I'd like to try and understand the differences between MFT specific lenses and why I should or should not invest in them over EF-S or other standard camera mount lenses. What are the advantages/disadvantages of MFT lenses on something like the BMPCC? With a mount adaptor, is there any actual difference and if so, what are those differences?
MFT Lenses vs. other mount types
- Thread starter DDK
- Start date
Hi DDK - If you get the Pocket Cinema Camera, with its active MFT mount, and you use MFT system lenses, the camera's built in meter will set the aperture automatically.
If you prefer setting your aperture manually, you can use MFT manual lenses (from SLR Magic, Voigtlander or Rokinon), APS-C lenses from any manufacturer with the appropriate adapter (as long as those lenses have manual aperture rings, or you buy an adapter with manual aperture - or you buy an expensive powered adapter).
Because Canon EF-S lenses do not have manual aperture rings, it is a challenge to adapt them to MFT mount. That said, Rokinon/Samyang cine lenses for EF mount do have manual aperture ringsl and can easily be adapted to MFT mount with an inexpensive adapter.
Hope this is helpful,
Bill
Last edited:
The big advantage of EF is the multitude of cameras that accept it. Glass can last a lifetime, lots of guys here are using 30-40 year old lenses today. Canon DSLR's, Canon Cinema Cameras, Blackmagic Cinema and Production cameras all use EF natively and it adapts well to Sony's mount on their cinema cameras and it adapts well to MFT.
As of now, the only cameras that are worth considering for video that use MFT are the GH2/GH3 and the BPCC.
That said, nobody knows the future, but seeing as how camera bodies are outdated a few months after their release these days and glass last forever, it's smart to plan to be future proof. When your BMCC doesn't cut it anymore and you have a suite of EF glass, there are a lot more camera systems to work with.
Assuming we're still using glass haha. Read an article the other day demo-ing a lensless camera with an infinite DOF. Who knows?
As of now, the only cameras that are worth considering for video that use MFT are the GH2/GH3 and the BPCC.
That said, nobody knows the future, but seeing as how camera bodies are outdated a few months after their release these days and glass last forever, it's smart to plan to be future proof. When your BMCC doesn't cut it anymore and you have a suite of EF glass, there are a lot more camera systems to work with.
Assuming we're still using glass haha. Read an article the other day demo-ing a lensless camera with an infinite DOF. Who knows?
EF-S is Canon's crop-sensor-only lens mount. Cameras that accept EF-S also accept EF.
Cameras that accept EF don't always accept EF-S however. Canon's full frame cameras and I believe their cinema cameras too only accept EF.
It's all about the distance form the sensor and the coverage of the sensor. EF, being designed for full frame, will still cover a crop sensor.
Typically, it's better to buy EF since it works for both. There are only a few good quality EF-S lenses.
Cameras that accept EF don't always accept EF-S however. Canon's full frame cameras and I believe their cinema cameras too only accept EF.
It's all about the distance form the sensor and the coverage of the sensor. EF, being designed for full frame, will still cover a crop sensor.
Typically, it's better to buy EF since it works for both. There are only a few good quality EF-S lenses.
Paul is correct. I don't know of any native EF mount camera that will accept EF-S lenses. All native Ef-s mount cameras will accept EF glass though. On the 5D (all marks) adapting an EF-S lens will result in a failure to cover the sensor if using a stand off adapter or the mirror will hit the lens. The only thing that EF-S lenses have over many EF lenses is price. Even if I had a crop sensor camera, I would not buy EF-S glass.
Hi Paul - As a micro 4/3 guy, I would say it a little differently. The big advantage of MFT is the multitude of cameras* that accept it...as of now, the only cameras worth considering for video that use EF are the BMCC EF/BMPC and the 5DMK3 RAW."
*hacked GH1/GH2, G6, GH3, BPCC, BMCC MFT
Bill
Haha, people have the preferences for sure, but aside from what you listed the C100 (iffy) but C300 and C500 for sure are worth considering, plus the 1DC and every other Canon DSLR. I know your opinions towards the Canons in general, but it's hard to argue against their high end stuff.
Plus, the Sony series of Cinema cameras. There are a few that say they've had good experiences with adapting MFT to NEX, but the majority say don't do it. If you get it to focus properly you'll see vignetting in the corners. So, considering. The NEX mount FS100, FS700 (with a soon to showcase 4K and RAW Upgrade) and FZ mount F3, F%, and F55 that all take EF with a cheap adapter.
Oh, and RED.
----
Now, most of your cheap glass that matches the price point of a BPCC probably won't end up on a RED or F5 or C500, but it could. I've seen plenty of shots of Rokinon glass on an Epic and it looks great. You can always upgrade, sure, but it's doable.
Just to be clear, I'm not trashing MFT mount cameras. I've ordered one myself! I just don't see the sense in limiting my options with MFT glass when there's super solid, manual EF to choose from and I can use it on way more sets.
It also depends on preference and what you intend to use it for. If you want to get into photography, MFT is a great choice. Not to mention, manual MFT glass will work on the BMCC, not to mention the upcoming Digital Bolex(not a fan, but hey, its going to be out there). The Ikonoskop also shoots with a smaller format (S16) but I don't think you can adapt MFT lenses to that cam. But, like PaulGriffith said, EF glass gives you more flexibility if you want to move up to bigger formats/sensors.