Skip to main content

Commlite Canon EOS to Sony E adapter

I possess two Canon DSLRs and two Sony mirrorless compact system cameras. The big full frame Canon I find too heavy to carry around, and, outdoors,  I tend to use the Sony most of the time. However I have a small collection of good Canon lenses that might be useful on the smaller camera.

You can buy cheap adapters to fit Canon lenses to Sony cameras, but they do not allow adjustment of the lens aperture, auto focus, or in lens image stabilisation. Alternatively you can spend rather a lot of cash and buy a top of the range adapter, e.g. Metabones, which will give full electronic contact between camera and lens.

I don't think that I will be making that much use of my Canon lenses on the Sony, as carrying heavy full frame lenses rather defeats the purpose of using a lightweight compact camera. However I would like to make occasional use of them, possibly in connection with a tripod, and the lens that I would particularly like to fit is my Sigma  APO 100-300 f4 . I used to do quite a bit of wild bird photography and that was my fitment of choice, but, recently I have concentrated on collecting commercially saleable photos for stock and that lens has taken a back seat. The Sigma is very good indeed between 100 and 200 mm, but the edges are not brilliant at 300. I am hoping that the cropped image available on my Sony a6500 might be more usable.

I contacted Sigma to see if their Canon to Sony converter would work with that lens, but the answer was no. Actually the only feature that I considered essential was the ability to control the lens aperture from the camera, autofocus and image stabilisation (for my Canon lenses) would be good, but I can live without.

Enter the Commlite adapter that comes with electrical connection between lens and body and costs the very reasonable sum of £50, a fraction of the price of the competition. For that money I decided to take the plunge.


Despite reading some adverse comment on the Internet, the adapter appears well constructed and the finish is good. It comes with a detachable tripod foot, and users are recommended to use that rather than the fitment on the camera.

It's a tight fit on the a6500 which has a metal bayonet connector, but slides easily onto the NEX 6, which has a plastic bayonet.


The Sigma 100-300 f4 dominates the scene.


Does it work?

Well to date I have found that the adapter will enable adjustment of the aperture on all of the lenses that I have tried, Canon 24-105 f4 L, 70-200 f4L, Sigma 10-20 DC HSM f4-5.6 and Sigma 100-300 f4. From my point of view that's fine, I shoot mainly manual focus, so my primary need is satisfied.

Can you autofocus? I've not experimented a great deal with this, but there is some degree of autofocus possible, it's slow, it involves some hunting, and it's not always accurate. I would not feel at all confident trying to shoot moving targets in this way.

Does the in lens stabilisation work? My only Canon lens with this feature is the 24-105, and I am not convinced that the stabilisation is working properly. I've not tested it extensively, but I seem to have a problem capturing sharp images at 1/15th. However it's early days, I need to do some proper testing. The big Sigma will generally be used on a tripod, so this is not much of an issue for me.

Conclusion - for around £50 this adapter has given my 100-300 f4 Sigma lens a new lease of life, money well spent. It won't suit everyone, but if, like me, you are happy to focus manually (and with the excellent EVF on the a6500 that's a pleasure) it could be a good buy.

11-1-2018

















Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sony Zeiss 16-70 f4

Wanting to cut down on the number of lenses that I cart around, and having suffered the failure of my Sony 16-50 zoom, I decided to try the top of the (crop format) range Zeiss badged Sony 16-70 f4. This is not a cheap lens, I paid £605 but with a potential cashback from Sony.

First the good news. It appears very well constructed, and is relatively small and light given the specification. The focus is very fast and accurate coupled with the Sony a6500 body, and the centre of the images produced is biting sharp.  The colour produced is pleasantly neutral, the photos look good.

The not so good news. The edge performance is variable, I would say barely adequate to poor. The lenses I hoped to replace with this Zeiss included a Sigma 19mm f2.8 ( cost £100) and an ancient Pentax 28mm f2.8 M from film days - the copy used here cost me £25. These two optics are the weakest amongst those that I regularly use.

So to the comparison. All tests using a tripod with a 2 sec delay and at f8. I have t…

Sony 28-70 FF lens on a6500

Since my kit 16-50 lens failed and was pronounced unrepairable I've been looking for a replacement walk around zoom, or, in my case, a lightweight lens that I can carry when cycling. I tried the Zeiss 16-70, but as my previous post here demonstrated, that lens was fatally flawed - as well as being expensive. I was persuaded to try the much cheaper 28-70 lens (cost £234 new) that is supplied as part of the standard kit on Sony full frame cameras.

Let's give it its full title, the  Sony SEL2870 E Mount - Full Frame 28-70 mm F3.5-5.6

There are things to admire about this lens. It's compact and lightweight and handles well on the a6500. Despite being of plastic construction, it does appear well made, with a metal mount and a robust feel to it. I liked using it.

Mounted on a tripod and shooting test pictures against a brick wall the lens is OK, nothing like as sharp at the edges as in the centre, but usable. Here are a few crops from a test shot at 28 mm and f8.  The upper imag…

Using an enlarger lens and a Sony a6500 to copy negatives

This is very much a work in progress. I've assembled a collection of components and examined the feasibility, but not done any proper testing. Hopefully you will find it interesting.

I have a large collection of negatives and transparencies dating back to the early 1960s, and I have scanned quite a number of them using an Epson 4990 Photo flatbed scanner. The results are OK, particularly for 120 film, but not so great for 35 mm. Sadly the film related section of the scanner failed recently, possibly due to overwork or maybe just old age, so I was interested in finding an alternative.

If you have a good macro lens read no further, but if, like me, you don't possess a macro lens, then what is the next best thing? Well possibly an old enlarger lens. They were designed to provide the best possible resolution over a flat surface ( the negative) and project onto another flat surface (photo paper), both at close quarters, so, theoretically, they should be well suited to scanning.

The…