Received my MC-11 yesterday and I am returning it today! Only Art lens I tried it with was the 35 1.4art and whilst eye-af etc all function, unfortunately accuracy and consistency is not there.
In comparison to my Metabones IV there is no contest regarding AF speed and accuracy, the Metabones wins hands down. Also noted that it had a hard time with backlit subjets where the Metabones didn't have any problem.
Interestingly the A7rii AF assist beam works with the MC-11 but again results were inconsistent with a lot of OOF shots even though focus was confirmed by the camera.
The MC-11 does work well with my Canon mount lenses but again in my opinion the Metabones IV simply works better, ie faster AF aquisition and accuracy.
I will stick with the MBIV and may look again at the MC-11 if Sigma starts to tweak the firmware. Its early days for the Sigma adapter, Metabones have been tweaking their firmware for some time now to get where they are.
alexoki wrote:
Received my MC-11 yesterday and I am returning it today! Only Art lens I tried it with was the 35 1.4art and whilst eye-af etc all function, unfortunately accuracy and consistency is not there.
In comparison to my Metabones IV there is no contest regarding AF speed and accuracy, the Metabones wins hands down. Also noted that it had a hard time with backlit subjets where the Metabones didn't have any problem.
Interestingly the A7rii AF assist beam works with the MC-11 but again results were inconsistent with a lot of OOF shots even though focus was confirmed by the camera.
The MC-11 does work well with my Canon mount lenses but again in my opinion the Metabones IV simply works better, ie faster AF aquisition and accuracy.
I will stick with the MBIV and may look again at the MC-11 if Sigma starts to tweak the firmware. Its early days for the Sigma adapter, Metabones have been tweaking their firmware for some time now to get where they are....Show more →
Kind of late to the party but my MC-11 is being shipped today. The only Sigma Art lens I have right now is the 20mm f/1.4. Although my original intention is to use it for astrophotography but I really enjoy that lens for general photography as well. So far, I have been using it with my Metabones IV and now I am curious how it will perform on the MC-11.
Same results as Alexoki. both my 18-35 and 50 ART, with updated firmware hunt for focus, whereas they lock immediately with the metabones. When shooting multiple frames per second with the A6300, the MC-11 also defaults to wide open aperture with Canon lenses; in single shot mode, it is as good as the MB IV with my Canon glass. I am trying to decide if I should send it back, but I need 2 adapters for video use with my Canon glass. I bought this mainly to use on the A6300 with ART lenses, but I can just use the MB IV on there with great performance, and use the MC 11 on the A7r2. The other option I am considering are just dumping my Canon lenses and go native and avoid this hassle.
Make sure you test by taking a shot and not just focusing.
To all who have invested in the MC-11. If your trying to test your MC-11 with a Canon lens it might work but I strongly recommend making sure in your test you expose as well as just trying to focus.
SInce I don't have my new Sigma 35 Art yet over the last few days I tried to see how the MC-11 compared to the Metabones IV (FW 0.49) for my 35L, 135L, and 100-400 II. Like most I mounted the lens and then just kept trying to focus on different objects. All went well and thought this isn't have bad.
Today though I put my 50L on it and headed for a walk on my A7RII. Focused and took the first image and all went great. It was when I tried to take the second image that all went sideways. It was completely over exposed. With a puzzled look I wonder what I did wrong. Tried again. Some results. I finally realized that when you turn the camera on the first image works fine. The second one the expose drops the shutter speed to ~ 1/6 (I was shooting in Aperture Priority) and your over exposed since for my images the expected shutter speed what closer to 1/250 or 1/500 when exposing properly. It did this every time. First image great, second image and any there after the wrong shutter speed. To get it back I had to either turn off the camera or rotate the lens to disengage the contact and then rotate it back and I could take an image with the correct shutter speed. So don't just focus to test make sure you actually expose images. Tony Norton has some kind of lock up as well he has reported.
I will go back and see if its specific to the 50L by trying my other lenses again but wanted to report this. For me its not a huge problem because I have the Metabones adapter but its definitely not a replacement for that when I consider using my 50L.
swldstn wrote:
Make sure you test by taking a shot and not just focusing.
Today though I put my 50L on it and headed for a walk on my A7RII. Focused and took the first image and all went great. It was when I tried to take the second image that all went sideways. It was completely over exposed. With a puzzled look I wonder what I did wrong. Tried again. Some results...
Same thing happens with my Canon EF 24-105/4L IS with the MC-11 adapter on my A6300. However, AF-S with that lens on my old Commlite adapter works fine.
My Canon 70-200/4L IS, 35/2 IS, 40/2.8 STM, 100/2.8L IS, and Sigma 150-600 C don't exhibit any over exposure errors with the MC-11 and AF-S works.
My EF 300/4L IS doesn't AF with either adapter but aperture control and IS works. My EF-S 24/2.8 doesn't fit on the MC-11, but it does fit on teh Commlite and AF-S works well enough.
Tony Northrup tested the MC-11 versus Metabones IV with Canon 16-35 f4L at ultra-wide setting. Sadly the image's corner degradation was much worse than the Metabones...
Anyone have one they'd like to sell? I cannot find this anywhere available. I had a pre-order for the last week with B&H and today it appears they don't expect any until 05/16.
So anyone not happy with theirs - please PM me if you would be so kind before you return it.
(I did start a WTB thread regarding this as well over a week ago).
Thanks,
Shawn (the guy with obviously too many Canon mount Sigma lenses)
Eyvind Ness wrote:
Just briefly tested my TS-E 24 II now, it seems to work OK, but the lens is reported as DT 24 F3.5 SAM, what is that?
Did you compared the corners with Metabones when fully shifted? Sigma MC-11 has a smaller opening compared to Metabones and I wonder if that affects the corners. I picked up a TS-E 24mm and a Metabones Mark IV a few days ago. I am quite happy with the result (except that the FE mount on the adapter is a bit too tight) but I have been thinking about returning Metabones and get a MC-11 instead (and save $150) if they have no difference in image quality.
Exif appears when you mouse over the upper right corner. First you see pics with the 5DSR + TS-E 24 II, then with the 24-70 II, and then the TS-E with the A7R2. I did a series with each adapter, MB first, unshifted, shifted 12mm down, 5mm down. Man focused using LV at the center and lower left corner (so there are two versions of each picture).
I could see no major differences, but right now I have more confidence in my MB adapter. There is less fuss with it, using non-Sigma lenses, and the FW has now stabilized while the Sigma FW has just been released. That comment applies mostly to AF and IS/IBIS operation, though, and not so much to corner smearing etc. as is discussed here.
I keep my finger crossed. Hope an F to FE version will arrive soon