[pinholecam]

That’s my understanding. I will look for a reference, but I think you will see that the menu option to select CDAF is disabled if I remember correctly.

It’s a fun tool for me and using the fa 31 is one of the best bits

Dumb question... I've got the adapter on my RV and I notice in some side light situations with the adapter it can cause fog/flare horizontally across the frame, or is that just me? It is reflecting off the internal surfaces of the adapter or something. It doesn't do it natively on the lenses in question, just on the RV with the Monster. (So far has happened with the FA50 1.4 and FA77 LTD)
Thanks,
Eric

Yes, I see that it's now prone to flare in my case too and I have also seen this being commented on the Monster adapter FB page.

I have not had the time to try flocking the internal of the adapter to see if it helps.

To me, so far, this has been the biggest drawback of the adapter.

[bdery]

Dumb question... I've got the adapter on my RV and I notice in some side light situations with the adapter it can cause fog/flare horizontally across the frame, or is that just me? It is reflecting off the internal surfaces of the adapter or something. It doesn't do it natively on the lenses in question, just on the RV with the Monster. (So far has happened with the FA50 1.4 and FA77 LTD)
Thanks,

Maybe try to see if that happens always with a light source in the frame, and if it changes if you move the frame slightly. I did not observe this but it's quite probably lens-dependent.

[UncleVanya]

Maybe try to see if that happens always with a light source in the frame, and if it changes if you move the frame slightly. I did not observe this but it's quite probably lens-dependent.

Another review suggested that there was a shiny part in the adapter that needed to be blacked out. One of their lenses showed reflections. I’ve not run into this myself.

[Erictator]

Maybe try to see if that happens always with a light source in the frame, and if it changes if you move the frame slightly. I did not observe this but it's quite probably lens-dependent.

Even with a light source outside the frame. It seems fine outdoors with natural light coming from everywhere, but say you are indoors, with a fireplace and windows on both sides in a dark room, you can play with exposure all day long but those side windows are going to fog a picture of the fireplace like crazy.

I even had the problem with my light tent... and I'm not using flash, I'm using standard soft box studio lights on 3 sides from outside the tent, so they are doubly softened, and it totally fogs across the frame. It's so weird, I go outside into my sun-room, throw the dog on the back of the couch in full sun, even parts where the rays hit her directly on her gold fur and I let it totally overexpose to pure white just to see when it would do... boom, nice sharp pic (other than the blown highlights), but no fog or flare at all.

Made me think I was crazy for a minute, and then started to suspect the adapter or even a light leak in the mount... but more likely internal reflections? Not sure why the effect is worse in low light with a side light though.

I'm scared to try flocking it, because true flocking in my experience (I've done model airplane cockpits, and its a process of glue and ground up fibers, messy...) is a lot of little fibers and well, it's mirrorless... so, yeah, sensor concerns with dust and crap. I used to have a little jar of very flat black paint for such things in the old days... I'd have to find a source, and find what is actually causing the issue before I go start painting things at random, heh.

Eric

[bdery]

Can you post a picture of the same scene, with the same lens, using a Pentax body and a Sony body + adapter? Also share which lens or lenses cause this? Use a tripod ideally to have exactly the same scene, handheld could cause variations which would complicate comparisons.

I would not want to add any type of fabric near a mirrorless sensor, but maybe some adhesive rough plastic surface would work?

It truly is something I have not observed. If it's a complete fogging, it could be light leaks inside, which is why I would like to see examples.

[Erictator]

Can you post a picture of the same scene, with the same lens, using a Pentax body and a Sony body + adapter? Also share which lens or lenses cause this? Use a tripod ideally to have exactly the same scene, handheld could cause variations which would complicate comparisons.

I would not want to add any type of fabric near a mirrorless sensor, but maybe some adhesive rough plastic surface would work?

It truly is something I have not observed. If it's a complete fogging, it could be light leaks inside, which is why I would like to see examples.

I'm at work and won't have time to do that kind of comparison shot for while, it's pretty crazy around here right now... but here is an example from when I listed my 150-450mm, when I took a shot in my light tent.
It is just nuts...

This was an early test shot I kept when I first got the camera, don't mind the crazy ISO. I kept stopping the lens down to see if the flare would go away. I got to f5.0 here and said WTH?! to myself. It's more pronounced on the left because I had a weaker modeling light intentionally on the right. In later shots I equaled out the modeling lights and tried a range of F stops and speeds and it never "cured" itself, the fogging was always there in some fashion. Unfortunately, I deleted most of the bad shots (61mp raws take up a lot of space, heh)


Sony ILCE-7RM5 FA 50mm F1.4 ƒ/5.0 50.0 mm 1/250 iso12800

I had the camera fairly close to the scene, I wonder if light was coming in through the side of the lens mount? I suppose I could do some experimenting with my hand or wrapping something like a black cloth around the lens base and try to get it to go away and come back with and without the base wrapped up. When I first got the Monster adapter, it was VERY stiff mounting lenses to it. With time, that has got a little smoother, but it makes me wonder if is something goofy with their mount? A WR lens with the rubber ring may not have the issue, compared to these older FA's maybe? Sorry for posing more questions than I have answers.

If one of you comes up with a simple answer that makes me look like an idiot, I won't mind, at this point I just want to get to the bottom of this. LOL! I've been shooting for a lot of years and if this were an old film camera I'd take one look at this pic and say light leak, but this digital stuff has me second guessing myself.
Thanks,
Eric

[clackers]

What could be better might be that the shutter response upon button press can be a bit faster.
I seem to find that there is a slight lag.

Great pics as usual, Pinholecam, what a great photographer you are!

But with this thing, why would there be a lag in the shutter?

[bdery]

I had the camera fairly close to the scene, I wonder if light was coming in through the side of the lens mount? I suppose I could do some experimenting with my hand or wrapping something like a black cloth around the lens base and try to get it to go away and come back with and without the base wrapped up.

It does look more like light leak than flare, especially as there are no light sources positioned directly close to the frame, and flare would be more directional. I like your idea to wrap something black and see if it helps. Side-by-side would also help a lot.

Sorry for posing more questions than I have answers.

Don't be sorry! We'll get to the bottom of this together.

[UncleVanya]

Great pics as usual, Pinholecam, what a great photographer you are!

But with this thing, why would there be a lag in the shutter?

Anytime the lens is set to an aperture that isn’t wide open the aperture motor in the adapter has to stop the lens down which takes more time than you might expect.

[clackers]

Anytime the lens is set to an aperture that isn’t wide open the aperture motor in the adapter has to stop the lens down which takes more time than you might expect.

Okay, thanks!

[UncleVanya]

I'm at work and won't have time to do that kind of comparison shot for while, it's pretty crazy around here right now... but here is an example from when I listed my 150-450mm, when I took a shot in my light tent.
It is just nuts...

This was an early test shot I kept when I first got the camera, don't mind the crazy ISO. I kept stopping the lens down to see if the flare would go away. I got to f5.0 here and said WTH?! to myself. It's more pronounced on the left because I had a weaker modeling light intentionally on the right. In later shots I equaled out the modeling lights and tried a range of F stops and speeds and it never "cured" itself, the fogging was always there in some fashion. Unfortunately, I deleted most of the bad shots (61mp raws take up a lot of space, heh)


Sony ILCE-7RM5 FA 50mm F1.4 ƒ/5.0 50.0 mm 1/250 iso12800

I had the camera fairly close to the scene, I wonder if light was coming in through the side of the lens mount? I suppose I could do some experimenting with my hand or wrapping something like a black cloth around the lens base and try to get it to go away and come back with and without the base wrapped up. When I first got the Monster adapter, it was VERY stiff mounting lenses to it. With time, that has got a little smoother, but it makes me wonder if is something goofy with their mount? A WR lens with the rubber ring may not have the issue, compared to these older FA's maybe? Sorry for posing more questions than I have answers.

If one of you comes up with a simple answer that makes me look like an idiot, I won't mind, at this point I just want to get to the bottom of this. LOL! I've been shooting for a lot of years and if this were an old film camera I'd take one look at this pic and say light leak, but this digital stuff has me second guessing myself.
Thanks,
Eric

That’s far more than I’ve seen. A tiny reflection or two perhaps - that’s crazy bad. Is it happening with a lot of lenses? That seems odd. Can you post pictures of the inside of your adapter?

[Erictator]

Well, just did some testing after watching a YouTube where the guy uses Video to test the Neewer adapter and the video readily shows light leaks, so I copied his process, plus I added my own flare test.

So I mounted my FA77 on the Monster and started recording a video with the lens cap on, and me shining a bright LED flashlight around the lens mount, and the intermediary Monster mount. I don't see any light intrusion or leaks at all. Pitch black.

For the remainder of the video, I take the lens cap off, and slowly bring the light around the front of the lens into the field of view. The lens starts to fog waaaay before the light source is into the field of view and it looks just like the picture I posted a few posts above this one. I think "Oh, nailed it!"

I looked closely inside the adapter, and I see no reflective surfaces that stand out to me.

BUT!!!!...

It occurs to me that I should complete the loop of this test, so I slap the FA77 on my K-1 and try the same video test. I'll be darned but it fogs just as badly in this test before the light gets into the frame.

FA 50 1.4, same thing.

OK, I feel like I'm loosing my mind or something. At this point I'm starting to have doubts it has anything to do with the Monster and its just something that I've never noticed before, but, how is it that all of a sudden I'm running into lighting that induces this much fog/flare when I've never had the issue before?

There is only a day or two left for me to return the Monster for refund or swap... not keeping the Monster would totally change my plans for keeping my Pentax glass.

The sad part is, I feel no further enlightened from the tests I did, just more confused than ever.

Eric

[Erictator]

Ok, some real world pictures... yes, my ever-patient model, Dolce'. These were from Day-1 when I first got the A7RV body and the Monster LA-KE1 adapter. These were before/after Dolce' got groomed that day. It's rough being a dog!

So, this is one pic that in hindsight, shows a hint of the flare/fog issue and I didn't think much about it at the time. It doesn't do much other than soften the contrast in some areas. This is out in our sunroom, so yeah, it gets a lot of light. It's one of the few pic's I've seen it in until I started this new round of shots, and I think most of those were because of goofing around with high ISO with dark backgrounds and strong side-light.


Sony ILCE-7RM5 E 50mm F1.4 ƒ/2.0 50.0 mm 1/80 iso100 (I love how Exif picks up the FA50 f1.4 as an Emount 50mm F1.4)

Another shot in the sunroom, but she is lit more from the front/front right, than from the back here, and there is no fog/flare at all.


Sony ILCE-7RM5 E 50mm F1.4 ƒ/5.6 50.0 mm 1/500 iso160

These next couple are with overhead cannister lights indoors. No issues here.


Sony ILCE-7RM5 E 77mm F1.8 ƒ/2.8 77.0 mm 1/60 iso320 (same with the FA77 1.8, it is seen as an "E" lens)


Sony ILCE-7RM5 E 77mm F1.8 ƒ/2.8 77.0 mm 1/60 iso400

This shot is by my front double doors, which have leaded glass, any rainbow effect you might see is from that, not flare. I thought it was a good demo of strong back/overhead light at weird angles that might cause the fog...but it seems reasonably controlled here.

Sony ILCE-7RM5 E 77mm F1.8 ƒ/4.5 77.0 mm 1/100 iso100

Conclusion:

Looking at these, you would think there is nothing wrong with the adapter... except when there is. LOL! I dunno, I just wanted to show that it does work fine, and the Animal Eye tracking is really good, even when the fur is hiding mode of Dolce's eye. That flare/fog is evidently just something I haven't noticed in the past with the FA50 and FA77... probably because I'm looking a lot closer and pushing a lot harder to test out the A7RV.

It seems that those lenses don't like spurious light sources accompanied by dark backgrounds and high ISO... in normal conditions its business as usual... until it isn't.

[UncleVanya]

The 61mp sensor in your camera may be more reflective and you may experience flare from reflection to the rear element of the lens. I can’t recall much about this but I do recall it was an issue in adapting lenses - with any adapter - to mirrorless
And the a7 series was know to suffer from it.

[bdery]

Looking at these, you would think there is nothing wrong with the adapter... except when there is.

Your tests indicate there's no problem with the adapter. If light leaked, it would always leak (and you would have seen it with your flashlight test).

The lenses are causing the flare.

Did you pull the hood on the FA77?

The FA50 is known to be pretty sensitive to flare, which is why some people preferred the F50 F1.7 because its front element is recessed. Otherwise, a hood for the FA50 would do marvels.