Usually third-party electronic adapters offering autofocusing are a pain in the … when it comes to get a really fast AF performance. But Kipon managed to make it really work super fast! Just watch those cool three official Kipon test videos:
KIPON EOS/EF Lens to Micro 4/3 Adapter AF Speed Test (Part1 on Youtube). Tested with the [shoplink 53353 ebay]Canon 24-105 STM (Click here)[/shoplink].
KIPON EOS/EF Lens to Micro 4/3 Adapter AF Speed Test (Part2 on Youtube). Tested with the [shoplink 53354 ebay]Canon 40mm STM (Click here)[/shoplink].
KIPON EOS/EF Lens to Micro 4/3 Adapter AF Speed Test (Part3 on Youtube). Tested with the [shoplink 53355 ebay]Canon 70-200 f4 IS USM (Click here)[/shoplink].
All their adapter usually sell via multiple [shoplink 52819 ebay]eBay sellers (current MFT adapter list here)[/shoplink]. The new adapter will be listed there soon!
49 Responses
Very nice, thank you admin for posting.
I wish they would have used just one AF point to demonstrate it.
good news for anyone who owns both Canon and MFT cameras/lenses, if you’re wsitching to mirrorless you could just sell your camera body but keep the lenses.
Question: does the AF work well with a camera using contrast AF only (like the E M-5)? or does it work well only with cameras (like the E M-1) using also phase AF?
good question. Still, video shows an Olympus, product shot above shows a GH4. But marketing shots are often bull*hit so who knows?
You might want to consider getting a good pair of glasses….
You know, you’re right it is a GX7, my bad, didn’t look closely. Still, you may want to consider getting your mocking superiority complex surgically removed.
Yeah the video’s are showing it in use on a GX7. GH4 would probably be faster again. Oly, who knows yet…..
Actually, the video uses what looks like Panasonic GX7, so no OFPDAF there.
I wonder if it support electronic aperture and IS control?
In the video, I see different aperture settings, so my guess is it will support both aperture and IS.
If only they would make one with a built in SpeedBooster as well! 🙂
Actually, I only see aperture changing on their variable-aperture zoom (24-105 3.5-5.6 only when they zoom). 40/2.8 is at 2.8 all the time. 70-200/4 is at f/4 all the time. At least the adapter is able to read current aperture from the lens.
Ah… I thought first 14 seconds of the 40/2.8 was the 40/2.8, but it was just an intro… (it showed 3.8 in the video). …, so yes, the question remains.
According to Kipon’s website it has full aperture, AF and IS control plus it transmits EXIF data too. Exciting times if it really does work as well as the vids (shot by themselves, we should note) suggest!
I asked them via email whether they would make one with their “BavEyes” focal reducer, too, and they said yes, they will.
That is super impressive. Now the question is, are there now lenses make more sense to buy as Canon than native (except $3000 super teles, obviously)?
I would be quite interested in trying something like 100mm f2 on it.
The new 50mm f1.8 STM should be not too bad in the center (m43 area) so would work as twice cheaper alternative to Oly 45/1.8 (of course if you don’t count the price of adapter). Probably a bunch of cheap APS-C STM lenses would make sense from weight and price and focusing speed perspective. 55-250 STM should be a nice and much cheaper alternative to Oly 75-300 and Pana 100-300, just $300 new. Sigma 8-16 used could be a UWA alternative. Sigma 18-35/1.8 would be a sick normal zoom. Sigma 105mm and 150mm macros (both older, without OS).
Why is it that Canon can make an affordable, good quality 50mm 1.8 for ~ $125, but yet the oly 25mm (50mm effective) 1.8 is three times the price? I thought one benefit of MFT was supposed to be cost? Now I realize that the high end PRO lens line is priced better than the equivalent DSLR (such as the 12-40 2.8 pro vs 24-70 2.8 lenses), but why are the non-weather sealed, plastic Olympus 25 1.8 priced so high compared to it’s DSLR counterpart? Not trying to be a troll, or start a Canikon vs MFT war. I’m just curious if there is a reasoning for the higher cost.
They don’t expect to sell many, so distribute marketing and R&D costs between fewer lenses. If Oly US would be more competent, they would price they cameras and lenses right (below similar APS-C) and they would sell like hot cakes. It is VERY annoying that Japanese imports, with much more expensive INDIVIDUAL airmail shipping (compared to almost free sea container shipping), are so much less expensive on ebay. Olympus US just overprices their stuff, and then wonders why nothing sells.
On the other hand, 40-150/4-5.6 is UNDERpriced. Come on $99 in kits, $119 often alone? It could easily sell fro $150 in 2-lens kits and $200 alone, it is very good. Lost money right there. 14-42 II might be a little underpriced too in kits. The rest are either overpriced or crazy overpriced.
Apart from the new AF mechanism, Canon’s 50mm f1.8 is largely the same its been for decades. Compound that with a the large customer base that Canon has, and they have more than made up their initial R&D on this lens. Economies of scale are at play here.
Cost was never a benefit of MFT. There has always been a premium on MFT cameras and lenses because you are paying for developing a new compact system. With a much smaller market share than Canon or Nikon, MFT doesn’t have the advantage of economy of scale to charge less per unit.
olympus 45mm f1.8 is not really that expensive. Simply 50mm is much more easy to make than 25mm
It’s called economies of scale. Larger volume of production — less costs per unit. Also, canon’s 50/1.8 is double gauss with no aspherics whereas oly 25/1.8 is much more complex and even retrofocus :))
300mm f/4 IS L, 400mm f/5.6, 100-400 Mk1 IS L, 70-300 IS L? I’d consider any of those, particularly the 400 for my own requirements (with a IBIS body of course). Not before we know how well it really does work though…….
This seems to working well, and I almost can’t believe the focus speed of the PDAF lenses on CDAF system like GX7. When I used old 4/3rd lenses on EM-5 the focus speed was a lot worse, and this should not be any different.
So I remain skeptical…seems to good to be true(not that I need it, haven’t got any Canon AF lenses)
This means that my wife’s Tamron 150-600 will turn into a MONSTER 300-1200mm wildlife lens with AF on my GH4.
The Salton Sea beckons…..
Exactly what i was thinking too 🙂 And m43 will also use best part of this lens 😉
That would be assuming the battery power can keep up with driving that lens too.
That’s just the combo I’ve been wanting, for that reason. But I’m a little worried about there not being enough light and the sharpness. Especially concerned about the sharpness when doing 4k video and having that 2.3x crop factor. Please post results if you end up doing it!
Pretty fast focusing, but what about AF accuracy?
The images shown in the videos look quite soft.
to be fair he’s just aiming it loosely with multiple focus points active. Not the best way to maximize accuracy! It does need someone independent to review it before we can really start to judge the performance though. Very promising vids, mind!
Olympus really should have got that 300 f/4 out earlier……. 😉
check some of his shutter speeds as well… they are a bit slow. If you look at his opening sequence when he takes a photo of his kid, the shutter is at 1/80.
This:
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Kipon-Auto-Focus-AF-Adapter-for-Canon-EOS-EF-to-M4-3-MFT-GH4-Olympus-Panasonic-/251958321735?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3aa9e2e247
is too expensive. If you already have literally THOUSANDS invested in ‘L’ glass, in which case, I would posit,”Why did you switch to m4/3 again? (given if you have that much ‘L’ glass, you must have SOME Canon FF body floating around)
For $340 USD, this adapter, while novel, is WAY over-priced. I see this being an interesting proposition at a $200 price point. But at over $300 USD, this a “uh….no” for me.
Well, the cheap crowd, which you are a part of, is not the target group for this adapter.
I’ll buy at least 2 of them for some of my old L-Lenses.
I’d disagree. I think this is targeted toward people who are too cheap to buy native MFT lenses. Considering its $340, perhaps it’s targeted to those who can’t think things through. I see you’re buying two of them.
Marcelo is spot on. Unless you absolutely have to mount that $3k canon zoom to your GH4 then this is a bad product at $340. $200, maybe.
Well, I can pickup a used 400mm f5.6 and this adaptor for less than $1300 and I will gain stabilization on an Olympus body. There is no native m43 equivalent.
The Canon solution is either no stabilization with this lens, the old 100-400 with lower IQ, or the newer and more expensive 100-400. Seems like a reasonable alternative and dropping the price of the adapter by $100 has little impact on the decision.
M43 could actually breathe new life into the Canon 400mm prime by adding stabilization.
Again, as I said. There are edge case uses for this adapter at that price point. And both of you have just made them….
It’s not about being “cheap”, it’s about being practical. I have a 70-210 USM EF that would work perfectly with this, but it’s just not practical enough a price point.
Take a Sigma 120-300/OS/2.8, Canon version. This new adapter and you will have a 240-600mm/OS/2.8 range with autofocus. How cool is that! Great for big arena concerts where you have to shoot from the soundboard. I use to own, shoot and make my living with Canon gear. Now all I use is MFT. But a combo could be ideal(at least for me). This isn’t about money, being expensive or not. This opens just new possibilities for MFT users.
could someone tell me if photos with this adapter has exif data like native lenses? shutter speed, exposure (time and compensation) and iso at least?.
I am not impressed. Looks like old NEX cameras which were bashed for slow AF.
Not impressed? Then you’re a moron…
Look at how fast…or to be more precise: slow, Canon glass works on ff sony cams… It’s a travesty and this is lightning fast in comparison.
would love to see the CAF performance in video mode
Simply unbelievable. None of my current lenses on G5 have such high focusing speed – maybe except the original 14–42 kit lens.
Excellent! Now those Canon lenses only need to keep up their image quality on the Four Thirds sensor, and we’ve got a whole universe of interesting lenses to choose from, especially in the telephoto range. I wouldn’t take the image quality aspect for granted, though, because of the thicker filter stack Four Thirds uses, which Canon lenses are not designed for.
“because of the thicker filter stack Four Thirds uses, which Canon lenses are not designed for”
That is a very valid point, having seen the difference it can make.
Can anyone shed some light as to how exactly this works?
I mean to get a different brand camera body to AF an alien lens
I’d say it’s no witchcraft, you just need to know which contacts transfer which signals and how do those signals look. Then you can translate them from one system to the other in an adapter. The major work, which should be similar in all systems, is still done in the camera, producing the commands for the lens to change focus in one or the other direction and to read and evaluate the results from the sensor.
In a comment by the video uploader, Kipon indicates that they will also make a “speedbooster” version of this also! The comment is in the part 3 video and here is a screenshot:
(Ah, looks like @Hubertus_Bigend:disqus beat me to this news, in another comment below 🙂
http://puu.sh/hZf73/52fd7069e3.png