The Olympus OM to MFT Speed Booster is finally in Stock at BHphoto (Click here). Great news for the many OM lens owners who can enjoy a Full Frame field of view and 1 stop faster lenses on their MFT camera!
Click on the links to check the price and auctions of the OM prime lenses on eBay: [shoplink 28869 ebay]21mm f/2.0 and 21mm f/3.5 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28870 ebay]24mm f/2.0 and 24mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/3.5 shift lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28871 ebay]28mm f/2.0 and 28mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/3.5 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28872 ebay]35mm f/2.0 and 35mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2.8 shift lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28873 ebay]40mm f/2.0 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28874 ebay]50mm f/1.2 and 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/2.0 macro and 50mm f/3.5 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28876 ebay]55mm f/3.5 macro lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28880 ebay]85mm f/2.0 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28881 ebay]90mm f/2.0 macro lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28882 ebay]100mm f/2.0 and 100mm f/2.8 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28884 ebay]135mm f/2.8 and 135mm f/3.5 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28885 ebay]180mm f/2.0 and 180mm f/2.8 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28886 ebay]200mm f/4.0 and 200mm f/5.0 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28887 ebay]250mm f/2.0 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28888 ebay]300mm f/4.5 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28889 ebay]350mm f/2.8 lens[/shoplink],, [shoplink 28890 ebay]400mm f/6.4 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28891 ebay]500mm f/8.0 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28892 ebay]600mm f/6.6 lens[/shoplink], [shoplink 28893 ebay]1000mm f/11 lens[/shoplink].
32 Responses
Thanks for letting us know admin… however, you might want to correct the post. I was excited to read that we’d be getting “Full Frame field of view and 1 stop faster lenses”, but this is only a 0.71x focal reducer. If I’m understanding it correctly that means we’ll be getting the equivalent of using an OM lens on an APS-C sensor (1.5x focal length and 1 stop worse DOF).
Example: 50mm F1.4 OM lens
Used on m43 with no speedbooster, roughly equiv. to: 100mm F2.8
Used on APS-C with no speedbooster, roughly equiv. to: 75mm F2
Used on m43 with new OM speedbooster, roughly equivalent to 75mm F2
In terms of metering, of course, the camera would treat it like an F1 lens…
a 75mm f1.0 lens… yummy
“If I’m understanding it correctly that means we’ll be getting the
equivalent of using an OM lens on an APS-C sensor (1.5x focal length”
More like 1.4x FL.
Is there a point paying $400 for that when you can pay $92 for another one on ebay? Had it been 0.5x instead of 0.71x, and with perfect corner correction of film lenses for digital sensor, it would be another story.
Another what for $92? If you a referring to a $92 focal reducer, you will find it is much inferior quality (google for reviews).
Getting a stop faster speed on several legacy lenses is almost certainly cheaper this way, than buying higher speed legacy lenses (that could easily be $400 each).
Something is wrong here.
We speak either about full frame field of view or 1 stop gain.
As full frame does mean 2 (two) stops of gain they do exclude themselves mutually.
This makes it equivalent to APS-C, not so called “Full Frame”.
Only focal reducers on Sony E mount cameras achieve that.
Hope the attached image below helps some folks.
The really useful range seems to be the adapted 50’s and 55’s at f/1.2. Adapted, they’re giving you f/0.95 which in 35mm terms has the DoF and field of view of a 71mm or 78mm f/1.9. If (unlike most old lenses) they’re usable wide open, you’d have a nice portrait lens. Unfortunately, most older lenses were terrible wide open, so I’m not liable to spend the money on the speed booster with so many great native MFT lenses available.
First, not exactly Full Frame field of view, should correct that.
Still, I think it’s great to get 1 stop of Speed/DOF as the chart shows and widen the field of view so the old OM Full Frame lenses can be used at closer range as well.
The plus sides for me are that I can widen my field of view, effectively reducing the crop to 1.4 or so, which is actually a little better than most APS-C crop factors… essentially, you can get close, if not better, than APS-C cropping effect on a MFT camera with this speed booster. Also, for an equivalent focal length and max aperture size, I can get a bit more background blur. For example, a 25mm will be 50mm on a MFT, right? but, with the speed booster, yo u can use a 35mm to equal 50mm on a MFT.. hey, that’s 10mm extra focal length to increase subject isolation and throwing background into bokeh land. and a max aperture of f/1.4 won’t equate to just f/2.8, but f2.. not a lot, but it does give you more to work with.
But, I’ve been doing the math on this a bit and it is kind of hard to justify spending $400 on this particular speed booster. I think if it were down to maybe $300 (or better at $200-250), it might be easier to swallow)
First, from my research, it seems the OM lenses are generally pretty nice, but the comments have been sort of 50/50.. depends on what copy you get and user experiences, tastes & expectations can vary quite a bit whether they are as nice or as bad (or not all that) as some say.
If I go with benefit of doubt and trust I can acquire a good copy of an OM lens, it seems a “good clean” OM lens is not expensive, but then again not exactly cheap.. $300-400 (or higher) depending on how nice you want it.. add that into the cost of the speed booster and you’re almost approaching $1000 (ok, high $100’s like $700-900, depending on the lens combo). Kind of makes me wonder how much use I can get out of it spending that much for an old lens when I can get something new that is probably better corrected and just as fast?
Granted, provided you stay with OM lenses, you only have to buy this 1 OM-to-M4/3 speedbooster once and just pay for additional OM lenses which you would like to use on your M4/3.. overall, for a relatively fast MF lens in varying focal lengths, it can actually save you money if you want more variety of lenses.
BUT, the IQ.. I feel if you want high IQ, some lens are better than others, but you will probably need to stop down a few to get the best sharpness. Then, does that negate being able to use the fastest aperture wide open? AND, these old OM lenses probably are more susceptible to chromatic aberrations and fringing… and the bokeh can be a bit noisy for some people’s particular tastes.
I guess if you are cool with having an old school look and be able to use a lot of fairly decent old OM glass in variety of focal lengths and relatively fast apertures, then this would be a great accessory and tool for photography for you. I would not go in high hopes to expect the ultimate best IQ with these lenses, however. I think if you like to shoot primarily in B&W anyways, then a lot of the potential imaging issues with old lenses are not really of any consequence and might help with rendering in B&W style.
I’m still up in the air on this one.. I see a few OM lenses that might be tempting to try this speedbooster with, I have a OM 50mm f/1.4 which would make for a more useful and easier to use 71mm f/2 (instead of the current 100mm f/2.8 in FF terms) But, I’m reluctant to invest if I feel I should just spend more for a more modern piece of glass that’s better corrected and higher IQ output.. and maybe with AF too.
I bought a speed booster to use with a collection of vintage Minolta lenses (some “cheap and fun” and some quite expensive, fast, and “famous”). The speed booster does what it says which is increase FOV and speed up vintage lenses. It will also increase center sharpness and is neutral for corner sharpness.
What I found was that with the $399 speed booster even the “best” of my vintage lenses would only equal the IQ of my native M43 lenses and then only when stopped down. While the F1.2 and F1.4 vintage lenses were certainly “fast” on the speed booster I did not find the wide apertures very useful (low contrast, CA’s, “glow”, softness, etc) except in some very rare situations. By the time the vintage lenses were stopped down to equal the IQ of the native lenses the speed ended up being the same. For example a Minolta 58mm 1.2 with speed booster needed to be stopped down to 2.8 (effective f2.0) at which point it was almost indistinguishable in every way from my M.Zuiko 45mm at f2. The difference was the vintage lens was more expensive, very heavy, and manual focus.
After playing around for several months with various lenses and the speed booster I ended up selling the speed booster and all my “expensive / famous” vintage lenses and kept my “fun /cheap” vintage lenses and use them with “plain / cheap” adapters.
interesting, but that’s exactly what I was imaging.. how’d they end up being used and what settings you’d have to essentially lock them at to maximize the overall IQ out of them.
for messing around with a cheap adapter (the fotodiox OM-M4/3 is a nice piece works perfectly for $25 and under, i think.. better than $100 or so Olympus charges for theirs?!) and vintage lenses for a different look, I would keep that combo around just for that.. I have used my 50mm f1.4 for outdoor portraits and stopped down to f2.8-5.6 (depending on the how much depth of field I needed without losing focus on groups of people that were staggered), it was actually quite nice and sharp and gave some nice background blur.. not super soft, but it was still nice the way bokeh was rendered. Still, have to watch out for CA and correct in post a little more aggressively than more modern lenses which have a lot less CA, if any.
I think if you wanted the vintage look, I guess it wouldn’t be a bad thing to use the vintage lenses at all.. I think if you already have a collection of good OM lenses and wanted to make the best use out of them, then the speed booster would make the most sense to such a person/user.. otherwise, everyone else basically wanting to go and try without a collection should expect the limitations of vintage glass and what it may cost to buy into such “toys”.
Admin, some news about lens schneider and Kowa?
A word of caution though, many ultra wide and wide OM lenses cannot be mounted on the SB due to protubing apendice that make contact with the inside of the SB.
I tested both 16mm (Fish eye and rectilinear) 21mm f3.5 and the 28mm f3.5 and f2.8.
The 24mm shift lens work but the results IQ was are less than pleasing.
The SB work great on long focal like the 100mm f2.0.
I have two OM lenses that are listed as incompatible with the EF speedbooster without modification to the lens– 50mm f/1.8 and 28mm f/3.5. They work fine with the OM speedbooster though. So clearly the EF mount version has other stuff going on that the dumb adapters don’t.
I have the Zuiko 28mm/3.5 and the 24mm/2.8 and they don’t fit the OM speedbooster. Stange that your 28mm fits?
Hrm. My speedbooster is the NEX version; perhaps there’s more forward extension in the optics with the MFT version.
Ok,that explains it. I have the OM > M4/3 version and there is not enough space between the lens and the speedbooster.
HI guys, I’m not sure I’ve ever *entirely* understood the Speed Booster. I’ve read up on it and I understand it in principle, especially that it’s not just an adaptor, but two things elude me:
1) can you (or would it be possible to) ) get an MFT to MFT Speed Booster? Simply “boosting” whatever MFT lenses you already own?
2) If I was to get one, what would you recommend? Which lens system offers the biggest diversity and more importantly, the cheapest assortment of lenses? I had this idea of buying some oldskool shit from 2nd-hand stores, eBay, flea markets etc. to get a wide variety of experimental lenses.
We cannot enjoy ff view on m43, just aps-c view. one stop=double the area of sensor.
the speedbooster is x0.74 and not 0.5x needed for FF view
I’ve been thinking that since it’s an adaptor as well as a “booster” it would be great to get one that will fit the broadest range of lenses. I have this idea of picking up a wide selection of old lenses from eBay, flea-markets and so on at decent prices. But I need help figuring out which lens system to choose. Anyone have any tips on which Speed Booster to buy for the greatest (and cheapest) options?
The most adaptable mount will be EF mount. Unfortunately, there isn’t an EF mount Metabones Speedbooster for MFT thus far (and the one for, say, NEX, is a smart adapter that’s $200 extra.
There are other focal reducers though. Probably the best alternative is the Mitakon Lens Turbo.
well considering the “smart” adaptor would give me some degree of aperture control and AF on compatible lenses, $200 more isn’t so bad. I’d settle for manual though – only problem is lenses without manual aperture controls would be tricky to exploit. I’ve seen videos of guys who have made decent manual control hacks for old lenses, but it requires the right tools and materials and patience.
EF mount is terrible choice as the lenses have no manual apertures, and the adapters have no electronics. Older Nikon F (before G) are plentiful but expensive because they still can be used on many Nikon cameras. Newer Minolta A-mount and Pentax K-mount have the same problem and also not so common. OM are great but rare. Leicas (R and M) are very expensive. With the choice of adapters (NOT Metabones) you are down to Canon FD (pre-1987 Canon mount) and pre-1985 Minolta SR-mount (MC/MD), or M42 (ancient Pentax, Soviet etc).
Nikon is still a good choice in case you are planning to add native Nikon FF camera (especially Df).
The reason the EF mount is the most flexible choice for manual focus lenses is because it has the shortest flange distance and broadest range of adapters of any of the available mounts for focal reducers. For most focal reducer users, I daresay the ability to actually use EF mount lenses is somewhat immaterial.
The reason EF mount is the best choice overall for adaptability is, quite simply, because the Canon EF mount has the shortest register and broadest range of available adapters. I’d imagine that the ability to mount and control Canon EF lenses themselves is rather immaterial to the people who just want a focal reducer for legacy lenses.
Canon EF DOES NOT HAVE shortest flange, where did you even get this ridiculous idea? It is 44mm, for comparison, Minolta SR is 43.5mm, Canon FD is 42mm (that is why old canon lenses are useless on new canon cameras, big abandonment of 1987), Konica AR 40.5mm etc etc. Even those DSLR mounts which are a little deeper are not in practice easily adoptable, you cannot make a sturdy adapter half a millimeter thick, so you will lose infinity anyway.
And without aperture control on EF lenses, and with relatively high prices on the lenses, it is the worst system possible for adoption.
My statement included an “and”. You’ll find a shocking lack of adapters available for Minolta SR and Canon FD, and no focal reducers for SR. canon EF has the combination of both the shortest flange AND the BROADEST RANGE OF AVAILABLE ADAPTERS.
The Speed Booster focuses the image projected by lenses designed for a larger sensor format onto a smaller area, like the inverse of a magnifying class. Instead of cropping the projected image and only recording the centre area of image projected by the larger-format lenses, the whole image created by the lens is used and projected on the smaller sensor. This means that wide angle lenses remain wide angle when combined with the Speed Booster and used on a smaller-sensored camera. And all the light that would be projected on a larger sensor gets now projected onto the smaller area of the smaller sensor. And if you take light projected on a larger area and focus it onto a smaller area, the light intensity increases.
However, there only is larger projected image to focus onto a smaller area if the lens was designed to cover a larger area/sensor. Lenses designed for one sensor format only create an image large enough for that sensor and thus don’t have an unused projected image area that could focussed onto the sensor area of a camera with a sensor size the lenses were designed for.
In addition, while a tele converter allows the lens to placed further away from the sensor it normally would be, with the inverse, the Speed Booster, the lens actually needs to be a bit closer to the sensor plane that it normally would be. It is pretty difficult to create an ‘adaptor’ that moves the lens inside the camera.
A focal reducer (ie, what a Speed Booster is) is simply the inverse of a teleconverter. While a 100 mm f/2.8 lens combined with a 1.4x TC becomes de-facto a 140 mm f/4 lens (that can be split into two parts), a 100 mm f/2.8 lens combined with a 0.71x focal reducer becomes de-facto a 71 mm f/2 lens (that can be split into two parts).
There are plenty of both adapters and cheap lenses in FD, and all the lenses have proper manual apertures and no heavy AF mechanics inside, working great on m43.
The point is, you can get an adapter to stick an OM lens on an EF mount. You can get adapters to stick most SLR lenses onto the EF mount without needing IQ-degrading FOV-reducing optics to correct the focus distance.
You cannot get an adapter to stick an OM lens onto FD mount. Literally the only FD adapter I can find is one to stick a Nikon F lens onto the FD mount. You can’t get adapters to stick non-FD lenses onto FD mount, because it’s a legacy, unsupported mount–why would anyone even bother machining them? The mount was superseded by EF in 1987, and there hasn’t been a camera produced in FD mount since the Canon T60 was discontinued (it probably lingered into the mid-90s). And furthermore, the design of the FD mount is such that most adapters cannot be fashioned –because the mount on the camera protrudes into the lens, rather than the other way around on every other bayonet mount. The only other adapters in existence to put other lenses on the FD mount are not commercial items and were produced by a guy with a 3d printer!
Therefore, for using manual focus optics on a focal reducer, the EF mount gives you the most flexibility of putting lenses other than EF onto the lens. Even if focal reducers are offered in the EF bayonet without electronics, those adapters are still more useful to a shooter with a collection of different lenses compared to spending $400 on one speedbooster…$400 on another…and $400 on yet a third.