I haven't conducted any tests, but generally, I am happy with my EF lens performance on the A7R2 with the MB IV adapter. So much so, I haven't felt the need to get native. I have the Canon 16-35/4, 24-70/2.8 II, 24-105/4, 70-200/2.8 II, 100-400 II, 400/5.6, and 500/4 II. AF works on all, and if the lens has IS, that works well too. IBIS works with all lenses. I only notice lag on FLs greater than 200mm or so. To minimize lag, pre-focus to near focus, engage AF, and it snaps to focus as fast as native. Despite speculative statements about the performance of adapted lenses on Sony from people who haven't shot them or shot them much, I shoot BIF with my A7R2 and Canon super-telephotos with keeper rates similar to those shot with the 5D3 and 7D2. I don't think eye-AF is available, but I mostly shoot wildlife rather than people. Since super-telephotos aren't available native (yet), adapted is your only choice with these FLs.
Jun 21, 2017 at 06:44 AM
Previous versions of scrappydog's message #14080649 « Adapted vs Native. Any real tests out there »
