[shoplink 46485 ebay]
[/shoplink]
The chinese clone of the Metabones Speedbooster are not really famous for the image quality. But now I have been told that the Chinese seller [shoplink 46485 ebay]Mitakon[/shoplink] will soon launch the new Lens Turbo II version for Micro Four Thirds. It will have:
– Redesigned Lens
– New and improved coating
– Special square end of the lens
Now let’s hope they can come close to the Metabones quality!
P.S.: The E-mount version of the [shoplink 46485 ebay]Lens Turbo II is already on sale on eBay[/shoplink].
28 Responses
http://teespring.com/m43user
Spam.
I wonder what they mean by “Special square ends”? The mind boggles..
I think the rear element, it will have a square plastic box instead of normal round one
and do we know anything about the Sony E version quality?
Frankly I don’t really understand the point. As I understand it, you can use APS lenses with their native FOV/DOF and FF lenses with an APS crop using a m43 x0.71 SB (that’s at least what the Metabones does). But any decent quality focal reducer costs more than buying some random cheap APS body. Yes, you have to increase the ISO to get the same brightness but that’s only a minor issue as you will have less noise on an APS sensor.
for my situation, I see the point. No need to say more. And I don’t want an extra random aps-c body. Often, when you fail to see the point, it is because you are not the target. the company may fail to evaluate correctly the size of the target, but it doesn’t mean it doesn´t exist at all. I’ll be happy to pay for a Metabones Pentax K reducer, this one may do the job as Metabones don’t seem to be in a rush to release it
Shooting legacy glass with 5-axis IBIS with one stop brightness gain beats having a secondary aps-c body. ISO perfomance between m43 and a typical APS-C sensor is less than one stop. In fact i prefer m43 high iso output to Fuji.
I forgot that Olympus bodies came with IBIS and I agree that’s a fairly good point.
“But any decent quality focal reducer costs more than buying some random cheap APS body.”
I bought mine for $92. And now can use lots of old lenses on a great, image stabilized body. What “some random cheap APS body” can provide me with the experience?
That’s a good point, I completely missed that one. I once tried one of the cheap boosters and I wasn’t really impressed with the quality at all (was on an APS body though). From which brand is yours?
I also have one of the $99 focal reducers from one of the Chinese eBay shops (they’re all identical- I think they are the old RJ focal reducers). I find the quality to be quite acceptable. I don’t expecting miracles from any lens at f/1.0 let alone a 40 year old Takumar!
I think the cheap focal reducers actually work a lot better on M4/3 than APS-C. With the APS-C reducers, you end up using a lot more of the edges and corners, which are almost always optically worse, even when using the full-frame lenses natively. With the M4/3 focal reducers, you basically get all the advantages of adapting old lenses on an APS-C body, with the ability to use your tiny native M4/3 lenses when you want. I like it.
that is because of the edges which are visible on APS-C fall outside 43 sensor, not because optics in reducers for m43 is magically superior.
That’s my entire point. In fact, that’s actually what I said.
“With the APS-C reducers, you end up using a lot more of the edges and corners, which are almost always optically worse, even when using the full-frame lenses natively.”
by the same logic one should use there old lenses on APS-C without any reducer at all, the edges will be even better than in m43 + reducer
That is absolutely correct. Unless you’re using very, very good (expensive) FF lenses, I’m not sure that a focal reducer is particularly useful for APS-C if you want good cross-frame sharpness. Unless it’s on an older APS-C sensor with a higher pixel pitch.
If you’re just using it to obliterate your background with creamy bokeh, then corner sharpness isn’t that important, though. Depends on what you want.
It sounds like you’re trying to embroil me in some kind of format war, here, but I think we’re actually on the same page. I try to be pragmatic about these things…
Cross-frame sharpness is the ultimate achievement for the most accomplished professionals. In particular, don’t forget total sharpness in the far corners with wide angles wide open.
“absolutely correct”? why do you tell us the rubbish you picked up in the net? learn learn learn first.
Oh, shucks! I just bought the old one! ;(
I wonder when the technology will advance to the point where we have 1.4x and 2x multipliers for m43, like ones that have existed for Canon for a few decades?
Perhaps by the year 2100, when we have artificial gravity?
Well, M43 already puts quite a heavy strain on the lenses in terms of resolution/area so maybe neither Olympus nor Panasonic were able to make a teleconverter that doesn’t degrade image quality too much.
This is only a personal guess but I think that M43 people generally don’t suffer from a lack of range but rather the opposite due to the crop factor (for instance there is no single UWA prime lens from Olympus or Panasonic below 12mm). And for those people who really need the range, there will be the 300mm f4.
1. the idea of teleconverter for camera with EVF is somewhat silly. If you need more reach with same lens, a camera with smaller pixels can give that.
2. m43 lenses have short backfocus, e.g. rear elements sits close to image plane. this makes making any rear mounted converters very difficult
But if you manage to find several millions of dollars — probably someone will make one for you.
I’ve had very good results using the RJ Photo Lens Turbo with classic Canon FD glass. I don’t doubt that the Metabones adapter is great, but don’t write off the cheap alternatives without testing them first. My only wish is that it was a true 2x multiplier to give the same FOV as full frame.
Agreed, the RJ Lens Turbo (for the Nikon F mount) is what I use. It is incredibly good value.
Release date?
The side by side comparisons are now showing up between lens turbo ii and metabones. You can’t tell any difference and its a lot cheaper. Waiting for the mft version, hopefully it gets here soon.
Still waiting on that Adapter… 🙁
can we get an update on this? Still not released!!