KarmaKramer wrote:
Hmmmm. Maybe it was just s**t lighting that day. On my old 6d that lens was vibrant. I'll test it again.
Tested it indoors (window light), took off PL filter (forgot it was on) and shots look great. Glad I revisited it,I love the 200 for portraits.
Thanks for the hint!
Glad it's working well. I've got a 200 F2.8 L II on the way. Really looking forward to it.
pgeorges wrote:
I'll have to give it a go! I've always preferred the rendering of the non-IS lens.
It's long been known that the f/2.8 and f/4 non-IS versions were sharper than the IS version of the 70-200L lenses. Plus, the non-IS versions are cheaper!
Gunzorro wrote:
It's long been known that the f/2.8 and f/4 non-IS versions were sharper than the IS version of the 70-200L lenses. Plus, the non-IS versions are cheaper!
I had the non IS 70-200 f4L from canon and had it calibrated at their service center near LA. Post calibration, the lens was beautifully sharp.
Tested the Canon 100mm F2 and 200mm 2.8. The 100mm F2 works very well with the MC-11 adapter and Eye-AF. Tracks close to the edges like native, but not as good. The 200mm is tack sharp but it's constrained to the phase detection areas for Eye-AF. Won't work beyond the Phase detection area.
Any other lenses that work past/beyond the PD area?
Gunzorro wrote:
It's long been known that the f/2.8 and f/4 non-IS versions were sharper than the IS version of the 70-200L lenses. Plus, the non-IS versions are cheaper!
As I remember, the f4 IS version was reputed to be sharper than the non-IS.
I have tried various EF lenses with three adapter brands including the Sigma. My impression is that the best performance is with the A9 body (with FW V2.0) and the Metabones IV. Have yet to try the just released FW upgrade for the MKIV though.
Using the MC-11 with a Sigma 150-600 Sport, with and without the 1.4 converter, on an A7III - works great. With the 1.4 it works FAR better than it did on my 7dII, 5dIII or 6dII.
Did you find that the tc was sharp enough? When I tried the Sigma tc with my Sport, I found my sample was very soft.
jeffryscott wrote:
Using the MC-11 with a Sigma 150-600 Sport, with and without the 1.4 converter, on an A7III - works great. With the 1.4 it works FAR better than it did on my 7dII, 5dIII or 6dII.
kimknapp wrote:
Did you find that the tc was sharp enough? When I tried the Sigma tc with my Sport, I found my sample was very soft.
Very sharp, it is like a whole new lens. I'd nearly given up on using the TC with my Canon kit. Here are two from yesterday (unfortunately, they don't look nearly as sharp here as they do natively on my retina MacBook Pro).
Sigma 150-600 Sport with 1.4 converter, Sony A7III ISO 12,800.
As I'm looking to get an A7III but have Canon lenses that I can't go without, I am starting to consider this over the Metabones V.
If funds allow me to, I'm hoping to get the 35mm Art in E mount and also the Sony 85mm f/1.8 then just adapt my 16-35mm f/4L and also the Canon 100L. Being that both these lenses are used to shoot static objects (UWA for lanfscapes and 100L for mostly still life), I figure even if AF isnt the fastest it shouldn't matter.
I do also have the original EX version of the Sigma 85mm and Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS, does anyone have experience using these with the MC-11?
