Quite frankly, it would be a miracle if the NEX-7, focal reducer, Canon 50mm f/1.2 combination would give satisfactory results. You are combining an extremely fast lens, a focal reducer fraught with optical problems and one of the most finicky sensors available. This is not going to work.
Besides, the NEX-7 is small and well built, but the viewfinder is not as fine as a ground glass by a large margin, noisy when it's dark, difficult to see with glasses when the sun shines, and with approximative colours and contrast. The user interface is different to anything sensible, the sensor is noisy at high isos and very sensitive to angled rays (meaning very finicky with wide angle lenses, color shifts, extra vignetting, etc...). AF is so slow as to be unusable with Sony lenses and the old adapter (the one using contrast detection) and this is not going to be better with Canon lenses on the Metabone adapter. Peaking may be used, but is not very precise and, in my view, distracting.
This being said, the NEX-7 is small and light. Less so with a 50mm f/1.2 on it, BTW.
Hi Jerome,
I think you misunderstand me. The usage with the Nex 7 would be with my Pentax Takumar 50mm 1.4 wide open. Not with a Canon L lens. This 50 year old lens was chosen for its dreamy rendition wide open not modern day sharpness and contrast so that losing 'IQ' does not bother me in the slightest.
I have never been able to focus the Tak accurately on my (actually your!) 5Dc without a viewfinder magnifier used on tripod. This was even with the canon EE-S screen and a Leica R9 split screen, the lens wide open is such low contrast and there is so little DOF that my eyes just cannot do it. With the magnifier and a tripod I can pretty much nail it every time with either of those screens but I cannot manage when shooting handheld. My eye sight is just not up to it.
So I am in a situation where to gain a certain specific 'look' for my photography (f1.4 or faster with significant coma/halation) I can either use a Canon 50L (very expensive and requires a 5D3 to focus accurately), my Canon 50mm 1.4 however the bokeh only 'works' in flat light, it's ugly with specular highlights, or my 50 year old Takumar which has an incredible rendition but requires a solution better than that of the current optical viewfinders. There is one another option, a Leica M with a 50mm summilux pre-asph but as yet I've not decided to sell body parts so as to afford the necessary mortgage!
I believe that peaking and the Takumar is the cheapest and best way to enable the look I am trying to obtain without resorting to using a tripod and magnifier. I have tried the Magic Lantern peaking and it was wildly innaccurate. I would like to test the Sony to see if it is any better with this lens.
From my reading of the white paper and the numerous discussions on various forums including by those who have them and the designer, the IQ loss due to the metabones adaptor does not seem to be close to being 'a focal reducer fraught with optical problems' as you suggest. Could you expand on this point?
I realise the AF will be close to unuseable on the Sony, this does not bother me as it is not what the camera will be used for.
Can you expand also on the sensor being 'finnicky'? I have been working for a while with raw files from the camera that I have downloaded from Imaging Resource and DPReview over various ISO's and lighting. My conclusion is this: The files are slightly noisy even at base ISO however given the room provided by 24 megapixels there is a lot of room for applying default reduction and once you downrez the file a bit it is not IMO an issue. The shadows are a world better than those of the 5Dc, no banding and much more retained detail from significant shadow boosting and after noise reduction. I have to admit that I swore when I first saw just what I could do with those shadows!
The tonality is very good with a nice flattish curve as standard, with a carefully curve controlling the lower highlights and a midtone contrast boost I can easily match the 5Dc and come very close to the 5D3. I actually prefer the flatter curve however, it is reminiscent of my 1Ds3. The colour is good, in facial tones I would say even better than canon. I've not done a lot of work with the bright highlights, highlight recovery as the test files provided are usually not blown out but I didn't notice any problems that leapt out at me. I've shot 100,000's of frames with my two 5Dc's over the years, I know what my benchmark 'look' is to a file and I honestly believe that the sony's crop sensor is very very good.
Here is some work shot with the Takumar to give you an idea why I am bothering so much for a $60 fifty year old lens
and a portrait, a field I really want to get into with this lens but have never been able to before as I cannot focus it without a tripod.
HOWEVER. The nex is only an option if I find that the peaking works for me and also if the EVF works for me. I can not tell this till I try it. Otherwise this discussion is all just academic, I will need the more expensive canon solution whether I like it or not.