Honestly I'm pretty happy with my TSEs on my adapter. Probably not perfect, but I'm sitting here on a 24" monitor looking at crops that are probably 6" wide at a foot and they don't look terrible. I would never, ever print large enough to really notice.
I printed a couple 20x24" shots from my 24TSE last summer and they are amazingly sharp. Plus, let's be honest, how often do we print 3:2. and if you aren't, you can frame the shot to avoid the corners.
A member here, Eyvind Ness, was awesome enough to test his TSE-24 II lens with...
5DsR
A7rII + Metabones IV
A7rII + MC-11
There's unshifted, plus vertically shifted shots. I'll make 100% crops of them and post them tomorrow. With no modification to the adapters, they look pretty good to me.
LostBoyNZ wrote:
A member here, Eyvind Ness, was awesome enough to test his TSE-24 II lens with...
5DsR
A7rII + Metabones IV
A7rII + MC-11
There's unshifted, plus vertically shifted shots. I'll make 100% crops of them and post them tomorrow. With no modification to the adapters, they look pretty good to me.
That sucks that he used shifted down rather that shifted horizontally, shifting down 12mm is really the equivalent to 6mm of horizontal shift because it doesn't get that far into the image circle.
MJKoski wrote:
Yes but I meant that I have to buy the damn lens again now that there is a solution
Rent one or get one on loan from a friend and test it with a shimed adapter.
I have two 24mm TSEs one was involved in a fall I had on a waterfall. The filter thread was damaged and the lens became slightly weaker on the left side. I tested that lens on the shimed adapter and it is also shows improvement. I bought a second one (2nd hand this time) because I can't live without a 24mm TSE!
When I get back from my Europe trip I'll send it off to Canon for a repair.
Good news! Eyvind Ness was fantastic and re-did the tests with horizontal shifts. I'm looking through the images now, and in both the 5DS R and the A7R II with his unmodified Metabones IV adapter on the Sony, the images look the same.
Shifted 12mm to the side, it's only really in the furthest 1/3 - 1/4 of the image that it falls apart. Up until then I'd say it's extremely sharp, even at f/3.5.
So it's interesting to see it come out as well as it does on the Canon body. Hmm. The mystery thickens.
My Metabones IV should arrive tomorrow too, and I'm hoping to have time to give it a good test too. I've also got my hands on the Nikon 24mm Tilt Shift, to see if that just happens to be any different.
These are 100% crops of the entire right half of the photos, closest to the edge of a 12mm shifted TS-E 24mm II at f/3.5.
Uhm? Well if that is with unmodified adapter then what does it tell us? Not only are some adapters decentered but also of varying thickness. OR, Sony bodies are not built to exact tolerances which is quite alarming.
Just for reminder: My Copy of 24mm TS-E 2 worked flawlessly on 5Dsr but had crappy corners even unshifted with MB4-T and awful corners with Fotodiox adapter. So the lens was not to blame for. Either the Sony body or the adapters.
I am beginning to have doubts that my a7r2 is somehow borked. Because my new Loxia 21mm is giving me field curvature which is greater than I have seen in many reviews.
engardeknave wrote:
Maybe you should be shimming the A7RII mount.
I'm not sure this is possible. I saw in discussions on using the photodiox replacement mount that the flange actually rests on sockets milled into the back of the flange that mount on posts in the body. If this is correct either the posts would have to be lenghtened or the sockets somehow made shallower.
I have been corresponding with Kolarivision and they can adjust the register on the a7r2 as they have to do this with all of their thin sensor conversions.
In discussions on dpreview I was made aware that there is probably going to be a difference in register due to the a7r2 sensor being a bsi design resulting in the metal layers formerly between the sensor and the cover glass having been moved to the back of the sensor and the sensor surface resultingly being raised. As a consequence, while I still believe there is a registration issue with my a7r2 the .29mm difference I found is not correct and unfortunately given the different construction of the sensors there's no reliable way to check the registration of the a7r vs the a7r2 without know the exact thickness of the two sensors. I think only sony can answer the question of thickness.
Mike
masimo wrote:
I measured the register in the a7r2 and the a7r and found a difference of .290mm over an average of 10 measurements on each camera.
I used a digital caliper and measured against a stainless steel rule placed across the flange in approximately the center of the sensor. I have no bench so the variations are probably due to differences in angle front to back and less from side to side if at all.
My measurements were as follows:
a7r2
15.76
15.84
15.78
15.80
15.78
15.76
15.81
15.74
15.77
15.73
--------
157.77/10 = 15.78 rounded up median 15.77
For the A7r
15.47
15.41
15.48
15.44
15.55
15.56
15.41
15.56
15.48
15.58
-------
154.94/10 = 15.49 rounded down median= 15.48
Trying to measure around the a7r2 sensor resulted in much more widely varying values even though stabilization was turned off and the camera was turned on to "stabilize" the sensor. I really wonder how well the sensor is aligned when stabilization is turned off.
My personal opinion is that there is a difference in register. I'd like to know where the a6300 is with regards to these two values.
I regret not having followed this up when I first found it but now that others are finding problems quite possibly originating from this same difference it might be time to do carefully controlled tests. Perhaps Roger Cicala could be enticed into having a closer look. I suspect that with his optical bench checking register on the two cameras would be both simpler and a lot more accurate. ...Show more →
I managed to get my test done today, conducted with:
A7R II (purchased Nov 2015)
Metabones IV T (purchased June 2016)
Canon TS-E 24mm II
Panorama of 2 images, fully 12mm shifted left to fully 12mm shifted right.
Set to f/9, no change of focus for either image, shots are out of camera JPEGs merged manually with Photoshop
I'd say it came out sharp edge to edge. The center is sharper, but the fully shifted far edges look very good to me.
I've got the 100% crops plus the full sized image here
100% Crops of Far Left, Middle and Far Right of panorama image:
LostBoyNZ wrote:
I managed to get my test done today, conducted with:
A7R II (purchased Nov 2015)
Metabones IV T (purchased June 2016)
Canon TS-E 24mm II
Panorama of 2 images, fully 12mm shifted left to fully 12mm shifted right.
Set to f/9, no change of focus for either image, shots are out of camera JPEGs merged manually with Photoshop
I'd say it came out sharp edge to edge. The center is sharper, but the fully shifted far edges look very good to me.
I've got the 100% crops plus the full sized image here
100% Crops of Far Left, Middle and Far Right of panorama image:
You have a winner there! I'll post my final results on both my 17TSE and my 24TSE with my modified adapters and with the Metabones 4 that I'll get this week. I'm really happy with both of them now, details right to the shifted edge.
Just received my Metabones 4 and tested in my A7R2 with 24mm TSE and 17mm TSE.
The results are disappointing, exactly just about the same as my 2 unmodified Metabones 3s and manually stopped down plain Metal adapters (I've tried 4, from the best Kipon $110 to worst at $10).
Weirdly, I also bought a cheap ($100au) Chinese adapter and there was some improvement over the Metabones 4. But the adapter was slightly off, so I'm not sure if that is affecting the results (maybe by applying low QC tilt).
Next thing to do is to open up the Meatbones 4 and shim it, like I have done to my Metabones 3s.
TakenWild wrote:
Correction I used 0.05mm stainless steel foil. So I used 0.2mm (4 layers) on the 24mm TSE and 0.15mm on the 17mm TSE (I have a metabones 3 for each).
I'm currently testing putting 2 layers on th rear on the metabones and 2 layers on the front mount as I'm having problems with tightness when mounting the lens.
Wouldn't automotive feeler gauges cut-up make better shims for you guys? Just a suggestion, maybe it'd help. ~Chris
