p.27 #2 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
A big bump, but after loving the Sigma 180mm f5.6 APO lens in Manual focus, I decided to try an AF version thinking I'd get some nice quality of life improvements with the LA-EA5 like AF and EXIF.
Unfortunately, this combo works very poorly. in all AF modes I have tried (AF-S, AF-C, wire AF, small box AF, Eye AF) and at all distances, the focus accuracy is extremely poor, around a 10% hit rate at best.
If anyone else was thinking of trying this out, I'd say steer clear. I'm not sure if it's just because it's a third party screw driven lens, but it's among the worst AF performance I've gotten from any body+lens combo. The lens focuses better on an a850.
p.27 #3 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
Reading the glowing reviews of 135 ZA, I was thinking of trying it via LA-EA5 adapter, since I see it's being sold around here used and even new at still reasonable prices.
However, I only used native glass (but 3rd party too - Tamron, Sigma, Samyang and was mostly happy with their operation) so I'm kinda used to native performance so I wanted to ask if 135ZA + LA-EA5 combo is a step below in operation or would you rather rate it close to native?
I don't mean 135GM AF speed and responsiveness but something that does not stand out too much compared to regular FE glass...
Is weight & size with the adapter also manageable?
p.27 #4 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
I'm really tempted to get a Minolta AF 24-50 f/4, it seems like the perfect compact 24 starting zoom I've been looking for. Before I think of buying it and an LA-EA5, I was wondering if anyone could say whether this would be a good idea. Ideally, it would be used as a landscape lens at f/8 all of the time.
p.27 #5 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
ethomp20 wrote:
I'm really tempted to get a Minolta AF 24-50 f/4, it seems like the perfect compact 24 starting zoom I've been looking for. Before I think of buying it and an LA-EA5, I was wondering if anyone could say whether this would be a good idea. Ideally, it would be used as a landscape lens at f/8 all of the time.
I feel like I must be blind because I went through the page a few times lol. I'm not sure if you were referring to the LA-EA5 itself, but I didn't see any comments from Fred on the 24-50 f/4, only the 100 f/2, 135 f/1.8 ZA, and the 200 f/2.8.
p.27 #7 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
ethomp20 wrote:
I feel like I must be blind because I went through the page a few times lol. I'm not sure if you were referring to the LA-EA5 itself, but I didn't see any comments from Fred on the 24-50 f/4, only the 100 f/2, 135 f/1.8 ZA, and the 200 f/2.8.
Lol--my apologies. I was trying to help @j4nu@ just above your post, but quoted you by accident
p.27 #9 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
j4nu wrote:
Reading the glowing reviews of 135 ZA, I was thinking of trying it via LA-EA5 adapter, since I see it's being sold around here used and even new at still reasonable prices.
However, I only used native glass (but 3rd party too - Tamron, Sigma, Samyang and was mostly happy with their operation) so I'm kinda used to native performance so I wanted to ask if 135ZA + LA-EA5 combo is a step below in operation or would you rather rate it close to native?
I don't mean 135GM AF speed and responsiveness but something that does not stand out too much compared to regular FE glass...
Is weight & size with the adapter also manageable?...Show more →
It depends on what your AF needs are. Its doesn't track fast action very well, but for posed portraits and even documentary photos where you have some slower movement, it works well. Eye-AF in AFC does what you'd expect.
I much prefer the rendering of the 135 1.8ZA to the GM, and would probably lean this direction even if the price difference weren't what it is.
p.27 #10 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
ethomp20 wrote:
I'm really tempted to get a Minolta AF 24-50 f/4, it seems like the perfect compact 24 starting zoom I've been looking for. Before I think of buying it and an LA-EA5, I was wondering if anyone could say whether this would be a good idea. Ideally, it would be used as a landscape lens at f/8 all of the time.
I haven't used it since I had the a99, but it's a decent little lens. The extreme corners are soft at the wide end, no matter how far you stop it down. They're better at the long end (my copy was best at 35mm) but still not perfect. Central resolution is strong throughout at f/8, though, so it really depends on how much you care about the long edges and corners. Coma can be a problem for city shooting at night. Flare is really its worst attribute and the hood's useless, so you'll need to get used to hand-shading. The flare's particularly disappointing because the seven straight blades can make some good sunstars, but, with the sun, the amount of veiling flare and ghosting make it rare that they'll actually come in handy, and the problem remains with stronger artificial lights as well. Distortion's relatively easy to correct (mild barrel at the wide end to minor pincushioning at the long) since it's simple. Overall, I don't think the lens is worth the purchase of an LA-EA5 since the FE 24-70/4 will outperform it at pretty much every focal length, and they're relatively cheap on the used market.
p.27 #11 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
Thanks @nehemiahphoto@ and @Mystik@ (great photos!).
I guess I'll have to think it over and I'm afraid LA-EA5 will keep bothering me in the back of my mind, as it opens up an another universe of glass from an era before my interest in photography piqued ...
p.27 #12 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
freaklikeme wrote:
I haven't used it since I had the a99, but it's a decent little lens. The extreme corners are soft at the wide end, no matter how far you stop it down. They're better at the long end (my copy was best at 35mm) but still not perfect. Central resolution is strong throughout at f/8, though, so it really depends on how much you care about the long edges and corners. Coma can be a problem for city shooting at night. Flare is really its worst attribute and the hood's useless, so you'll need to get used to hand-shading. The flare's particularly disappointing because the seven straight blades can make some good sunstars, but, with the sun, the amount of veiling flare and ghosting make it rare that they'll actually come in handy, and the problem remains with stronger artificial lights as well. Distortion's relatively easy to correct (mild barrel at the wide end to minor pincushioning at the long) since it's simple. Overall, I don't think the lens is worth the purchase of an LA-EA5 since the FE 24-70/4 will outperform it at pretty much every focal length, and they're relatively cheap on the used market....Show more →
Thank you for providing such a detailed response, this was very helpful and probably saved me from an unwise purchase.
p.27 #13 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
ethomp20 wrote:
Thank you for providing such a detailed response, this was very helpful and probably saved me from an unwise purchase.
Happy to share my experience. It would be nice if this latest round of compact zooms (Sony's 28-60, Nikon's 24-50, and Canon's 24-105 STM) inspires some friendly competition from the third-party makers. The Sony, for example, is an awfully good lens, but it would be a more handy landscaper if it were a 24-50 or 60. Maybe we'll see something like that in the I line from Sigma.
p.27 #14 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
The 24-50 f4 is good enough on film, but not good enough for digital especially on the a7r4. Just get the 28-60 instead of size is a priority. Wide open it’ll beat the pants off the 24-50 at any aperture and in truly any optic measurement
p.27 #16 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with the specific combination of the LA-EA5 with an A9 and the SAL 70-400G. Does it enable EyeAF? Tracking? I currently have the LA-EA4 but it obviously severely limits the possibilities of the A9. I'm debating whether it's worth selling the 70-400 and picking up the Sigma 100-400 e-mount.
p.27 #17 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
I use a 70-400 mk 2 with an A7RIV, and both the EA3 and 5. After adjusting for persistent backfocus, everything works fine. It's about as fast as it was with an A99II, and the eye af works well enough.
Made the mistake of renting a 100-400 GM and comparing, though. While I personally find the extra wide angle handy, the 70-400 isn't in the same league, and is going to find a new home soon. Dunno about the Sigma.
p.27 #18 · Introducing LA-EA5 | Mount Adaptor | Sony | Accessory
The GM 100-400 it's indeed a dangerous lens, once you tired it, there's no going back to another zoom
For what I've read and seen, the Sigma is almost as good optically, save maybe at 400mm, so I suspect it could be worth the switch from the 70-400, especially conaidering the "native" AF (even if it's not as fast focusing as the GM).
...