100 Replies to “UPGRADE Your LENSES AND SAVE $$$”

  1. Welcome to 2013 Matti! Hahaha. Canon lenses work well with Sony and m43 bodies well because of the similar AF screw system. Fuji with Nikon lenses can play pretty nice with each for the same reason from my understanding.
    Since the A7RII Canon lenses have been decent to excellent in stills on Sony bodies with phase detection points (A7SII doesn't have any so manual focus only really).
    Commlite, Sigma and Viltrox are the other adapters worth considering. I have the Sigma MC11 and a couple of Commlite ones that work well on the A7RII and A6300. My older A7 and it's just best with manual adapters which are like a tenner.
    If you need to vlog then you're best served with native Sony lenses especially the crop lens 10-18mm with its IS and the fact at about 14mm it covers the FF image circle. Of course the Sony A7RII/III/A7III/A9 do great crop/Super35 video as well.
    Most live shots on my Instagram that are long range are taken with the Canon 70-200 L f4 on the A7RII or A6300. At edshots

  2. Hello. Amateur photographer fan here, asking a newbie, nerdy, rookie question, sorry. But… Is it possible/useful to attach a M43 lenses to an APS-C body camera? Does it make sense?
    I mean… M43 lenses are very much affordable . Thanks for reading this.

  3. If you’re doing paid work with your Sony and you sold your canon bodies, do yourself a favor, sell your canon glass and get native Sony lenses. Auto focus was not ready for pro use. I sold all my canon gear and slowly got the Sony equivalents. Couldn’t have been happier. Performance is light years better.

  4. Matti I have a few thoughts about the speedboosters:

    You mentioned they increase your F stop but actually it is called T stop, because the F number is the ratio between the lens front element diameter where the light is collected and the rear element which projects it to the sensor, and theese parameters do not change. T number is amount of light hitting the sensor. By adding a speedbooster your sensor will be able to see more of the image that the lens is projecting to it, so it is creating a bigger field of view, but at the same time it makes the bokeh effect smaller, altough more light hits the sensor. So you can take photos with faster shutter speeds while retaining the brightness needed, that's why they're called speedboosters. The other problem with speedbooster is the myth you seem to support by saying that it gives similar looks like a bigger sensor, while it is true in case of the field of view parameter, the more important background compression or so called depth of field effect can not be achieved by adding a speedbooster to a smaller sensor camera. The myth lies in the sensor size. The smaller the sensor the closer you have to go to your subject to reach you minimum focus distance. The closer you are to the minimum focus distance the bigger the bokeh effect will be.

    Let me explain this, If I take a midshot portrait with the A7 on F1.8 the background will be blured out nicely, to get the same amount of background blur as the A7 is capable of I almost have to fill the frame with the models face using the GH4, that's how big is the difference between fullframe and microfourthirds.

    I use the Sigma 18-35 Art Canon EF version with a 0,71X speedbooster on my GH4 and also on my A7 but with an MC11 adapter

    In terms of field of view the A7 gives 35mm on the zoom end ( thanks to the over engineering at Sigma this lens covers 95% off fullframe sensors at 35mm position! )
    and the GH4 math is the following: (35×2)x0,71= 49.7 mm (all lenses are specified to full frame even if it is made for smaller sensors so you have to apply the sensors crop factor in this case 2x)

    As I said before the F number does not change, but the light transmittion does so it is T 1.2 on the GH4 and T 1.8 on the A7 which is 1 and a quarter stop of increase when using speedbooster
    To easily visualize this, it is two steps of ISO so it helps reduce noise.

    What is important about speedboosters is that some times you need deeper depth of field, because you don't always want to blur out everything, to do this with a fullframe camera you have to go around f5.6 or f8 and this would cause a lot of light loss, so you would have to crank up the ISO so hard that your shots may get noise. In this situation a smaller sensor is more suitable becuase it has a deeper depth of field, thus showing you more information in focus altough you're aputure is wide open, plus the speedbooster gives you even some more light, so you can keep your ISO levels safe.

    Another advantage is when you want to shoot upclose/intimate, for example textures of a metal product, eyes of a model or small insects maybe, to do this with a fullframe camera you have to buy expensive macro lenses, with a microfourthird you just go closer and take the shot

    The last trick is not about speedboosters but simple lens adapters, if you need some extra reach just take your canon ef ( fullframe ) lens and adapt it to a microfourthird camera and you'll have twice the reach of course with half the field of view, this is because the small sensor only see the middle of the projected image which is by the way the sharpest part 😉
    This way you can have a crazy fast F 2.0 270mm lens if you get an 135mm F 2.0 Samyang EF version and adapt it to a GH4/5!

    A common mistake is to multiply the F number with the crop ratio as you do it with the field of view parameter, but in reality you can have that big amount of compression as the original number promises but only in limited situations when you can be close to the minimum focus distance.

    PS: I hate to be the geek who always brings this topic up, but as an important educational channel I feel it is your (and our as a community) responsibilty to get things right and clean, I'm not saying this is the absolute truth what I just wrote but the best of my knowledge. I hope you find this topic interesting and I would love to see a whole episode about it, your editor makes such a great visuals I bet he could make it easily understandable. Maybe it would fit in Peter's almost two minutes of Tuesday lessons as well 🙂

    Thank You

  5. Love the idea of an adapter but unreliable autofocus is a huge concern. If AF sucks than essentially so does the camera and lens, making your several thousand dollar set up worse than a Canon rebel t3i with a IS kit lens.

  6. The nice thing about EF to EF-M (Canon M50) is that with the official adapter and the Viltrox 0.71x speedbooster, is that both are very close to native lenses in autofocus (at least in my testing so far).

  7. I have used the Metabones Speedbooster on my GH5 for over a year now with a Sigma 18-35mm, overall it's been good but some issues too. As you say, autofocus in video mode is basically trash, I had to buy a native panasonic lense for the cases I need that. The worst issue I had, was that the adapter doesn't properly mount to the camera. When it's locked in place, I can still twist the adapter between the camera, so when I have it mounted on my tripod as the mount point is on the speedbooster itself the camera will rotate a couple of degrees with a slight bump, pretty annoying.

  8. Sigma mc-11 is a way better adapter when using canon lenses on the Sony from personal experience. autofocus is always gonna be pretty spotty for video, but I was actually blown away by the AF for photos.

  9. hello Matti i really enjoy your videos! and thank you for sharing !
    any chance that you will post a video about your sony a7iii PP and setting ?

  10. I would have thought this was very old news. I had a metabones for canon on an a7R something of other when it first came out like 3 or 4 yrs ago. Hated the camera, tried the Sony top model twice, confirmed hate each time LOL Now use combo 5dsr and 1dx2.

  11. Speed boosters are awesome, I use a viltrox on my EM-5 MK II mainly with the Sigma 18-35. it works awesome. it was a lot cheaper than the metabones

  12. Matti Absolutely love your Videos and what really makes me upset is I wish just one of them would get it done right where you don't have to jump through hoops.But the three that you just mentioned are Awesome and always enjoy your tips.Just like they said they were going to come out with New and still have one thing or another but Thanks so much for sharing always enjoy Deb 👍✌

  13. Have you test those adapters with advanced mode?? Green mode won't work with video shooting, only with stills!!!! Would you like to test both of them with all lenses and give us your impression in a dedicated vlog??

  14. News flash for you, Matti: Canon EF lenses work best on Canon R Mount adapters. No autofocus issues. No compromises. And two of them at least are much cheaper than the imperfect Metabones. You can save even more $$$! 😉

  15. Think from now on I'm just gonna invest in Canon lenses and get adapters for any system I change to unless there are specific lenses I need from that particular system. Easier to track the lenses I get that way hahaha.

  16. Adapted lenses are pretty much useless for any kind of vlogging or action shots. They only work reliably in manual focus. There's no avoiding spending the money on native lenses if you decide to switch camera brands. Just my opinion 😀

  17. Just started my own business in videography! An extra camera would be very helpfull, would love to win the fujifilm.😍

  18. Commlite is great if you don't care about the autofocus or ibis (not sure how metabones compares to it on ibis). Been using it for a long time now with my wide canon F/4 L16-35 and 50mm, no problem other than ibis not being ideal handheld.

  19. Outside the topics, what have you done to your left arm brother? Hope its just a temporary thing, unless I did not notice before. Look after yourself and each other!
    Cheers!!! Dawid…

  20. I tried my Canon lens on a rented A7iii with frustrating results. When it worked the photos were awesome but I missed too many shots… so far adapted canon lens onto the EOS R everything worked perfectly. Couldn’t switch to Sony but I tried.

  21. I always had confusions with adapters, it's all clear now..Well explained.!!!
    Thank you Matt
    And all hail Potato Jet 😉

  22. I switched from a 5dIII with the holy trinity of lenses, all canon mounts. I eventually switched to the Sony A7RIII and used metabones adapters (and i tried the sigma adapter) and was SO disappointed. Images looked good, but autofocus almost never worked properly (I shoot concerts, so a lot of lowlight situations). If I was manually focusing more often I probably wouldnt have had an issue tbh, but i ended up selling everything and swapping to sony lenses.

  23. I tried this lens adapter. if you rely on auto focus at all, good luck! Complete and total garbage. There’s no good way to use Canon lenses On an A7III with AF…

  24. Hey man, question: you mentioned you buy Canon lenses used. Have you ever gotten screwed on a purchase by buying a defective one or is that not really something to worry much about? How do you go about making smart buying decisions when it comes to used glass?

  25. Not just a little warning, but a BIG warning. Have been using the Metabones adapter on my A7sii for a while, but autofocus is so unreliable, you’ll ruin any shot within 200ms. If you need autofocus, go native.

  26. Man I really like your videos! You, Potato Jet and Petter McKinnon are the best on YouTube. Hope to see a colab between you all.

  27. Does anyone find any issue with speedboosters lowering the quality/resolution of their class? Putting more glass in front of a lens could, i think, potentially alter the characteristics of the lens your using, maybe?

  28. Yo matti, when entering the competition, the Gleam app asks for access to delete, edit videos and messages from the users account. You might want to check that out.

  29. Matti – I"m surprised you had such a positive response to autofocus in video mode using the Metabones adapter and a Canon lens. I too thought I could survive using the Metbones and my trusted Canon lenses with my A6500 and A7iii but was disappointed with the results. Nothing comes close to a native Sony lens on a Sony body or a native Canon lens on a Canon body. For photo, I can see the advantage but for video, no way. The hunting and pecking the Canon lens does when using the adapter on a Sony camera, not to mention the stepping of the motors and the sound is a non-starter for me.

  30. Matti please try the Fringer adapter with your canon lenses on the Fujifilms. I would love to see the performance. They are not speed boosters though

  31. I recently started using Canon vintage glass on my Fuji mirrorless. Horray for primes for cheap. 😀 Takomar Lenses start at $50. :-O

  32. Actually Speedbooster like that for m43 aren't glasses which magnify the image. It's quite the opposite.
    They are called focal reducer because they focus the light coming from a bigger sensor lens onto a smaller sensor.
    By doing that you have more light hitting the sensor. It's like a projector. If you increase the size of the image projected on the wall it will be more dim. If you make the image much smaller the brightness is increased because the light flux is more concentrated.
    You also have a gain in sharpness and a reduction in aberration. There's a nice article on the web about that 🙂

  33. I can the Sigma adapter when switching to Sony. It worked great with Sigma lenses (obviously) but with most of the canon lenses too including fast af.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *