Justin Stone wrote:
Why do the different mount versions have such variation in aperture blades?
Because they are quite different mechanisms for each mount option.
I'm going to presume because they already had good working aperture mechanisms for Nikon F and Sony FE, and that the Canon one is new due to having electrical operation (and no aperture ring on the EF version of the lens)
From the product images and reviews posted here, the Canon version has electronic coupling (EXIF transmission).
Is that the case with the Sony and Nikon versions?
The Canon version of the Laowa 100mm Macro lens is equipped with an aperture control motor and CPU chip. The aperture can be controlled via the camera body (no aperture control ring on the lens body) and the aperture will close only during shutter release. Photographers no longer need to compose their shots in a dark viewfinder. A focus assistance indicator will also be shown in the camera. EXIF data can also be saved. If you are looking to use the lens on Sony FE camera via adapter, make sure an electronics adapter is being used or else your aperture cannot be adjusted.
All from Laowa website. I can see the Nikon version has an aperture ring.
So I think 'Aperture Coupling' means the blades will close as shot taken (if lens is stopped down).
The info about the Sony electronics adapter is when using the Canon version on a Sony body (I think)
So the Sony version...is a secret!
Snopchenko wrote:
Still a no-go for me because it's only MF but an impressive lens nonetheless.
I use my AF macros in manual-focus mode, including the stepper-motor equipped EF-M 28/3.5 .
On the Laowa 2:1 100mm macro itself:
The 'APO' here becomes less useful too; while the 100L is riddled with it (I did own one...) at f/2.8, f/2.8 is mostly just there for the AF. For any real magnification work, you're stopping down for depth of field.
If considering the lens for more than macro, well, for the most part you're better off using a 'portrait' lens for portraiture, i.e. and 85/1.8, and having a faster aperture and focus, and while nearly all of those lenses are also riddled with CA wide open at f/1.8, they're usually producing far sharper and cleaner images at f/2.8 than your average 90mm-105mm macro. And unlike a manual focus macro, they're also more likely to be in focus .
-however-
This is a cheap 100mm 2:1 macro. For those actually interested in macro- and I don't mean product photography!- this is a killer tool.
Right, but I知 not sure that would explain the choice of having 13 aperture blades for Sony and 9 and 7 respectively for canon and Nikon. I get that the canon electronic coupling is unique among the three, but the number of blades seems like a different, if possibly related, choice.
keith_cooper wrote:
Because they are quite different mechanisms for each mount option.
I'm going to presume because they already had good working aperture mechanisms for Nikon F and Sony FE, and that the Canon one is new due to having electrical operation (and no aperture ring on the EF version of the lens)
Justin Stone wrote:
Right, but I知 not sure that would explain the choice of having 13 aperture blades for Sony and 9 and 7 respectively for canon and Nikon. I get that the canon electronic coupling is unique among the three, but the number of blades seems like a different, if possibly related, choice.
The explanation here is that the more aperture blades, the more friction.
If you have a mechanically coupled aperture, then stopping down quickly is hard. So 7 blades.
The canon version has a built in motor by the aperture, so 9 is possible.
Sony has Loxia style manual stop down. So you can have as many as you want for nice macro bokeh: 13.
I much prefer manual stop down for macro. On an auto rail, where you take lots of high mag images and are using natural slight at long exposures, the aperture mechanism causes vibration if it closes down at shooting time! (at 2:1 everything causes visible vibration...) so I think the Sony version is much better suited to macro (even if no EXIF which I suspect though I知 not sure @Fred Miranda)
I値l be reviewing this lens, but not for a couple weeks..
DavidBM wrote:
The explanation here is that the more aperture blades, the more friction.
If you have a mechanically coupled aperture, then stopping down quickly is hard. So 7 blades.
The canon version has a built in motor by the aperture, so 9 is possible.
Sony has Loxia style manual stop down. So you can have as many as you want for nice macro bokeh: 13.
I much prefer manual stop down for macro. On an auto rail, where you take lots of high mag images and are using natural slight at long exposures, the aperture mechanism causes vibration if it closes down at shooting time! (at 2:1 everything causes visible vibration...) so I think the Sony version is much better suited to macro (even if no EXIF which I suspect though I知 not sure @Fred Miranda@)
I値l be reviewing this lens, but not for a couple weeks.. ...Show more →
Regards DavidBM wrote:
The explanation here is that the more aperture blades, the more friction.
If you have a mechanically coupled aperture, then stopping down quickly is hard. So 7 blades.
The canon version has a built in motor by the aperture, so 9 is possible.
Sony has Loxia style manual stop down. So you can have as many as you want for nice macro bokeh: 13.
I much prefer manual stop down for macro. On an auto rail, where you take lots of high mag images and are using natural slight at long exposures, the aperture mechanism causes vibration if it closes down at shooting time! (at 2:1 everything causes visible vibration...) so I think the Sony version is much better suited to macro (even if no EXIF which I suspect though I知 not sure @Fred Miranda@)
I値l be reviewing this lens, but not for a couple weeks.. ...Show more →
So is it better to get the canon mount to use with the MC-11 adapter or the Sony fe mount? I am wanting to preorder but not sure which mount would be best for the a7iii.
BullsOnParade81 wrote:
So is it better to get the canon mount to use with the MC-11 adapter or the Sony fe mount? I am wanting to preorder but not sure which mount would be best for the a7iii.
I would advise against the Canon version adapted to Sony because it will only have 9 aperture blades.
Definitely an interesting looking lens. I'd prefer af, but the Canon 65 doesn't have it, either, and that's the only other lens I can think of offhand that goes greater than 1:1 without any additional attachments. So it seems reasonable that I doesn't have af.
I have gone closer than 1:1 hh recently, so it can definitely be done.
.
.