Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

speedbooster from metabones

Saumene Mehrdady said:
Wow, really? My only major gripe with that camera is its stupidly small sensor but if this adapter can fix it (even a little), then I am totally sold.
Click to expand...

Yeah would be a fun camera to play with. Not saying I would replace it with my scarlet.
 
I'm not familiar with the general quality of such optical reducers but, in a time with so many sensor sizes, the potential seems very significant. No more crop factors with full frame glass. Nice.
 
Jacek Zakowicz said:
Yes It should be :)
There awful little room in that mount. I know it works with the Nikon ProLock- I've tried it. Kind of forgot about that- hmm. I have the parts somewhere so I can check.
Click to expand...

are you talking about for the red canon mount or for a dslr with a mirror?
 
I'm actually talking about the OptiTek Canon ProLock-i mount (ugh that name got too long...)
 
The current prototypes From Metabones are for mounting on short flange distance (17 to 18mm) cameras. The design seems to rely on the difference between the large flange distance on the canon mount lenses and the much smaller distance to the sensor on these e-mount, mft, fuji-x etc. I don't know what the minimum difference is for optimal results. The m-mount flange distance is quite a bit more than the other mounts they are adapting for, but if this was possible then it would be easy to use on epic/scarlet.
 
Jacek Zakowicz said:
I'm actually talking about the OptiTek Canon ProLock-i mount (ugh that name got too long...)
Click to expand...

haha, is there a spec sheet or something on this long-lettered lens holder?

are there any limitations on lenses? i've got some olympus zuikos that i'm in love with, some of which have a little protrusion. that would probably be the dealbreaker for me.
 
I wonder how no one taught of that in the old times of EX3 + letus S35 adaptor... It would have worked much better, improving our lenses instead of reducing mtf...
 
Rodrigo Prata said:
I wonder how no one taught of that in the old times of EX3 + letus S35 adaptor... It would have worked much better, improving our lenses instead of reducing mtf...
Click to expand...

I was a fan of S35 adapters, and I always thought about that possibility. That's why, from now on, I am not going to pay any attention when someone says, "Is impossible".
 
Not a new idea, They probably purchased this from Kodak in the recent fire sale: US Patent 5,499,069
 
It might not be a "new idea", but it might be an idea whose time has come.
What would it take for red to manufacture optical reducers for their sensor sizes?
Make one line of FF 35mm lenses, and a custom reducer for each camera model?????
 
I find it interesting that when I get a 2x extender at Panavision, they have to match it to the lens/lenses I am using it with. I always figured each lens is different and so must the extender be made to fit. I'd assume that is what a reducer would require to be most effective, right? Not a one size fits all... but then again we live in the Good Enough generation, right?
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
I find it interesting that when I get a 2x extender at Panavision, they have to match it to the lens/lenses I am using it with. I always figured each lens is different and so must the extender be made to fit. I'd assume that is what a reducer would require to be most effective, right? Not a one size fits all... but then again we live in the Good Enough generation, right?
Click to expand...

I think an extender would be more critical since you're effectively magnifying the light (which will show problems easier), hence the need to pair it properly.

With a reducer, you're essentially supersampling the light of a full frame lens to hit a smaller CMOS (similar to shooting 5k for a 4k finish)... I also think that's where the perceived added sharpness/resolving power claims comes from.

That said, there has to be something new, otherwise manufacturers would have been using reducers with 1/3 chips to get the s35/FF image back in the 90s for a few hundred bucks (maybe it can only be reduced so far before it goes to complete crap.)
 
Last edited:
Mike P. said:
That said, there has to be something new, otherwise manufacturers would have been using reducers with 1/3 chips to get the s35/FF image back in the 90s for a few hundred bucks (maybe it can only be reduced so far before it goes to complete crap.)
Click to expand...

My understanding is the big limitation is flange focal distance. A general purpose focal reducer requires optics that take up space and also reduce flange focal distance, so you can only fit it in an adapter with lens space to spare. Focal extenders are easy because they increase flange focal distance so it is easy to fit it on any mount since the optics increase flange distance enough to make room for the adapter and its optics.

The big difference recently is that there are lots of new short flange distance mounts (m43, e-mount, etc). Also it may be the case that a 0.71x focal reducer is near the limit of what you can put behind most lens designs before the required FFD becomes so short that you cant fit the optics of the adapter between the mount and the sensor.

Anyway it seems like a great sweet spot since FF35 lenses have been the biggest market for so many decades and they have some amazing fast, sharp, and cheap designs that don't exist in most other formats. I mean it really speaks to FF35 designs that you could buy 24mm f1.4 from multiple manufacturers for FF35, but few companies make anything close to 17mm f1.0 for S35/APS-C except the not-yet-released Vantage T1 17.5mm, certainly no one makes such lenses at prices that compete with rokinon/nikon/canon. Then again Vantage is one of the few companies that also makes a general purpose 0.7x reducer lens... so perhaps they are using that technology in their T1 line?

And of course most of the best motion picture cameras these days are based on a S35 sensor format, so the combination of unbeatable FF35 lens designs and S35 cameras with a mount adapter that fully uses the FF35 image circle seems like a real sweet spot in getting the best image quality for an affordable price these days.

I just got my speed booster today for EF-NEX so we'll see how it goes. Interested to see how the performance of my lenses, which will now become 10-11.5mm f2.0, 17-50mm f2.0, 35mm f1.0 and, and 50-140mm f2.0, turns out....

(the 10-11.5mm f2.0 lens is based on the portion of my tokina 11-16 I know will be still be useable, but I imagine i can probably sell that lens to pay for the adapter now since I hardly use it as an 11-16 much anyway, so I'd use it even less as an 10-11.5mm lens...)
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
I find it interesting that when I get a 2x extender at Panavision, they have to match it to the lens/lenses I am using it with. I always figured each lens is different and so must the extender be made to fit. I'd assume that is what a reducer would require to be most effective, right? Not a one size fits all... but then again we live in the Good Enough generation, right?
Click to expand...



I agree with you on the "good enough generation" but I think its more of a quality/price thing than a lack of attention to detail. This adapter is going to be great for people with fs100, fs700, and even RED cameras for people who shoot with stills glass. ( if they found a way to make it work)

I also believe you are right when it comes to the benefits of reducers built for specific lenses. Without wading too deep into it I know that Joseph Wisniewski has spent a fair amount of time discussing it on dpreview.com http://photo.net/digital-camera-forum/00XMEt .

The issue here is price. Yes of course you could turn your stills glass into superspeeds using adapters specifically designed for each lens but the R&D would likely drive the price up significantly. Once things start getting too expensive there is no point in modifying lenses over buying existing PL mount cinema glass (master primes, leicas, cookes etc) that are already fast and sharp.
 
Noah Yuan-Vogel said:
My understanding is the big limitation is flange focal distance. A general purpose focal reducer requires optics that take up space and also reduce flange focal distance, so you can only fit it in an adapter with lens space to spare. Focal extenders are easy because they increase flange focal distance so it is easy to fit it on any mount since the optics increase flange distance enough to make room for the adapter and its optics.

The big difference recently is that there are lots of new short flange distance mounts (m43, e-mount, etc). Also it may be the case that a 0.71x focal reducer is near the limit of what you can put behind most lens designs before the required FFD becomes so short that you cant fit the optics of the adapter between the mount and the sensor.
Click to expand...

I think you've nailed it. It's the SHORT flange distance that's making this possible....for the mirrorles M42 and Nex systems...the beefy adapters are giving them the "room" to add these extra optics.

I wonder if this thing changes your lenses color temperature?
 
we received the metabones adapter (EF to E Mount) today, will use it with the leica R set.

It seems that it has the same clearance issues like using Leica R lenses on FF Cameras like the Canon 5D MK II.

the 28mm V2, 50mm V2 E60 and 80mm work without problems, the 19mm V2 and the 35mm 1.4 will definitly hit the glass within the metabones adapter.

i think this list helps as a rough guide:

http://www.pebbleplace.com/Personal/Leica_db.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top