technic wrote:
Great to hear that the 100-400II and 100L are working now, and a 2.8/200L with IS sounds great as well. Now if someone can test the 4/300 IS with the latest firmware ...
But I'm puzzled by what you say about the IS: does IBIS only work when IS is turned ON? The opposite would sound more likely to me (i.e. either IS or IBIS active, but not both).
Any of my lenses with IS will work with the IS on for stabilization but unlike before the update, when you turn off the IS, the IBIS now does not work. Before you could use either the IS, with it on or turn it off and the IBIS would turn on.
180L now works, though sloooow but I like it for the final lock on focus. It is never fast and wasn't meant to be and many use it manual anyway. I dial it in and then it will lock to give me the place I want absolute focus on and it is working.
stevei wrote:
I think this thread might be about to become a lot simpler, because at this point in time, nobody has managed to find a Canon lens that doesn't work well with the RII with Mb 0.43?
I tested the 100-400L II with brand new Metabones 4 with updated firmware. Sony a7rii. The lens focused fine at the shorter focal lengths. And yes, it *does* focus at 400, but I found that often it would lose itself, and hunt to infinity and then back before it found the target. This at 400. So technically, it does focus, but imo it is not usable.
Oh and I wasn't sure, so I stuck the 100-400 + MB4 on my a6000, it would not focus at all, zip nada.
I'm sending back the 100-400 and sticking with the Tamron 150-600 A mount, and the LA-EA3 adapter.
I just did some testing using my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 Mark II with the just updated FW of Metabones IV. Here are my findings:
1) Using the flexible AF from small to large, the AF works great, even in continuous mode as long as the AF points (in large) or point (in small) are within the inner section/cluster of the points.
2) Using the small AF point, if I move it towards the edge, the setup won't focus, it just hunts and hunts. If I move in the AF point towards the center, like 3 steps from the edge, then AF works just fine again. This is for all FL although it is a tad slower for FL setting approaching the 200mm marking.
3) The 135mm setting seems to be the limit of the AF to be able to work regardless of which AF point being used, whether from the inner cluster or not.
4) The lighting conditions do not seem to matter much for the above points.
AGeoJO wrote:
I just did some testing using my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 Mark II with the just updated FW of Metabones IV. Here are my findings:
1) Using the flexible AF from small to large, the AF even in continuous mode, the AF works great as long as the AF points (in large) or point (in small) are within the inner section/cluster of the PDAF points.
2) Using the small AF point, if I move it towards the edge, the setup won't focus, it just hunts and hunts. If I move in the AF point towards the center, like 3 steps from the edge, then AF works just fine again. This is for all FL although it is a tad slower for FL setting approaching the 200mm marking.
3) The 135mm setting seems to be the limit of the AF to be able to work regardless of which AF point being used, whether from the inner cluster or not.
4) The lighting conditions do not seem to matter much for the above points....Show more →
When you say Edge points, what is the ball park in terms of where the center is where they all work.
also if you change the camera to crop mode (which means the entire display covers all the PDAF points) will it work all the way to the edge?
absolutic wrote:
When you say Edge points, what is the ball park in terms of where the center is where they all work.
also if you change the camera to crop mode (which means the entire display covers all the PDAF points) will it work all the way to the edge?
In my experience, you can chose any AF point unto 3 layers outward from the center points. The AF points in that center cluster work just fine for both single and continuous mode. BTW, there are 7 horizontal layers of AF points, including the center point in one direction. So, somewhere half way, I would say. Far cry less than what the actual available PDAF points you get if you use a native FE lens but still not too bad.
I do not have any crop lenses, and do not use the crop mode and as such, I didn't test that.
The best working lens for me right now is the 24-70mm f/2.8 Mark II. It really shines on the A7r II with MB IV. The AF is fast and sure-footed. I am using that lens more and more as my universal standard zoom just like in my old Canon days. And the IQ of that zoom on the 42MP body is simply great and the IBIS works like a charm.
My 85mm f/1.2 Mark II lens is not that far behind. Sometimes, when the outer AF point is is selected, it hesitates a little, or it hunts a little but it locks on in single AF mode. However, I would not rely on the continuous mode using one of the outermost AF points. As soon as I move in the AF point just one layer towards the center, the AF is fast (for that lens that is) and sure-footed even in the continuous AF mode.
AGeoJO wrote:
3) The 135mm setting seems to be the limit of the AF to be able to work regardless of which AF point being used, whether from the inner cluster or not.
\.
There is another adapter that bears curious resemblance to new Techart http://www.deoinfinity.com/#!saker-falcon/cqse
Interesting notes come with it
Tips & Tricks
4. For 200mm(focal length) or above tele lens, please switch to “Nor” mode. Only limited native lens is over 200mm(focal length), therefore not enough information to support the coding of “Fn” mode. The AF will become slow and not accuracy when using tele lens with “Fn” Mode
5. For ultra fast lens (f/1.2) and heavy lens, like 50/1.2 L USM and 85mm f/1.2 L USM lens, please use “Nor” mode. The power supply of “Nor” mode is more stable than “Fn” mode.
.
I assume what they are saying is because there is not enough native FE lenses above 200mm so it is hard for them to do programming (coding). Could that be the problem?
p.23 #11 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
absolutic wrote:
There is another adapter that bears curious resemblance to new Techart http://www.deoinfinity.com/#!saker-falcon/cqse
Interesting notes come with it
Tips & Tricks
4. For 200mm(focal length) or above tele lens, please switch to “Nor” mode. Only limited native lens is over 200mm(focal length), therefore not enough information to support the coding of “Fn” mode. The AF will become slow and not accuracy when using tele lens with “Fn” Mode
5. For ultra fast lens (f/1.2) and heavy lens, like 50/1.2 L USM and 85mm f/1.2 L USM lens, please use “Nor” mode. The power supply of “Nor” mode is more stable than “Fn” mode.
.
I assume what they are saying is because there is not enough native FE lenses above 200mm so it is hard for them to do programming (coding). Could that be the problem?...Show more →
I am not sure the reasoning behind that statement. You could very well be right.
The ironic thing about this issue is the fact that you cannot just say globally that the AF of certain lenses works or that those lenses are compatible and some are not because it depends on the AF mode and which AF point or points are selected. I am not aware of anybody mentioned that anywhere else, but please correct me if I am wrong.
Frankly, this was brought to my attention by somebody I knew and not an FM member last week. When I first checked for compatibility of my lenses, I just used the center cluster and so far, before the upgrade, only my Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS, didn't work using the center cluster. Every other lenses worked great but I didn't bother checking the AF using other points other than the center cluster that is. For sure we can say that Canon lenses introduced after 2006, whether it is a wide angle, standard or short tele lenses, whether prime or zoom lenses work just fine using all or almost all (in case of the 85mm f/1.2 Mark II).
p.23 #13 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
After updating the metabones firmware, I have also now updated to the latest A7RII firmware. Rather surprised to find the 85mm 1.2 Mk 1 now works a treat!
p.23 #15 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
bluebird wrote:
After updating the metabones firmware, I have also now updated to the latest A7RII firmware. Rather surprised to find the 85mm 1.2 Mk 1 now works a treat!
Have another go Doogie, might be ok now.
bizarre! tried again - still the same issues. then tried one more time and the 85 f1.2 mk1 works fine
i still plan to get the batis 85, as at half the weight and faster autofocus, it will be of far more use.
p.23 #16 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
I purchased (again) Metabones IV T adapter this morning, this time in person, so I could try it to make sure the sample was mounting properly on my A7RII and all the connections worked. It did. I updated it to the latest firmware and tested it with 85 1.8 and 135 2.0 and both now work. 85 1.8 focuses faster on A7R2 than it is on my 5D Classic. However, fast tracking of my son running toward me with 85 1.8, I need to do some more testing as I may be not getting enough keepers. But I need to test it again and turn off preview when I am doing it. I tried video and of course Metabones does not do PDAF with video, I guess someone needs to test that Techart 3 adapter that claims it can do PDAF on A7R2 during video with Canon lenses.
p.23 #17 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Canon 400 2.8 IS version I works well with the A7R II and Metabones IV. Not super fast focusing, but it will track a slowly moving car or a person walking towards you in AF-S mode. I wouldn't trust it to shoot a football game or anything, but it definitely works. Also works well with a 1.4x III extender.
p.23 #18 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Same experience as Andy with the MB T IV an Rii and the 100-400ii in that it gets lost at 400mm. I do see an improvement, actually a surprising improvement but still slower than my 70-400g2 or Tam 150-600 A-mount via ea3.
For Kruger/Alaska/Yellowstone=big animals I could do with the 100-400ii on the Rii but true BIFers should pass for now.
BUT with this latest FW update I now have a stabilized viable 135/F2 with the Rii and that is momentous. Not only that but the last FW update put the SigART35 in my adapted Sony camp. The 24-70 Tam was good all along.
For a Sony dominated trip (e.g. landscape focused but me taking a longer reach for just in case) I'd grab the 70-400g2 first, the Tam second, the 100-400ii last.
I did get my first BBIF with the Rii and Tamron this weekend--might not count, it was only at 210mm but the rig did focus track (posted elsewhere but might deserve repeating here)- BBIF black bear in flight by MedicineMan4040, on Flickr
?