# So I think I'll "make" (modify) me that EOS M Focal Reducer w/AF & Aperture :D



## Khufu (Jun 6, 2015)

the optics aren't great but I have an EF-NEX focal reducer for Sony cameras and I'm selling on the disappointing A7S, think I might see if I can use the connectors and bayonet plate off my first (dismantled/dead) 22/2 and get this thing autofocusing and controlling the aperture just like the standard adapter does... and with a few millimetres shaved off, as is the go with focal reducers!

It's a Viltrox, the glass is alright and the illustration in the manual is actual of the adapter on an EOS M body, despite never being sold with the EF-M mount! 

I've read before that the connectors are just straight-through wiring on the EF/EF-M adapter, I can always unscrew mine for clarification...

Anyone seeing any obvious oversights or potential pitfalls I'm missing?!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2015)

The contacts may be spring loaded, watch for that.

Whats wrong with the a7s? I was sort of interested in one for low light photography, I don't do video. The price kept me from buying one.


----------



## Khufu (Jun 6, 2015)

I've had a little rant about it on a thread in the technique forum asking people about equipment to shoot a low light/glow UV type thing... and apologised for it, I just had to vent 

In short; I don't believe, from my own experience (and backed up by a more technical explanation I found online) that these cameras as suitable for low light photography where you wish to produce an image that actually portrays a low light image... It simply doesn't sample enough data from the first few stops of light. The posterizing/banding is embarrassing and pretty pathetic, I'm really, really disappointed... Apparently someone, somewhere thought "everyone's into this HDR jazz now, so let's take few samples from lots of 'stops' and people can have bright and dark things crushed into a low contrast image!"... So, no, Low Key photography, low light photography with the intention of boosting or even identifying things from the darkest few of it's apparent fourteen or fifteen stops? Reminds me of playing with MS Paint on Windows 3.... Honestly, I wanted this to be awesome... I'm also shocked by their JPEGS, as someone who likes to use jpegs for quick life/family pics from capable cameras... Splodgy, artifact ridden, eugh...
just got me an EOS M2 for beans from Japan on eBay, way more impressed with it


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 7, 2015)

Khufu said:


> I've had a little rant about it on a thread in the technique forum asking people about equipment to shoot a low light/glow UV type thing... and apologised for it, I just had to vent
> 
> In short; I don't believe, from my own experience (and backed up by a more technical explanation I found online) that these cameras as suitable for low light photography where you wish to produce an image that actually portrays a low light image... It simply doesn't sample enough data from the first few stops of light. The posterizing/banding is embarrassing and pretty pathetic, I'm really, really disappointed... Apparently someone, somewhere thought "everyone's into this HDR jazz now, so let's take few samples from lots of 'stops' and people can have bright and dark things crushed into a low contrast image!"... So, no, Low Key photography, low light photography with the intention of boosting or even identifying things from the darkest few of it's apparent fourteen or fifteen stops? Reminds me of playing with MS Paint on Windows 3.... Honestly, I wanted this to be awesome... I'm also shocked by their JPEGS, as someone who likes to use jpegs for quick life/family pics from capable cameras... Splodgy, artifact ridden, eugh...
> just got me an EOS M2 for beans from Japan on eBay, way more impressed with it


Besides mf sensor, I doubt there is another 35mm sensor camera can out perform a7s in low light at this time.

Good luck with eos-m. Almost forgot, learn how to shoot raw


----------



## Khufu (Jun 7, 2015)

cheers, Dylan, but your selective interpretation of my commenting on Sony's poor jpegs doesn't change the fact that Sony records fewer samples per stop to achieve a broader dynamic range with smaller file sizes, even when nothing reaches those ranges, producing abysmal images when only requiring a lower, standard, non-crushed dynamic range like, say, a "poor DR Canon sensor" with more usable Jpegs than Sony's RAW files... You simply can't shoot dim things coming out of darkness with this camera, it's only good for a crushed DR to show ~14 stops within a low contrast image, in my experience and, as I'm led to believe, out of necessity, to work within the utilised file sizes and bit-rates.. (yes, RAW..)

I found sample pictures on my phone (Sony Xperia) with terrible posterized skies and "shot on a77" in the corner - it's obviously not just the a7s - and they are Sony's promotional shots


----------

