Adapting M lenses for Canon EOS R5/6 cameras

[Monz]

Dear Friends,
Has anyone here tried adapting M lenses on to an EOS R body? If so, which adapter would you recommend? I have come across versions from Novoflex, Metabones, Urth and there are cheap ones on Amazon as well.
Thanks.
--
Monz

 

[Archlich]

As usual, avoid the cheap and generic ones. I'm sticking with Kipon and they're of very high quality (also the lightest among the competition).

 

[brusby]

I bought a few cheap adapters off eBay and normally use the one that fits best. But they all work just fine even if some are not the tightest fit. Sorry I don't recall the brand name right now. 'Was much cheaper than buying just one of the more well known brands.

Edit: I found the name on the close focus adapter below - Fotofox

Couple of test shots from the first outing with EOS RP and both modern and vintage M lenses. Just driving through the French Quarter and shooting out the window, mainly to see if I'd be getting any of the horrid corner discolorations and smearing I'd heard so much about.

I really like the combination of EOS R and M lenses. Nice and light, easy to use and decent results.

Good luck!

21mm Leica Super Elmar on RP
_MG_8249 by Brusby, on Flickr


35mm Summaron on RP
_MG_8247 - Summer Sunset French Quarter New Orleans by Brusby, on Flickr


And one Canon 50mm f1.2 LTM to M mount on EOS R (shot at max ISO to enhance grain) This adapter has close focus ability which really comes in handy.

Vickie 7064 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have RP. Using Haoge from Amazon adapter. 50mm and 35 1.4 works no issues. RP can't handle well CV CS 21 f4 LTM, but it has nothing to do with adapter.

 

[Monz]

As usual, avoid the cheap and generic ones. I'm sticking with Kipon and they're of very high quality (also the lightest among the competition).

I haven’t come across Kipon adapters although I knew they made manual focus EOS R lenses. I’ll check them out. Thanks.

 

[Monz]

@brusby
Those pictures look pretty good to me. Maybe a hint of magenta on upper left with the 21mm lens? I’ll check out the Fotofox adapter. Thank you.

 

[Monz]

I have RP. Using Haoge from Amazon adapter. 50mm and 35 1.4 works no issues. RP can't handle well CV CS 21 f4 LTM, but it has nothing to do with adapter.

Thanks Ko.Fe. I have the 21mm/f4 LTM lens. It doesn’t behave too well on the M10 either. I was hoping to use the VM 15mm SWH version 3 on the EOS R5. This lens works great on the M10 with no magenta colour issues. I wonder if it will behave as well on the R5.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Canon will have RF 16 2.8 AF compact lens available in next few weeks. Very reasonably priced. I use me 16-35 2.8 ii at 16 often.

 

[Monz]

Canon will have RF 16 2.8 AF compact lens available in next few weeks. Very reasonably priced. I use me 16-35 2.8 ii at 16 often.

The 16Mm f2.8 RF lens sounds very interesting. I also have that EF 16-35 f2.8L ii lens which is excellent but very bulky.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

The 16Mm f2.8 RF lens sounds very interesting. I also have that EF 16-35 f2.8L ii lens which is excellent but very bulky.

Same here.

I'm considering of letting go to all of Ls I have. Too bulky on RP.
Already added 24-105 USM RF to replace 24-105 F4 L. Got it new, never used for 270 USD. Already have 50 1.8 RF and will add 35 1.8 IS RF (also not expedite on used market) and most likely 16 2.8 RF to replace 16-35 2.8 II EF.

 

[Monz]

Same here.

I'm considering of letting go to all of Ls I have. Too bulky on RP.
Already added 24-105 USM RF to replace 24-105 F4 L. Got it new, never used for 270 USD. Already have 50 1.8 RF and will add 35 1.8 IS RF (also not expedite on used market) and most likely 16 2.8 RF to replace 16-35 2.8 II EF.

How are you finding the 50mm f1.8? I was thinking of getting that for its compactness.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

How are you finding the 50mm f1.8? I was thinking of getting that for its compactness.

I have 50 1.8 EF original (from Japan with L like pouch). I had 50 1.8 EF II. Both kind of dull on colors.
RF version is more punchy in colors, sharpness OK. Just like any STM economy lens, I guess.
Putty they made 50L such overpriced and big. I miss 50L EF unique rendering.

RF 50 1.8 and 35 1.8 have same defect on RP. If focused close, they could be in stuck to focus on greater distance. They share same crappy focus implementation as in old 35 f2 EF. Tube which has to move in and out significantly on closer distance.

And 24-105 STM RF as acting up on 105 and close distances.

Other side of cheap price...
But since I do not work for media it is not so big deal. Every time I'm checking alternatives to RF, Canon keeps me by its low prices for STM RF lenses. They are cheapest on the market for FF mirrorless, it seems.

 

[brusby]

How are you finding the 50mm f1.8? I was thinking of getting that for its compactness.

The new RF 50mm f1.8 and RF 35mm I like quite a lot because of their very small size -- at least compared to the new RF f1.2 offerings -- pretty low price, and very nice image quality. Here's a couple of images from my first outing with the RF 50mm, both shot at max aperture, within a few seconds of each other.

_OSR4844 by Brusby, on Flickr

_OSR4870 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[brusby]

The RF 35mm f1.8 macro has pretty strong vignetting wide open, but not too bad for portraits. Same shoot just a bit later in the day. Natural light at dusk. Kinda deceptive cause it was almost too dark to focus and had a pretty strong red component.

_OSR5738 by Brusby, on Flickr

 

[Archiver]

@brusby - I suspect that in the course of releasing a new mount system which is intended to replace the old, manufacturers will have to make decent lenses, even the midrange/not pro versions. The Canon RF 50 and 35 f1.8s seem to be in that category.

 

[brusby]

@brusby - I suspect that in the course of releasing a new mount system which is intended to replace the old, manufacturers will have to make decent lenses, even the midrange/not pro versions. The Canon RF 50 and 35 f1.8s seem to be in that category.

The release timing seems to have been done to maximize profits with the high dollar lenses released first. Frankly the new inexpensive lenses are so good I suspect many users would have been satisfied with them and would not have purchased the faster, more expensive models if they would have been available earlier.

I'm very pleasantly surprised by the build, image quality, focusing and handling of the new lenses, particularly considering the prices.

I also have the new, faster f1.2 siblings and if it weren't for minor but sometimes important differences in bokeh, I could be completely happy with the slower, less expensive variants. In fact, if I have to hike more than a short distance with a camera bag, as was the case for the shoot that produced the images above, I often choose the lighter lenses just for weight savings. They really are very nice.

 

[Archiver]

The release timing seems to have been done to maximize profits with the high dollar lenses released first. Frankly the new inexpensive lenses are so good I suspect many users would have been satisfied with them and would not have purchased the faster, more expensive models if they would have been available earlier.

I'm very pleasantly surprised by the build, image quality, focusing and handling of the new lenses, particularly considering the prices.

I also have the new, faster f1.2 siblings and if it weren't for minor but sometimes important differences in bokeh, I could be completely happy with the slower, less expensive variants. In fact, if I have to hike more than a short distance with a camera bag, as was the case for the shoot that produced the images above, I often choose the lighter lenses just for weight savings. They really are very nice.

Makes a lot of sense, and Panasonic seem to be following the same strategy of expensive lenses first, moderate lenses second. I have the Lumix 50/1.8 and I'm not sure if a f1.4 version that weighs almost three times as much is worth it to me.

Nikon went the middle way and released high quality f1.8 primes and a f4 zoom first, then the f2.8 zooms and the extra expensive 50mm primes. Sony had a range of f2.8 primes and f4 zooms at first, then made faster midrange primes and expensive Zeiss primes, and have lately been making more G Master primes.

Canon's high end RF lenses look great, but darn are they large, heavy and expensive. They don't even have a 35/1.4 L yet, which is kind of odd.

 

[Monz]

Thanks Ko.Fe, brusby and Archiver for your comments and images.

I think I'll get that RF 50mm/f1.8 for its compactness and decent image quality. I do have quite a few EF lenses from the DSLR era and don't want too much duplication, so will hold back from getting 35 RF for now 🙂

 

[Monz]

UPDATE:
Hi Guys. In the end I got a URTH M to EOS RF adapter. I must say, for the price (only £30), the fit and finish is excellent. I tried the adapter with several lenses (VM 15mm f4.5 v3, Zeiss 25mm f2.8, Leica 28mm f2, 50mm f1.4, 75mm f1.4) and in all cases the results are pretty good. Even with VM 15mm v3 there was no significant colour shifts (see attached picture). Focusing using magnification/ peaking takes some getting used to.