-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Micro Four-Thirds (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter JGobeil
- Start date
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
Yes, indeed!
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
It was so windy things were shaking all over the place, so this was hard to manage:
I get the impression that the actual AF area is somewhat larger than the outline in the VF, but I need better conditions to test that further. I find both single point small and large effective, large being easier to use and small being a bit more selective.
One more BiF through the branches
I get the impression that the actual AF area is somewhat larger than the outline in the VF, but I need better conditions to test that further. I find both single point small and large effective, large being easier to use and small being a bit more selective.
One more BiF through the branches
Last edited:
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
I got my smartadapter EF-M43-BT2 today. It had the firmware version 1.6 installed and it didn’t give any AF at all with my E-M1 and the EF 400mm. After updating to firmware version 1.82 I got AF…very nice….It functioned pretty well when testing on different objects inside my home. Outside it is dark, can’t wait to test it daytime on some birds.
When trying it on an E-M5 it did AF but first after going back and forth first, every time I pressed the trigger halfway down. Even if first focusing on an object, still keeping the camera on the object, pressing the trigger again it should have stayed in focus but it went back and forth again…so AF on E-M5 works but it is not really enjoyable and I haven’t tested image quality but it looked ok on the camera live view screen.
Anders
When trying it on an E-M5 it did AF but first after going back and forth first, every time I pressed the trigger halfway down. Even if first focusing on an object, still keeping the camera on the object, pressing the trigger again it should have stayed in focus but it went back and forth again…so AF on E-M5 works but it is not really enjoyable and I haven’t tested image quality but it looked ok on the camera live view screen.
Anders
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
The E-M5 (I and II) does not have PDAF, and the whole DSLR Canon/Nikon system is a PDAF system. That is why FT lenses also do not focus as well on the E-M5 as on the E-M1. Metabones clearly states this here
http://www.metabones.com/article/of/firmware_update_version_1.8
http://www.metabones.com/article/of/firmware_update_version_1.8
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
Tord,
I think it will not physically fit. There seems to be some sort of flange on the MC-14 that prevents it from locking together with the TC. I will check further with the guy in Germany who tried it and failed. There is also no way of knowing whether the Oly TC would work properly with the Canon lens. The Mark II 1.4s can be had for under €200, and on 4/3 I really doubt there would be that much difference. Still, I got a Mk III. The newest generation Kenkos are also not that bad and they are cheap. They produce vignetting on FF, but what do we care?
By the way, I also just got an answer from Metabones after about two weeks. They say the only difference between the BM-1 and the BT-2 is that there is flocking material inside the opening on the BT-2. Big deal! No news on whether there will be C-AF and they have not tested it with White Monsters or the new 150-600 zooms.
OK, found the post. The opening of the Metabones is about 1/2mm too small for the MC-14 to fit!
I think it will not physically fit. There seems to be some sort of flange on the MC-14 that prevents it from locking together with the TC. I will check further with the guy in Germany who tried it and failed. There is also no way of knowing whether the Oly TC would work properly with the Canon lens. The Mark II 1.4s can be had for under €200, and on 4/3 I really doubt there would be that much difference. Still, I got a Mk III. The newest generation Kenkos are also not that bad and they are cheap. They produce vignetting on FF, but what do we care?
By the way, I also just got an answer from Metabones after about two weeks. They say the only difference between the BM-1 and the BT-2 is that there is flocking material inside the opening on the BT-2. Big deal! No news on whether there will be C-AF and they have not tested it with White Monsters or the new 150-600 zooms.
OK, found the post. The opening of the Metabones is about 1/2mm too small for the MC-14 to fit!
Last edited:
Tord
Well-known member
I am not sure I get why the MC-14 would not fit mechancially. Do you mean the protuberance pointing towards the lens, that will not fit inside the smart adapter?
http://static.bhphoto.com/images/images250x250/1411146343000_1082049.jpg
The price tag is quite high, almost as expensive as the Canon 1.4 III.
It would be interesting to be able to test on Canon fast prime telelenses having first generation IS (or without IS) and see if it works...
http://static.bhphoto.com/images/images250x250/1411146343000_1082049.jpg
The price tag is quite high, almost as expensive as the Canon 1.4 III.
It would be interesting to be able to test on Canon fast prime telelenses having first generation IS (or without IS) and see if it works...
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
Precisely. The plastic flange in the Metabones with the gold contacts on it sticks into the opening about a mm or so, and that gets in the way of the protruding lenses on the TC. It is possible that the flange could be trimmed off a little, but I would not do that without checking with MB first. From the bottom it looks like there is enough plastic that could be trimmed, but from the top (inside) the gold contacts come right to the edge.
The Extenders are designed to work with Canon lenses, and even though it would be interesting to try the MC-14, the Canon would be "safer".
It took me 2 minutes to flock the tube of the MB.
About S-AF Rls priority. I discovered it worked as designed without the TC, but not with the TC, so I tried taping only the first pin on the TC and it works! Focuses just fine, just as before, and it is still invisible in the EXIF data. But I had to reset and re-save my Mysets to get it to work with the them.
The Extenders are designed to work with Canon lenses, and even though it would be interesting to try the MC-14, the Canon would be "safer".
It took me 2 minutes to flock the tube of the MB.
About S-AF Rls priority. I discovered it worked as designed without the TC, but not with the TC, so I tried taping only the first pin on the TC and it works! Focuses just fine, just as before, and it is still invisible in the EXIF data. But I had to reset and re-save my Mysets to get it to work with the them.
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
Dan, I'm impressed ! How come it didn't work for me ? Lens ? Camera ? It can't be the adapter because it is only software and we both have V. 1.8.
I don't think it is me either. I have photographed lots of fast moving birds in branches. I know how to do it and I know how to set the camera.
I may be able to try it again this afternoon. I will also try a 2X TC III.
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
Good for you Anders. Welcome to the club.
DanC.Licks
AKA Daniel Bradley
Jules,
I am slowly getting the hang of using AF after only MF for the last years. Takes practice! Today I wanted to try some selective AF with the 1.4x TC on. Light was not good, hence the 1/125 at ISO 800 noisy shots, but it was just practice. Had better luck with the single point small in order to really get in between the branches. Not much to show for my "work" today though. Bad light and not much going on...
I am VERY curious about how the 2x TC III works. There are a number of them for sale here no doubt due to the crappy AF on Canon bodies with anything other than the Big Whites 3. They run around €300 like new, where the 1.4s run used for close to €400. Don't forget your scotch tape!
As to the S-AF Rls priority turned on or off, I find off a bit of a pain in bad light because the AF system doesn't always register "in focus" even though it is close enough for government work. So I have it in my sets turned off, but if I exit the set, it is back on. A handy quirk in the system.
I am slowly getting the hang of using AF after only MF for the last years. Takes practice! Today I wanted to try some selective AF with the 1.4x TC on. Light was not good, hence the 1/125 at ISO 800 noisy shots, but it was just practice. Had better luck with the single point small in order to really get in between the branches. Not much to show for my "work" today though. Bad light and not much going on...
I am VERY curious about how the 2x TC III works. There are a number of them for sale here no doubt due to the crappy AF on Canon bodies with anything other than the Big Whites 3
. They run around €300 like new, where the 1.4s run used for close to €400. Don't forget your scotch tape!As to the S-AF Rls priority turned on or off, I find off a bit of a pain in bad light because the AF system doesn't always register "in focus" even though it is close enough for government work. So I have it in my sets turned off, but if I exit the set, it is back on. A handy quirk in the system.
Last edited:
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
New firmware release 1.9
There is a brand new firmware update available.
Name: Firmware update V1.9 for for Canon EF to Micro Four Thirds Smart AdapterTM/Speed BoosterTM
Release date: 10 Nov 2015
Benefits and improvements:
Fixed an intermittent issue with Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC A009 where camera becomes unresponsive
Reduced IS motor noise when power is turned off
Anders
There is a brand new firmware update available.
Name: Firmware update V1.9 for for Canon EF to Micro Four Thirds Smart AdapterTM/Speed BoosterTM
Release date: 10 Nov 2015
Benefits and improvements:
Fixed an intermittent issue with Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC A009 where camera becomes unresponsive
Reduced IS motor noise when power is turned off
Anders
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
Wait, don't update !!!
Wait..don't update, my camera don't work properly after update...wait until I try again!!!
Wait..don't update, my camera don't work properly after update...wait until I try again!!!
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
It is ok to update...forgot to press the switch
...forgot to press the switch inwards during connection of the usb cable to computer....
Funny the app said the update had been sucessfull to v.1.9 though it wasn't... I checked the firmware version in the camera but it didn't display any firmware at all for the lens, only for the camera.
I am not sure I like the way it focus now...I will test some more...
I can always go back to v.1.82....
...forgot to press the switch inwards during connection of the usb cable to computer....
Funny the app said the update had been sucessfull to v.1.9 though it wasn't... I checked the firmware version in the camera but it didn't display any firmware at all for the lens, only for the camera.
I am not sure I like the way it focus now...I will test some more...
I can always go back to v.1.82....
Last edited:
Binoseeker
Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.
I went back to v.1.82
It feels like the AF is better in v1.82 than in 1.9 but that is tested only indoors , maybe it works better outdoors....have you tested the new version ?
Anders
It feels like the AF is better in v1.82 than in 1.9 but that is tested only indoors
, maybe it works better outdoors....have you tested the new version ?Anders
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
Canon 400mm + Metabones BT2 + Canon 2X Extender III
I tested the Canon 400mm with the 2X Extender III this afternoon under bad light conditions. Cloudy dark, cold, windy.
Attached are 3 photos:
Settings: all 3 are 1/320 s. - f/5,6 (f/11 EQ.) - ISO 1600.
Distance: #1: 75m. - #2: 50m. - #3: 30m.
Tripod - IBIS - no flash
Processed and cropped in LR and PS. #3 has almost no crop at all.
No doubt the photos would have been better under good light. Closing the aperture 1 or 2 stops and lowering ISO to 400 would have helped a lot.
Even then, autofocus worked very well without much hunting and was almost as fast as it is without a TC. The 3 leftmost pins were taped of course: use at your own risk.
Those dynamic photos look pretty good, considering the light. However, I am not sure purchasing a 2X TC is a good investment. See why in the next post...
I tested the Canon 400mm with the 2X Extender III this afternoon under bad light conditions. Cloudy dark, cold, windy.
Attached are 3 photos:
Settings: all 3 are 1/320 s. - f/5,6 (f/11 EQ.) - ISO 1600.
Distance: #1: 75m. - #2: 50m. - #3: 30m.
Tripod - IBIS - no flash
Processed and cropped in LR and PS. #3 has almost no crop at all.
No doubt the photos would have been better under good light. Closing the aperture 1 or 2 stops and lowering ISO to 400 would have helped a lot.
Even then, autofocus worked very well without much hunting and was almost as fast as it is without a TC. The 3 leftmost pins were taped of course: use at your own risk.
Those dynamic photos look pretty good, considering the light. However, I am not sure purchasing a 2X TC is a good investment. See why in the next post...
Attachments
JGobeil
Nature Photographer
Canon 400mm + Metabones BT2 + Canon 2X Extender III (2)
Now let's see how the TC performs in a more controlled environment.
I've taken photos of the same object at 10-20-30-40-50 meters. I took many photos at each distance and at different apertures. I then selected the best one for each. I adjusted the Exposures to make comparing easier but didn't do any other processing. I then cropped the images to be able to compare them easily. Here are the results.
The clarity of the images decreases substantially as distance increases. It is not easy to judge because the Export function in LR has made all photos the same size - so, as we increase distance, the resolution decreases.
Comparing similar static photos taken in a controlled environment, it becomes obvious that the 2X TC degrades IQ significantly. It becomes more obvious as we increase distance.
I never expected it would be that bad... The good news is that I took more than 100 photos for this test and autofocus performed very well each time. At least, it locks very well, but is it accurate ?
Now let's see how the TC performs in a more controlled environment.
I've taken photos of the same object at 10-20-30-40-50 meters. I took many photos at each distance and at different apertures. I then selected the best one for each. I adjusted the Exposures to make comparing easier but didn't do any other processing. I then cropped the images to be able to compare them easily. Here are the results.
The clarity of the images decreases substantially as distance increases. It is not easy to judge because the Export function in LR has made all photos the same size - so, as we increase distance, the resolution decreases.
Comparing similar static photos taken in a controlled environment, it becomes obvious that the 2X TC degrades IQ significantly. It becomes more obvious as we increase distance.
I never expected it would be that bad... The good news is that I took more than 100 photos for this test and autofocus performed very well each time. At least, it locks very well, but is it accurate ?
Attachments
Similar threads
