I theorize that if the camera isn't talking to a lens that reports its own geometric corrections, it doesn't do well at locking on focus away center of the frame, regardless of how that focus location was decided upon. Since the function of the fancy AF features on the rV is mostly to select the correct focus area (eye, butterfly, pet, airplane, etc) I think it would help only if said area happened to be right in the center of the frame already. Otherwise it would know *where* it should focus, but probably not be able to.
But this is only my theory, though based on a lot of experimenting. And indeed, with my a7r V and the Fotodiox Mk. II adapter (I don't have an LM-EA9, at least not yet), it does a fantastic job on eyeAF only IF the eye is at the center or quite close. If it's even vaguely mid-frame it doesn't really work even though it will identify the target with no problem.
DavidBM wrote:
wasn't using tracking, just regular eyeAF. Tracking might not be a great idea, as the response speed becomes more critical.
Medium focus priority.
Hi David,
Have you had the opportunity to test the adapter with the A7R V? If yes, have you noticed any improvements compared to the R IV?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Hi David,
Have you had the opportunity to test the adapter with the A7R V? If yes, have you noticed any improvements compared to the R IV?
I’ve been using it on the rV extensively. I’ve used it on about twenty old OM film era lenses, as well as the c-Sonnar, ZM 85, Helios, and four or five old CZ Jena lenses. It’s worked remarkably well on it almost all of the. (With a couple of baffling exceptions).
I have not explicitly compared it a/b with how it worked on the r4 by my impression is that it’s very much better. I’ve almost always used it with eyeAF (as I tend to use vintage glass mainly for people)
I could pick a lens and directly compare if you are really interested as I still haven’t t got around to selling the r4
I assigned a custom button to switch to manual focus. However, when I hit it, the adapter retracts and I loose the focus completely and also loose the close focus ability. Is there any way to prevent this? F45 command seems to work only for camera switching off, not for manual focus/autofocus switch. Many thanks.
stevocem wrote:
I assigned a custom button to switch to manual focus. However, when I hit it, the adapter retracts and I loose the focus completely and also loose the close focus ability. Is there any way to prevent this? F45 command seems to work only for camera switching off, not for manual focus/autofocus switch. Many thanks.
Can anyone comment whether the LM-EA9 feels more mechanically rigid than the previous model? It was a little worrying that you could nudge the lens and see focus change a bit.
DavidBM wrote:
I’ve been using it on the rV extensively. I’ve used it on about twenty old OM film era lenses, as well as the c-Sonnar, ZM 85, Helios, and four or five old CZ Jena lenses. It’s worked remarkably well on it almost all of the. (With a couple of baffling exceptions).
Hi David, can you tell more about the baffling exceptions? I am using the same combo (A7RV&EA9) and when working with lens glow a lot wide open (undercorrected spherical aberration), it will always annoyingly mis-focus.
ziqueChase wrote:
Hi David, can you tell more about the baffling exceptions? I am using the same combo (A7RV&EA9) and when working with lens glow a lot wide open (undercorrected spherical aberration), it will always annoyingly mis-focus.
One baffling exception was the simple OM nifty fifty 1.8/50 - the old one. Baffling because it’s pretty sharp and low CA and I doubt it has a large ray angle. Not much glow. But also very distance dependent (yes I am keeping an eye on the focussed distance on the lens to ensure TAP can get it in range)
I don’t recall what the other was — might have been 2/85, which you would expect to be fine. 4/200 was bad too, but I guess it’s getting heavy.
OTOH Zeiss c-sonnar, which has a pan extreme ray angle and uncorrected CA was fine over most of the frame.
One possibility (since I was using and noting, not semi formally testing) is that some minor variation in the parts of the frame I had subjects played a role. My notes say only centre, inside ROT intersection, at ROT intersection and just outside. That allows a little slop.
Has anyone been using any of the following lenses on an A7R5 and can speak to the performance of the LM-EA9?
Leica 35mm Summilux FLE v2 (2022 version), Voigtlander 35mm Ultron VII, Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f1? How does tracking seem to work if you start with the subject in the center and then move the camera to recompose? Any other observations, sample images, etc?
Is there a method to switch the adapter to manual focus? I can't achieve this using a custom button like the AF/MF toggle, or through the Focus Mode menu. I recall being able to do this with firmware v1.4, but it's not working with the latest v1.6. Appreciate your help.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Is there a method to switch the adapter to manual focus? I can't achieve this using a custom button like the AF/MF toggle, or through the Focus Mode menu. I recall being able to do this with firmware v1.4, but it's not working with the latest v1.6. Appreciate your help.
On my A9 I have "AF/MF Ctrl Toggle" mapped to the center button on the 4-way controller back wheel and it works fine with LM-EA9 FW1.6.
lattesweden wrote:
On my A9 I have "AF/MF Ctrl Toggle" mapped to the center button on the 4-way controller back wheel and it works fine with LM-EA9 FW1.6.
Thanks for letting me know. I just tried setting a custom button again and this time it worked. Not sure why it was not working before.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Hey @BastianK@, how did you come up with that formula for MFD (Minimum Focus Distance)? I saw it in your review of the LM-EM9 here.
I'm curious about the constants 0.1244 and 0.032 – where did those numbers come from? Also, wouldn't this formula be more accurate:
MFD = (0.1244 + 0.0045) x e^(0.032 x Lens Focal Length)
I checked with a bunch of lenses and let Excel come up with the formula.
It should be correct like that but I can check if I still have that sheet somewhere.
BastianK wrote:
I checked with a bunch of lenses and let Excel come up with the formula.
It should be correct like that but I can check if I still have that sheet somewhere.
With the formula:
MFD = (0.1244 + 0.0045) x e^(0.032 x Lens Focal Length)
MFD = (0.1244 + 0.0045) x e^(0.032 x Lens Focal Length)
(adding the 0.0045 extension from the adapter)
I get results close to yours:
15mm: 0.1794m
21mm: 0.2778m
24mm: 0.3353m
28mm: 0.4054m
35mm: 0.5617m
40mm: 0.6619m
50mm: 0.9029m
75mm: 1.7224m
90mm: 2.4888m
Adding the 0.0045 makes a 3.6% difference.
I say that is completely irrelevant.
Deviations in focal length specs are more than that.
