Lately we have quite some good news for Canon owners here on SAR. The new Sony A7rII with Canon lenses focuses as fast as on “native” Canon cameras. And now we have another great news:
DEO Techart is about to release a the world’s first E-mount translucent adapter for Canon EOS lenses! The adapter is scheduled to be released in August and I hope to get final specs and images soon. B
UPDATE: For unknown reasons MXcamera removed the three videos showing the adapter at work. Hope they will be back online soon 🙁
139 Responses
translucent adapter???
what is it good for…?
What’s next? Nikon lenses adapted via SLT adapter?
I want a MF to e-mount adapter with T/S.
Seems to be extremely slow. Still hunts like contrast detect AF.
extremely slow? c’mon guys.. for me its even better than canon-eosm itself.
EOS-M was crap to begin with…
Barrys dream come true lol
This was clearly just a matter of time. Although I realize this is not released yet and the videos were crappy quality but still hunting is strong in this one…
I’m a Canon shooter moving to the A7RII but have no idea what a translucent adapter is? How is this dfifferent from all the other EF adapters on the market?
You need not worry then with 7R II, this is for normal A7 series without the fast AF via 3rd party lenses
This might still be useful on the A7RII. We don’t know exactly how well that camera works with Canon lenses or A-mount Sony/Zeiss lenses – the videos showing examples of the AF look quite good but we don’t know how well it tracks, how well it works in low light and in a couple of the videos of it, it seems to hunt on occasion a lot more than the A99, going back and forth. So if someone buys the A7RII for the sensor and IBIS it might still be the case that a translucent mirror adaptor is better for some applications using Canon lenses.
The first thing to not is that this adapter is irrelevant to the A7R II as it has on-sensor PAF which is meant to work with adapted Canon lenses. Although that said, if I was a Canon owner I’d wait until there were more hands-on test reports.
This adapter has a so-called translucent mirror (it’s actually a beam splitter) and sends a proportion of the light (normally about 1/3) to a dedicated AF unit and the rest to the sensor. (Many years ago, Canon had such a system with a fixed “pellicle” mirror to allow for high speed shooting, but it made the viewfinder too dim).
The Sony LEA4 adapter works like that as do all current Sony A mount lenses. The good news is that, in principle, it allows for things like full-time PAF, including video and live-view modes. The downside is that about 1/3rd stop of light is lost so things like dynamic range are reduced similarly (so, for instance, a shot taken at 800 ISO will look more like one taken at 1,200 ISO).
Look at Sony’s own info/comparisons/documents for the LA-EA3 and LA-EA4 adapters
All existing EF-mount adapters are similar to the LA-EA3
This new adapter is more similar to the LA-EA4
Isn’t this obsolete with the 7R II? Might still be good for normal A7?
The focus speed didn’t look that great though
Not everyone’s going to shoot with the A7RII and there are a lot of people still shooting APS-C, me included. If the fast focus from A7RII is not coming via firmware update to A6000 (because it’s limited by technical things), so I would appreciate a good working adapter
I thought APS-C was dead? j/k
This would make sense if it ended up being cheap somehow, but this adapter will be $300-400 I think and will therefor be almost pointless and negate the cheaper Canon lenses
I also had the feeling that APS-C is dying. It would be awesome to know if the A6000 could have this new autofocus via update. No need for expensive adapters
0% chance, it’s hardware on the sensor itself
Has to be small – without PDAF protrusion – otherwise no buy. Has to be cheap too – like under $100. AF has to faster than what A7RII can do natively with OSPDAF – otherwise no sense.
Are you kidding me? Not everyone is going to blow $3500 on an A7RII. This would sell like hotcakes at $200 for existing a7/a7ii/a7r/a7s owners. Even plenty of new owners who wouldn’t want to spend all their money on an a7rII would get this.
As this is a third party company then they won’t have known the A7RII was coming when this was in design. I suspect it came as a nasty shock to them.
As it is, the obvious market is a retro-fit for existing Sony models. Assuming that Sony will introduce BSI and on-sensor PAF like the A7R II onto new e-mount models, then this adapter will have a more limited market than the developers first thought.
It makes perfect sense – its made for every other E-mount camera to date, the A7RII is irrelevant.
It’ll be close in size and probably price to the LAEA4. A mirror and an AF module will cost more than simple electronic adapters, over $100 may rule it out for you, but there are plenty of people that would pay more for good AF with Canon glass.
probably smaller, LAEA4 has screwdriver and aperture lever while EF doesn’t need them.
It would still need distance to make up to the sensor to achieve AF. The motor is only a small part of the adapter’s size.
Tough to say at this point, but any size difference will likely be pretty insignificant since they’ll still have roughly the same registry distance (for the anal- I know A-mount is 0.5 mm longer, I consider that insignificant) and mirror.
There is no chance that it will be under $100. And the A7rII is more than 3000 bucks and is for now the only E-mount camera able to focus accurately and fast with non native lenses. So even if it’s a little bit slower it totally makes sense, at least until all E mount bodies have OSPDAF for third party lenses…
And how exactly do you expect it to be ‘without PDAF protrusion’?
this is great news for my a6000,
and a very welcome if it around 100$ mark.
combining this with generic canon lens are great value combo
Even the cheap adapters are $100. This is going to be $300 at least I would think
hahahaha,.. agreed it wont be 100
even a bulkier stupid adapter cost 100, no to mention it has a glass in it
But why … ?
Why is there more of a focus on Canon lenses than Nikon? Is Canon easier to hack with these types of devices or something? Its be cool to get something that allowed autofocus on Nikon lenses on Sony (maybe it already exists and I didn’t know)
Canon is much easier because they use an electronic aperture mechanism. Nikon uses an ancient mechanical aperture mechanism and would require motors and such to be in adapters.
That being said Nikon AF/electronic adapters will come, but they are considerably more difficult
Cool thanks
Also, all EF-mount AF lenses have electronic autofocus, while Nikon AF is a mix of screwdrive and electronic AF.
EF mount is, to my knowledge, the oldest existing mount that is 100% electronic with zero mechanical control linkages.
Until this year, the only Sony adapter that supported mechanical control linkages was from Sony themselves (EA1/EA3 mechanical aperture, EA2/EA4 add screwdrive AF), who has full documentation of the mounts on both sides of the adapter.
um there was Contax G-Sony E adapter from Techart which had screwdriver.
Indeed. Though if anything the aperture stop down linkages are much more difficult to make.
Not sure about this, I think there are more adapters with aperture levers than AF ones.
Automatic ones with properly calibrated 1/3rd stops?
Sorry I don’t know
I think that’s the tricky part.
Canon first…more users…Nikon next.
New fully electronic Nikon to E mount coming soon.
Wow
Ever since E mount mount came out I have been repeatedly suggesting that Sony make E mount fully high speed Autofocus compatable …either with thier own or 3rd party adapters…with Canikon glass.
Now with the a7rii Sony hals fimally listened and made it compatable.
An alternate suggestion. I have continually made is that if for legal reasons Sony does not want to do this themselves they should license the laea4 technology to a third party so they can make Canon anhd ikon versions…they seem to finally be listening to all my many times repeated suggestion. We will probably soon see a Nikon version too.
This now makesCanon lenshes not only fully af compatablewith the a7rii, but fully compatable with all E mount cameras, plus provides a choice between mirrorless or slt focusing.
Since I now know Sony is listening to me..next improvements..
A much higher mp ..78 or better..specifically opytimized for still pictures..reasonable but not super high iso, and no compromises for video.
Lenses. .a 300-600 f4.8or 5.6 max aperture at 600mm.
Very important feature..build in a 1006mm or 150mm barrell extension, and a 1.8x teleadapter.
Lens to function normally with barrell retrakcted and in macro/close up mode with barrel extended.
1/2 max magnifction at 600mm would be fantastic.
Teleadapter could be pylaced at optimum location in optical path , and a click stop on the barrel extender cbould be provided for use with the TC.
Bahahaha! You have spent the last how long saying E-Mount is crippled and you don’t want to use a crappy adapter. Oh prophet please tell us more!
Absolutely corect, I have sptent a lot of time complaing how E mount is crippled to not wourk wit dslkr lenses, and how adapters only ptouvide crippled af performsne.
Now Sony hfas finnally listened and uncrippled E mount.
The new sensor is not crippled and provideis full af speed with dslr lenses, and the slt adapter for Canikon will provide full performance for the lenses with built in image stabilization even on older E mount cameras.
You still continue to complain and critisize thes very comments that are at least partly responsible for getting Sonyp to make these advances.
A rational iundividual wyhen seeing most of my suggestions happening would realize Barry was right…but that excludes you because you can only argue and critisize.
*sigh* and what may I ask makes THIS adapter less crippled? LA-EA4 was still crippled when the A7 II came out according to your holiness. I could quote you time and time again with the same rhetoric that using the adapters were ‘crippled’ but now YOU personally have supposedly brought us the mothership? You are a twaddling old fool, who is mentally crippled. You are clearly worked up, your typing is all over the shop, did you forget to take you meds again Barry? Quickly respond before the nurse puts you to bed. Nutter.
He is a nut job, who clearly lost it in search for ultimate resolution and longest lenses. He believes Sony has listened to HIM. Ask any psychiatrist and they will tell it right there and then what the condition is called. It’s Megalomania – delusion about one’s own power or importance; delusion of grandeur.
And whats being able to tell the truth? Best not ask them actually lol
Hahahaha.
The actual present solution to good af with those lenses is the new sensor and that is converging utility with video purposes, now I really want colour information in the video to use such but regardless the convergence is at a rate that has not precluded much available lens resolution and at once allowed this new kind of sensor to have that AF potential at all because of the speed it can relay the data or whatever. Surely we also want fast fps at high resolutions just like video which requires higher fps for higher resolutions like 4K/6K etc in future, you more than anyone if your ‘wishes’ about that matter even made any sense. My pc has problem and i have to do something for tomorrow so this will have to wait…
Sony did NOTHING to improve Canon AF. The A7RII improvements were targeted at the LA-EA1/EA3. The only reason Canon AF got improved is because it was impossible to improve performance with Sony’s own EA1/EA3 without improving performance with the Canon adapters. You’ll NEVER see Sony provide official support for lenses from other manufacturers or spend any resources on doing this.
They could have blocked it when not using an LA-EA. They could not promote the function either. But they do neither… pretty sure they have some idea what they are doing. Heck Sony Australia gave away Metabones adapters with every A7 series camera for over a year…
As I have said many times
There may be legal complicatitons that prevent Sony from making BOTH canikon compatable cameras AND the compatable converters.
To avoid these legal complications Sony has delibrately made these cameras compatable and provided technology for third partys to make the proper adapters, not at all unexpected, and one of the solution choices I have often asked for.
Drop in tele adapter sounds really useful. Could they be almost modular and interchangeable with lenses made to match so you can buy the set of multiplications instead of unique to each lens and multiplier? Surely almost perfect for sport too.
not as useful as high mp sensor
Matching tele drop in adapter GLASS with great image quality would surely be better than making a sensor with relatively high compression of mp at any time than would have been ideal say for speed of image output for display or fps…much like the new cam. Speed is more important than resolution for that overall so you lose same light either way otherwise right? but one sensor can relay data considerably easier, like those canons which are expensive just because of speed and have less resolution not more for purpose (a cost not matched by compromise of resolution exactly but rather scarcity ‘:I) scare no more…
sensor with smaller pixels is the best teleconverter in sense it doesn’t add own aberrations, stretching image doesn’t come for free.
With a dedicated adapter it doesn’t add a lot of aberrations either right? else all lenses would be innately horribly aberrated, in fact they are not, and most stop down well anyway. And telephoto may suit this sort of extension, I think it does in fact. That’s why matching extenders can be a prerequisite for those tele zoom users, and why we may need them, these being an even more powerful solution it seems. You may be right for this one instance but otherwise its a compromise and not needed, unless glass was all say, optimized for that even higher than usual resolution, and yet we hardly capture what we have due to said debayering, now as reference. Sharpness seems to be the only interest here, and speed/light? Is that implicit, a speed/light advantage or you just didn’t even think/say it..(you lose same light anyway as i said don’t you, because of cropping area relative to whole light gathering area..) .And regards using the sensor, what is the solution, going into APSC mode? a variable reframing which requires matching new cropped image sharp to displays in real time? because even APSC mode can leave you wondering what happened with a later shot :I
Of course a one time only reframing tool would solve that and show on screen hopefully too.
of course, it doesn’t add a lot, but the situations where we need TC is where we need more sharpness and resolution. Cheap TCs even make it worse
And regards the problem of viewing the crop full screen? In future that will be no problem, but its now…with a medium format tele you could crop even more, would that be better all round for resolution in all shooting? or weight assumed and depth of field a problem for that shooting….why not as i said, use APSC glass, uh oh! lol wouldn’t that be easier and provide for that purpose in future after APSC dead and gone otherwise? So what you want also caters for this situation, which is fine but i still think speed of aquiring the image may be important for such shooting and thus high res prohibitive and missed shots compared to a live stream of say 1000 FPS whats the limit with mirrorless anyway?
Your crop could possibly be recovered as fast too as its only crop and our camera system hardly lacks resolution the way its going, i just don’t see why not use whatever is available in camera and tele as we suggest? is it now only because of the cavity…well your method or similar doesnt even require whole sensor covered and can be made more compact, if overall slower, no free light. More glass, less weight restriction = more of image circle = better image output doesn’t it… you just want more res for crop use of lenses even if overall image quality or development is negatively effected, for what? a tele adapter in difference that the given user PAYS for anyway, not everyone else in ALL performance otherwise. but yeah..more res for crop, and while we are at it, medium format for 35mm crop and medium format lens as tilt shift to 35mm sensor crop. (buy and demand better lenses and be willing to carry them) with 120-300mm 2.8 you don’t even need a tele adapter you might have? i think you are kinda….
neither does light.
Why not both?
why would you need teleconverter if pixel size is small enough?
With the whole sensor debayered you have a reasonable actual resolution after for instance if you scale the image down for viewing, but with that method you just have the problems, would that really be better than optics fit for purpose? With smaller frame size in first place used of sensor, you wont even have that scaling action possible. Of course you are the new barry so to you this is irrelative in perfect version of problem, but its already the case that BMI can operate without hiking up resolution and rather by being more sensitive, that way is in effect backwards in all other respects….Proof? a lens made for 35mm camera will beat APSC equivalent, wont it? and isnt your idea based on further,. applying the sort of resolutions used for optimized glass for APSC across a 35mm lens which is cost prohibitive and would make relatively heavy. etc, some thoughts for the new barry.
take your personal insults elsewhere
haha, its not an insult, you seem to have technical ideas and knowledge,
but check out my way!
When shootin wildlife we often need all the reach we can get. A dedicated , matched, itegrally placed 1.8x tc would be like an f8 1000mm lens because it should degrade the image very little.
That being said that is why I also suggested drop in because many people will agree with you and feel 600mm plus high res sensor is enough and not want to pay for a built in tc that they dont want.
Pluss the drop in slot can also be used for smaller filters.
The dedicated tc can be sold seperately to keep initial cost down, and to not offend those tjat do not want a tc.
As for the color of this lens…
Big white lens shout expensive and scares the animals .
Black is conservative and easy to build, especially with more economical plastic materiels.
Green says economy, value , and animal/environment friendly…plus it looks real cool and will generate brand recognition….best choice olive green and or black.
Reserving place for TC placement is antagonistic to making lens smaller/sharper/cheaper.
If taking about today’s sensors, I agree they are not high mp sensor to make TCs obsolete. But what if Sony makes really high mp sensor, e.g. about 140 mp — it would give you what 42 mp sensor gives with 1.8 tc and better sharpness
Any other drop in filters of use potentiated though also? like against haze and with control on of some sort?
filters are thin unlike TCs
Relatively, though a filter with variability might use some space for the controls, and a fit in tele adapter may be smaller than usual one for all we know or even up to 3X?
APSC lens for a given focal length at furthest tele end is more compact than available 35m sensor one (and cheaper and lighter), so for furthest extension use APSC and forget about cropping 35mm sensor I reckon.
Now regards light and sports…
A high mp camera would be great but it would not replace every other camera.
Ther would be times when one would choose to use a differrent camera.
But even with higher mp camera the extra reach is usefull, otherwise the extra resolution is wasted on cropping.
As for additional wieght, size..
This lens would be smaller than the big primes but bigger than the compactest 150-600s
In every case there is plenty of space already in a long lens like this to accomadate a tc and I do not believe it would significanly change the size of the lens.
With lots of competing lenses available Sony must give consumers a reason to choose Sony over all the others.
The greater versatility and intermediate price/quality/features/size will put this lens in a highly desirable class by itself.
‘And’ definitely and sounds cool to go with my camo lamborghini between shoots 😀
If you need all the reach you can get, why not just get a telescope? 1000mm f8 is already approaching what mirror based telescopes will do.
Portabilty, autofocus , image quailty, closer focu and ease of use are a few of the many reasons.
Are you aware that setting up and maintaining a telescope are complicated..in fact every time you move a telescope you need to allow about 15 minutes for the optics to settle in and adapt to the new temperature.
Plus the contast of available 100mm f8 opticsdoes not compare to a good camera lens.
Yes a telescope is more eeconomical, but severe limitations come with those cost savings.
Each adapter can have it’s own click stop on the barrel extender.
Your prediction from only 4 months ago (and that you repeated about 100 times for the last year):
———————-
animalsbybarry 4 months ago
E mount is dead…see my comment below
———————–
animalsbybarry 4 months ago
For a long time now I have been saying Canon will make thier new mirrorless cameras fully AF compatable with thier DSLR lense, and by doing so will dominate the mirrorless market by 2017.
As expected I have endured tons of abuse and nasty comments for making these claims.
Also as expected Today a new Canon Patent emerged for an EF-EF-M adaptor that will provide high speed AF with EF lenses on current mirrorless system and obviosly on new mirrorless sysem.
So will we now see hundreds of retractions to the nasty comments? No I don’t think so…but I do get to say I told you so.
Hahaha !
Yes I have many times said that both Nikon and Canon will enter the mirrorless competition with systems compatable with thier current dslr lenses.
I have also repeatedly said that the current E mount system that is not fully af compatable with Canikon glass will not be able to compete and that E mount is dead.
Sony has furtunately listened and remedied that situation by providing full compatability. It is now a univetsal camera.
This is not any longer the same incompatable E mount …that system is dead, died , and gone …this is the new mature E mount system.
Therefore consistent with what Sony is currently doing, and proof of my willingness to adapt to current events, my new official revised comment..which I will make more than once…is..
The old E mount is dead,
Long live the new E mount.
hahaha,.. barry you are most popular comentator on SAR, but please he himself cannot remember what he said 4 month ago, and you guys still remember his statement,.. i should be proud if i was barry, and poeple mind changed as with technology evolve.
long live the new E-mount… great duck move
I make thousands of comments on sar.
I remember the general direction but not every single comment.
Not every word I say will come true but a lot does.
If my words have helped move Sony in a good direction I am very happy to be able to modify my opinion to reflect those changes.
E mount is dead,
Long live E mount.
Um Barry, you were 100% wrong nearly every day for well over a year. Despite your endlessly wrong predictions you feel compelled to take credit for Sony improving their cameras to work better with slr lenses? That’s plain crazy.
Sony isn’t listening to you any more than any of their consumers. Obviously they want to improve their cameras and obviously they will seek to improve a-mount performance on e-mount bodies because we all know that eventually Sony will cease production of a-mount bodies and refer a-mount lens owners to e-mount. That’s not a prediction, it’s common sense.
It’s great that this benefits third party canon adapters. It’s great that you found a new camera that appeals to you (until you get it and find something to complain endlessly about). Acting like you designed the camera and are the brains behind the operation is delusional at best.
E-mount users on here have been stating against your “e-mount is a toy, is dead, is terrible” ranting that it is a young system, continuing to improve and expand rapidly. It’s not a new e-mount. You just have not been listening, sort of what you accused Sony of for the last couple of years.
The fact that you dissagree with me nearly everyday is very differrent than me being wrong nearly every day.
You’ve been saying and Sony has listened? That is one of the most megalomanic statements i’ve seen in a while.
At first you’ve been bashing E-mount and praised A-Mount. Then to you both became crap once you got your Nikon gear. Now you are praising it.
Sounds like you have ADHD in addition to megalomania….
SPOT ON STAN !!! 😀
This will be a huge hit. Tons of great Canon glass can be adapted to the E-mount with what looks like pretty good AF – that will likely improve with further development. We’re no longer restricted to the LAEA4 and A-mount lenses when looking for more AF options.
Love it. I’ll preorder the first day available.
Finally, we can get the Sigma 120-300 F2.8 for Sony camera.
Not really sure what I am looking at here? These lenses still focus like CDAF, just faster. This is nothing like the LA-EA4, in the way it communicates nor in operation. While it could be, something seems quite odd.
Also interesting that Canon have quite a number of new patents for SLT’s… Could this be part of one OEM’s plan (Canon or Sony)?
I agree. The lenses still hunts and move forward and backward like CDAF. And I don’t know if there is a problem with the video or if it’s just me, but it seems that we heard the confirmation sound way before the image looks really sharp and in-focus…
Have you ever use the AF on the Metabones smart adapter? I’m seeing much quicker lock with the 70-200, the Metabones hunts for a couple seconds before locking. Its early and I believe this is the first AF adapter Mitakon has made, give them time to get it tuned.
Yes I have, I didn’t say it was like the Metabones, I said it was like CDAF, just faster. It hunts back and forth. It shows the built in CDAF point, not PDAF points.
Manual controls and fantastic zooms like I have outlined now please. 20-105 2.8 or at least 21-95 2.8 seems an excellent one to start with and differentiate from all presently available, then we can AF with native weather sealed zoom and buy into Sony system even more than otherwise and make a carrot for other system users while they get beaten by their limited systems and twin zooms EVERYWHERE! 🙂
20-105 2.8, sure why not 16-400 2.0
why not shoot at f/1.4 zooms instead? 20-105/2.8 is going to weight 20 pounds or 10 kg why not build a 16-105/1.4 it is going to weigh slightly more at 190kg but then it will be very much universal once you mount it on a dedicated lens vehicle.
Ohh forgot any of those lenses will need own separate power supply that will either come in a LiIon battery backpack or you can use the optional 5kW lens power supply
1.4 isn’t universal for best image quality, general shooting, price and compactness. I have 1.2 and 1.4 so I guess those can be allowed, but mine are vintage and but for adapter, compact. I want primes compact to carry lots, ultimately all like m mount and loxia etc and also the AF Sony ones hopefully with aperture control, but I like vintage at the moment and can afford those easier across all ranges and not above f/1.8/2. I will get a fast m mount Zeiss at some point, but i’m actually covered at f/2 on that one with my only m mount already 🙂 and why not buy/double/upgrade on most useful focal length..This zoom might make me put off getting all the really cool £1000+ primes for a while…Otherwise I have no ranging zoom or AF and weather sealing for work in future. Its vital in actual fact.
There are some physicals laws that you can’t avoid when you make a lense… 20-105 2.8 would be a total monster… And the A7 series are the smallest 24*36 camera with interchangeable lenses. It’s a total nonsense…
No its not, I do not in any way accept that A7 need have small lenses. I want small camera always, and a lot of lenses, including SOME very heavy glass, for instance 120-300mm 2.8. An all in one may be heavy but i would use a support strap or something, even thinking about it makes me want it more, not less for compact A7 cam, switching lens at all for certain situations seems so oldfashioned, and i have mainly manual vintage primes…I want and even demand weather sealed all in one, or rather this focal length range, NONE OF YOU CAN PROVE ITS HEAVIER. Actually if it was made it would prove only you all wrong for presuming there is not so much an advantage with our short flange distance and that we can be different from all else BECAUSE OF IT. there i said it. Makes me think too, leica have 90mm or 70mm perhaps its just within the better part of advantage even, surely not bad anyway. So the 20mm 2.8 is free and the extra 15/25 at tele end is worked out using the best part of lens understanding, no problem at all in fact!
A 20-105 f/2.8 would weight at least 2kg and cost 5000 euros…
2kg plus Sony cam = less than camera bag with some lenses and bother and switching and all now required, just on your body. the weight sounds not too bad, and the price? Surely overestimated given the ranges covered by 24-70 2.8 lenses and prices thereof. This has 85mm range and at wide end too vs only 46mm range of 24-70, requires no 20mm 2.8 lens to buy or carry or switch and up to 105mm? incredibly versatile.
But I dont think it need cost 2.3X as much as say EF one or 5X as much as Tamron one. 1.6X EF one would be £2500/3500 euros. I dont see why 24 is the lowest focal length anyway on ALL zooms and this saves you one such lens and gives that range while range at top likewise also, from which theoretically you could crop to 157 in apsc mode, and in deed it all becomes a really cool 30mm-157 for APSC or video. Not as fast as the Sigma 18-30mm 1.8 but much much greater range in one lens. Great if it had weather sealing and smooth focus interaction and manual aperture with declick for video. Is there such a useful APSC zoom with 2.8 and range short of $10000’s cine zooms of some sort? and parfocal may be the worst problem so without that perhaps it all cost much less than expected but of course not useable for video as such. Instead of cut into Sony cine sales it ADDs to them through convergence :I
Buying EF and nikon 20mm 2.8 and 105mm 2.8 costs £1000/1400 euros and weigh no less than 1kg extra. EF 24-70mm 2.8 ii costs £1500/2000 euros and weighs 800g alone so in total thats:
£2500/3500 euros and weighs 1.8kg. With switch of lens in any weather for 20mm and anything over 70mm. In fact you can consider this as on the way to the 70-200mm too (by 35mm at most useful side), which has a lot of mm just for effect sometimes that you can get in many ways…that one weighs and costs a ton on top…This 20-105mm 2.8 with the admittedly heavy and relative investment of 120-300mm 2.8 means you have 20-300mm 2.8 and that other lens already achieves some compression and reduction of cost i think 🙂
Do you want 300mm 2.8 or around or above 200mm 2.8? why not this way…..
“No its not, I do not in any way accept that A7 need have small lenses.” Bad for you, but what do you want to hear? There is absolutely no chance that your curious expectations meets those of a sufficient amount of people. So Sony will never do such a lense… 120-300 seems less unrealistic than your 20-105 but I don’t believe in it neither…
You have to deal with it : your super-bridge 24*36 with one constant 2.8 zoom at 10000$ is not going to be released soon…
The 120-300mm 2.8 is clearly a fantastic choice for those willing to carry the weight and consider other factors, for instance, you get 300mm 2.8! as well as 200mm compared to 70-200mm 2.8. I am seriously considering that one and of course I cant shoot everything with 120mm+ thats actually in a sense why i want a zoom covering sub 120mm, 200mm is already long and I want all the range I would carry in primes so thats all the way to 21mm and in fact no further. This is useful for a certain kind of shot maxed out and for interiors and drama. At 105mm you can get what the 70-200mm can at 70mm and then some..in fact, you could theoretically get a 200mm f/2 to go with it, and i’m serious about that too. However, i’m like many new photographers, i’m setting up my system of zooms and 24-70mm is neither great for around and sub normal length nor is it good for these quite important aesthetically and compositionally, 105mm shots. This idea is for an artists kind of lens but moreover what I honestly believe at this time to be the most useful possible range forgoing another model which is say 35-135mm 2.8 and I do not believe these mutually exclusive: I would buy that next and it would be super sharp and no aberration. In fact, with primes so good, and higher resolution cams, the new aesthetic may make you shake your head at old zooms, no matter the subject…Sony should hit fast and hard with the best 🙂 24mm is good but not 21mm and i’m hardly interested beyond that, but it must cover all most useful focal lengths without swapping. One day you will might see a from cams eye video of why this might be from me 🙂 Its more like film somehow…the least i expect for still ideal use is in fact 21mm-95mm 2.8. there aren’t any 85mm lenses which would make it unique too 🙂 the rest? for me to know as photography master willing to even suggest such a thing on basic factors and other understanding 😀 I really don’t want the other zooms and they are no good in general and I have told why, surely that’s reason enough. Time for ideal, just like the cam. I thought everyone was bothered about the lens ‘problem’ more than even the cam one. I’m preempting that, wild style XD
First of all, sorry but English is not my native language so I’m too uncomfortable to read your giant text without some spaces. Put some subsections if you really want to write a dissertation 😉 Try to compact and organize your ideas please…
I don’t really know what you want and why you want it, but I’m pretty sure that wider ranges of zoom or faster aperture zoom will be first released for bigger DSLR first if technology allow them to be created one day… And don’t forget one thing outside the size issue : optically, creating a performing lens both at the wide end and the tele end is difficult. So wide open at f/2.8 at 20 or 21mm and at 90mm… good luck to find a lense like this not “over corrected”… You want everything and his opposite, this is just not going to happen…
wait for RX 1″ curved sensor, ull get 20-105 2.8 in a tiny form
No zoom ranges possible with curved sensor. Only fixed focal lengths.
yes, but they’ll figure it out.
curved focal plane are what natural lens projection was, so in theory zoom are easy to bulit upon than a flat focal plane zoom.
Not with glass I don’t think, from what was said…The curve is different for different focal lengths so the change is impossible to match. Not sure its even possible to flex the sensor to match continuously either. We looked at the different curves and it would be like correcting complex distortion with just pincushion correction: impossible, at least, accurately across any useable range.
BS. Don’t believe everything you read here.
Also, Sony DOES HAVE a patent on zoom with curved sensor
T/S should be in-body.
Correct, a medium format body XD it is serious though, tilt-shift and quality required…its already somewhat popular so i don’t see why not become mainstream too, just less expensive and more available.
So, it’s for the E-mount bodies other than a7RII then. I missed the point at first.
Yes, its for every available Sony e-mount camera ever built.
Looking forward to see “_a_ _the_ world’s first” A99 chineese clone soon…
Another~!?
I realized “translucent adapter” meant “SLT adapter” after about 30 seconds, but at first I was trying to figure out why the hell someone would build a lucite lens adapter lol
So they honestly want us to take the world’s best glass and stick a walkman at
the end?
Yes I want the 16-400 too ! I just need to sell one kidney and hire 2 body builders to carry the lens everywhere !
What does ‘translucent’ mean in this context?
A copy of Sony’s AF design with semitransparent mirror. Only why does it not focus like a DSLR, but rather like a mirrorless camera(hunting) is beyond me.
It seems that the focus confirmation beep comes before actually focusing, you hear it beep but see it still hunting for something to lock-on.
I was thinking on getting into an Alpha Adapter mainly for a Tamron 70-200 F2.8 but now I am not so sure. Maybe this adapter will be a better choice. I pretty much shoot all Canon FD lenses but I could get some EF ones for the AF.
because 20-105mm 2.8 range is more ideal than whats available with ANY general use lens and 16+400 is best as prime at f/2?
yes, a walkman that you still care to read and post a comment here.
welcome aboard brother
for pdaf utility
That’s like using sheetty Sony earphones to listen to uncompressed (big lol) audio files of Beethoven’s 5th
>The new Sony A7rII with Canon lenses focuses as fast as on “native” Canon cameras
That’s surely an overstatement… no tests of AF-C with A7RII and Canon glass has been published yet
Yea, while for portraits the speeds look OK. I’m doubting you can use the A7RII and shoot sports or birds in flight with the nice canon long telephoto primes on the market. Especially in less than ideal light with on sensor PDAF.
Will it use native focus points???
wonder where they get the pdaf and all that stuff, maybe theres some company that makes them and actually camera makes are fairly similer? but number of focus points and coverage matter too.
as for why canon lenses, some other reasons, i emailed sigma about something and ended up being told they sold massively more canon lenses than nikon, atleast for 1 type of lens. so theres that, and canon’s sensors have fallen behind for some uses, so theres more desire there too.
You can always use a fallen-behind canon sensor.
wath holding sony the a6000 also occupy PDAF like the a7rII with adapters??
sorry my englesh
woah! a talking walkman!!
Umm…. http://www.deoinfinity.com/#!falcon/c1u93
The product page is already up…and heck the price isn’t that bad!
Heck if you can actually find that product, because you’re probably mistaking the electronic EF to FE adapter for this mysterious SLT widget (that can’t possibly be for sale since no one knows what it actually does).
Huh? Is it a translucent adapter, or an adapter with a translucent mirror inside? If it’s the latter, what’s the mirror for? Has Deo-Tech developed a fast PDAF module that is nestled in that adapter? Has it also reverse engineered the communication protocol for LA-EA2/4 adapters to identify the set up as an A-mount lens with Sony’s own adapter, to fool the camera?
Also, what happened to Deo-Tech’s website?
WTF is this article about? The site they have up is an absolute mess and doesn’t even mention this adapter. Does anyone understand how this adapter actually augments AF?
Aside from Andrea posting an article with no apparent meaning he, as usual, can be bothered to send 10 seconds to proof his writing. Your audience is large enough that it’s worth spelling things correctly and checking your posts for accuracy/substance/grammar.
And what’s this about the a7R mk II focusing Canon glass as fast as Canon cameras? You say that like its a fact. Best case, the a7R mk II might focus one kind of lens as fast as a Canon body, occasionally. But to make such a gleefully childish statement outright makes me wonder what can be trusted here at all.
Those are all excellent questions.
Definitely does not appear to be acting like a LA-EA4, from an interface point of view.
All 3 videos are gone, deleted by the user