Our reader Brian sent us this mail to warn about a possible issue with the new Metabones Canon EF adapter:
“FedEx delivered today the Metabones Canon EF to Micro Four Thirds Speed Booster, P/N MB_SPEF-m43-BM1, that I had ordered after reading your posting as to its availability. I have test fit the adapter to all MFT cameras I own, and I wanted to alert you to the fact that it DOES NOT FIT the Olympus OM-D E-M1 camera. It’s not even close. The adapter interferes with the forward projecting EVF hood on the E-M1. The adapter also does not fit the Olympus E-M5, although the interference is not as severe. The adapter will fit the Olympus E-M10, although the adapter remains in contact with the EVF hood. I don’t know yet if this tension prevents the lens flange from seating flat. If so, this could cause lens decentering.
The adapter does fit fine on Olympus PEN Mini E-PM2, and Panasonic Lumix models G5, G6, GX1, & GF5. I mounted a Canon EF-S compatible Tamron SP AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR LD Asperical (IF) zoom lens on the adapter, and made some test shots with the E-PM2 camera. Result is a 12-35mm f/2.0 zoom lens. Sweet! This Tamron version lacks IS, but that isn’t a problem on Olympus bodies.
I am a bit surprised that Metabones did not engineer the adapter to fit more camera models, especially the popular E-M5 and E-M1.“
Hope Metabones will release a statement about this soon!
61 Responses
Easily fixed with a Dremel tool!
But it does make you wonder why Metabones don’t do the dremmeling for you, it’s not like it’s a cheap unit.
Probably because Metabones assumes that their users will actually read the compatibility list of a $600 camera accessory.
It’s in the first line under “Not Supported” – Olympus E-M10, E-M1, E-M5.
Also, because 90% of speed boosters are used for video purposes, so Olympus cameras “need not apply.”
Hal, I have to question your intelligence now. Where did you pull the 90% from? Your behind? Did you know that 93% of statistics on the Internet are made up?
It’s a VIDEO accessory. Olympus cameras shoot low quality video. Therefore the market for a $600 video accessory for Olympus cameras is very small. If you need more verification I am correct, why several generations down the line do Metabones still not offer a speed booster that is compatible with Olympus cameras? Because until Olympus puts some decent video in their bodies, there will be little demand for one.
That is absolute bullshit. They just had to change the metal, not even the optics, of that FR a little so that it would fit all cameras well. Even if they were just selling few to Oly users, it would be more units sold without any extra cost.
You’re right! You should send them an email ASAP pointing out this grievous oversight that I’m sure they are unaware of. You should also let them know that if they need to consult your expertise of all things in the future, it will cost them.
It’s not solely a videography tool, it’s also for stills which has a lot of people desiring it. Myself included. And it IS compatible with Olympus Pens. There are numerous versions of the Speedbooster for other APS bodies that have far worse video quality than the OMDs. Your OPINION does not equal facts, Hal.
Works perfectly with my GM1… improved back focus / infinity compared to my cheaper Chinese/eBay “focal reducer” EF > mFT unit I was using before.
the E-M1 issue was already known if I remember correctly
Yes, I remember something like that.
Yes, but they released a new design to fix that. Surprising that they run into the same problem again.
Same issue with Lens Baby Composer and EM1. But it can be corrected by filing off some of the metal from Composer.
this reminds me how the dandelion universal adapter made a scratch on my E-3 back then
Interesting…. But often adapter manufacturer can’t do anything as bodies are not designed for legacy/others objectives with thicker adapter.
And how much would it cost to design new adapter because OM-D line?
How GH4? seems like Metabones use Panasonic cameras in testing…
Good service about this news, and shame on Metabones (didn’t like that name anyway).
Looks like us PEN owners finally have some bragging rights. PEN owners UNITE!
The Metabones site mentions that the E-M10, E-M1 and E-M5 are not supported.
b-b-b-but how can they call it a “Canon EF to *Micro Four Thirds*” adapter if it only supports 91% of Micro Four Thirds cameras!?
/sarcasm
You are correct
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BM1
I don’t know if its a good idea put an adapter (a liitle more than this, but still) in the market if it doesn’t work on a huge part of the market (the Olympus OMD cameras).
Olympus cameras are not a huge part of the speed booster market.
No but for the m43 version, it obviously is.
Really? We didn’t know that, thanks for enlightening us. Now stop and think for a moment. Olympus cameras ARE a huge potential market for the Micro four thirds to Canon EF speed booster, the subject of this discussion. Are you following now?
There will only be potential when the Olympus cameras get better video than a point and shoot from 2005.
No. You poindexter go ahead with your EF adapter nonsense, on top of m43 nonsense, but refrain from schooling the others. It’s too funny at your level of brain “prowess”.
Huh? Do you have a point to make, because you make no sense when you reply with insults? Do you have something you disagree with, or just a personality disorder? Need a refill on your meds perhaps?
Incredible!
The lack of final testing and inspection form Metabones is just wow!
And they had this problem before I remember…
If some one were to mention this issue to a novice in product design they would raise a flag and solve the problem way way before the supposedly finished product. Even though they mention this they shot themselves in the foot for 70 of potential users even willing to give them 400+600$ for just extra exif information…
Maybe Germans need to buy Metabones…
There is a limit to how small they can make the Metabones adapter so has it occurred to you that maybe they knew all along it would not fit on to those cameras but built it anyway because owners of other cameras could use it?
The world does not revolve around the Olympus toys you know.
It has also occurred to me that if dremeling is a DIY solution that it should have been done by them before final assembly on their fancy CNC machine for all m43 adapters.
I mean one would thing they would like to avoid a bad rep and more sales.
What a sorry @ss answer. It’s strikes me as utterly stupid, busines wise, to not consider this very very large market potential.
The video in Olympus camera’s might not be up to snuff with regards to codec but it’s not bad at all and certainly better than compacts.
But foremost this speedbooster is useful to stills shooters also. Many have legacy lenses.
Oh yeah and almost forgot it has nothing to do with it being technically (im)possible to make it for Olympus because even the bigger 43 lenses all work on m43 including teleconverters 1.4 and 2.0! So no excuse for Metabones.
They have truly screwed up! And at that insane price!
Buy $99 off ebay, they are good enough for video and fit E-M5.
You mean mega-bones. As in serious money…..
This is an Olympus issue, so don’t blame Metabones. The cause of this is the fact that Olympus designed some of their models differently.
Sorry, I disagree, Olympus cannot be held accountable for issues with a add-on product.
Olympus should release a fix in the form of redesigned OM-D bodies.
You’re putting the blame on the wrong foot. It is not Olympus’ responsibility that a 3rd party has put out an adapter which does not work with the EM-5/EM-1/EM-10. Metabones made the same mistake with an earlier version of their adaptor (I don’t recall which was the lens mount that one was for). At the very least, they should have made it VERY PROMINENT that this adaptor would not work for the OM-D line. As it is now, one has to read all of the details (which is a good idea to do anyway). But don’t blame Olympus!
I think you missed the humour here…please, don’t feed the trolls…
Sorry if I missed the humerous intent of the posting, but it struck me as too close to some of the other comments here and at other sites. Thus a mistake on my part.
Given that some people are talking about making minor adjustments with a Dremel tool to get it to fit, it strikes me that the manufacturer was too intent on using some standardized parts they had already been using and didn’t want to adjust their tooling just for the OM-D series.
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BM1
Their “statement” should be to read the compatibility list before buying a $600 lens accessory. How is this news?
Useful to know, but wasn’t the fact that at least some of the Metabones adapters did not fit the E-M5 and the E-M1 an already known issue?
Metabones fail. If they can’t even adhere to a semi-open mount standard, whats that say about their design team? I was looking forward to buying this to use with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 on my E-M1, but thats gone. No f/1.2 zoom lens with aperture control and exif reporting.
It’s not a f 1.2 zoom, it is a f 1.8 zoom. Tiny sensors increase equivalent apertures. No free lunches, particularly with this poor overhyped m43.
Take a big image circle that give an f/1.8 exposure on its native format, focus that light down onto a smaller area, and it becomes f/1.2 exposure. How does math work, you might ask.
By your logic, a large magnifying glass that is not focused will burn up a dry leaf faster than a small magnifying glass that is focused down to a point properly.
Light intensity is where its at. Who cares about 1mm deep depth of field? No one who takes real pictures.
No… Have you actually put your money in those things? I suggest you try first, one thing is trolling nonsense in forums, one thing is wasting your money.
Wow Harry! You are so confused.
Smaller sensors don’t increase the aperture of a lens. They only increase the DOF of a lens.
A 25mm f1.8 on MFT is still a f1.8 for light gathering ability, but the DOF will be *equivalent* to something like a 25mm f3.6 lens.
To simplify, think of it as a DOF multiplier, similar to the concept of focal length multiplier.
Hope that clears things up.
Just FYI I shoot with a FF but I also have an APS-C and MFT camera.
This exact same thing happened with the Canon FD SpeedBooster. They have since corrected the compatibility problems, I own the corrected version. I can’t believe they made this same mistake again!
This is no surprise. Why would one use EF lenses on m43 anyway? I am pretty happy with EF lenses on EOS.
The newer EF lenses are kinda sharp, some are kinda fast, some are faster. Bump that up a stop, and get to use it on a superior body?
But if you want the best of the best, only genuine M43 products will deliver that. Make sure they have “pro” written on!
I love your joke, you cracked me up with your “superior body” and the wrong aperture equivalence.
That’s not how it works. Why do you guys spend the money first and learn things after, or never? You don’t “bump up” anything with those toys. You only add flare, distortion and aberrations.
On a side note, an EOS body will vomit on any m43 toy, will cost less, and even focus those lenses when the subject is moving! Can you picture that? Focus tracking! Proper usability! Proper viewfinders! Less cost! Huge battery life! Useless for a fauxtographer, I know…
I guess you don’t even own the toys you are writing about. Focus tracking doesn’t really work well on the quadruple and triple digit EOS models. And they can’t hold a candle to all the modern m43 camera’s in SAF mode be it Olympus or Panasonic.
I haven’t even rented an EOS body for a few years, since Nikon is way better in the CAF area today.
Really? Try it, you may discover something.
I totally agree…the whole adapter thing is just too silly. This is yet another…maybe that huge honkin lens has no business on you MFT camera to begin with?
Incredible fail by Metabones.
OM-D line has HUGE sales, it’s not G(F/X)whatever of PEN.
I don’t get the moaning. They say at their website that these adaptors are not compatible with certain cameras. They are useless to begin with – who would waste an EF lens on a m43 body?
Do you people check your facts before throwing away your money? I suspect most will never buy these toys anyway, not to mention take photographs with them. It’s only about the nerding, isn’t it?
Well if you THINK about it for a few seconds: You might have both cameras but want to only carry around one. You might have sold your EF-compatible body and gone over to MFT entirely, but kept your EF lenses because they’ve cost a lot of money and are really good. You might have only MFT and find the large, often cheap assortment of EF lenses appealing, especially since a speed booster in many cases improves the f-stops of those lenses. There are in other words a myriad of reasons. As for the moaning… well… I don’t think it would be impossible engineering to make the SB fit those cameras, and if Metabones had looked at their target consumers they might have realized that this incompatabilty will hurt sales.
+1000
If only they had your foresight and market analytical skills as well as your optical engineering and machining expertise… It good to see the experts weigh in.
http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPEF-m43-BM1
The Metabones website lists these as not supported – hard to believe that was the intent, but..
I got mine a week ago or so. It seems to fit just fine on E-M10, you just have to be very careful when inserting and locking it. IMO it was not listed as not supported when I ordered it.