapter quality and test each unit..
I was told that there was a issue on a run that I received but mostly before April 6 they were fine.
Now just waiting for my lenses to return, I will post more info when I have it.
Bought a Deo Tech Techart EOS to Nex version II adapter after a five month waiting. Too disappointed to find out most of my EF lenses cannot be screw on because of extremely tightness. Three lenses adaptable are 135 f2, 100 macro and Tamron a16. All lens focused lightning fast but none of them are in focus. Sent my message to MX camera Hong Kong but they did not even bother to respond
Called MX Camera just now. They confirmed the mechanical problem of adaptability and out of focus problem. I hope I can get a new adapter soon enough for my next trip.
An update on my situation - I finally broke down and bought the Metabones III after reading the inconsistent reviews of alternatives in this thread.
It seems to work well - though AF is hit or miss. AF works (slowly) for my 85/1.8, 100USM Macro, and 200L 2.8, but not for my 50/1.4 or a Tamron 28-70 Zoom. This is in line with the MB website, so no room to complain there. I am pretty happy, it seems better made and sealed than my previous Metabones adapter.
Good to hear! Yeah it's very slow with the 100 2.8 L IS Macro, Yeah I think for the money we are getting a better product and works with 95% of my Canon mount lenses I have..
Mark K wrote:
Called MX Camera just now. They confirmed the mechanical problem of adaptability and out of focus problem. I hope I can get a new adapter soon enough for my next trip.
Mark, please keep us update on the Deo Tech Techart EOS to Nex v. II adapter, I have higher hope on this adapter (fast AF and works with wide range of EF lenses) than others. Why waiting for exchange Have you try AF Micro Adj on the camera? or go to DEO website there is number of update firmwares maybe one could fix your issue. Good luck
My experience with the Techart is a bit different. First off, Mark, you said you received version 2 of the adapter. I bought the "falcon Mark 3". There's a "eagle Mark 2" also still for sale from MXCamera. Since there's no "Mark 1" listed, I'm not sure if you bought the falcon or the eagle. In any case, I found the fit to be good to both the a7 and all my Canon lenses. AF is slow and practically useless, but having aperture control and IS and EXIF data makes the adapter worth the price vs a dumb adapter. It's not clear from earlier posts whether the Metabones has superior AF. Focus peaking and magnification on the a7 mean that the lack of usable AF is not a big problem (for my purposes).
I loaded the latest firmware on the Techart via Bluetooth (using the supplied BT dongle) but AF didn't improve noticeably.
