[shoplink 40560 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Dicahub reports that the EF-M43 Speed Booster will be released in August. EF-M43 will have electronic contacts. This is good news because MFT will get access to the largest lens range of the world. Now Canon gear owners can use their Full Frame lenses on MFT cameras gaining 1 stop of speed!
The Speed Booster can be found:
In USA at Metabones, at Amazon and at BHphoto.
In Europe at [shoplink 40560 ebay]eBay UK (Click here)[/shoplink].
66 Responses
So Canon folk can use MFT to backup camera.
OKAY I take back all all the crap I said when the Nikon version got announced. I my eyes this is the only version they need to make!!!! I currently use Takumar 135 1.8 Summicron R 50 and Pentax 31mm limited on my ancient T2i along with my beloved 24-105 is and my 70-300 DO IS…. This gives me an incentive to sell my liver to get That 85mm 1.2 expensive as “L” lens.
Time to get the 24-70!
This is some fantastic news! 🙂
this is the first time i regret selling my 85mm MK1 f/1.2
Does that mean Canon EOS too?
If so I have an adapter for inexpensive Praktica lenses, and therefore for M42 too.
Aren’t all Canon DSLRs called EOS and have the EF mount, like Nikon an the F mount?
Technically, the APS-C bodies have an EF-S mount, which is compatible with the EF mount. However, EF-S lenses are not compatible with the EF mount.
report says “autofocus uncertain”. Given the difficulties one can safely assume: no autofocus.
I think you should say right in the news what will work – AF? Aperture information? OIS? Not all are as clever as the top-smarties here. Also you could give right in the text an example. A FF Canon 24-70/2,8 will be on your MFT camera a … ??
And I think he could make a better one for less money and give everyone at 43rumors one for free!
24 mm * 2 * 0.71 = ~34 mm
70 mm * 2 * 0.71 = ~99 mm
F2.8 becomes F2.0
DPreview of speed booster seems to indicate that the increase at largest native aperture may not give 1 full stop. still cool but wondering if the mid apertures and above are the only ones that get the boost. anyone know about this? I am definitely interested as I have EF lenses and would love to use them on my GH2. just as an adapter is cool enough but then the price starts to seem a bit high if max aperture doesn’t get a boost.
Very good news indeed, now that Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 would be 13mm-25mm F1.2 on M43
When paired with E-P5/E-M5 you get stabilized footage/photo too
As an apsc lens would it not still be 13-36 with the metabones speed booster and 24-54 without on m43 (AOV)
The focal length is reduced by 0.7x (approximately) no matter what system you’re using. The calculations to know what the full frame equivalent FOV will be are made afterwards (in this case the lens would be around a 26-50 full frame equivalent).
And on Micro Four Thirds an APS-C lens will not vignette, as the lens in this system would then work like an APS-C lens on an APS-C camera.
Provided the ibis works automatically. I shall get it right away then.
Link to “BHphoto” needs to be fixed.
With a regular adapter, a 1000 lp/ih APS lens would only perform at 800 lp/ih on a µ43 sensor. I wonder if the Metabones can preserve the lp/ih figure, too, if not increase it, since the crop from APS to µ43 is only 1.23. That would be cool. Does anyone have the DxO software?
It does not work like that at all
In English please.
He is assuming that because the 43s sensor crops the aps c lens 1.2 times (or 20% more) then the resolution it gets from that lens is 20% less. And it does not work like that at all. A lens resolves what a lens resolves, and given two equally efficient sensors with same pixel qquantity theyll resolve the same. Heck the corners will be better on the smaller format because its using more of the center. This hae been proven a million times over, butthe ignorant masses cannot fathom the idea that a smaller sensor can resolve as equally as a bigger one.
LP/IH means line pairs / image height. Same resolution (line pairs per millimeter) on a smaller sensor (MFT instead of APS-C) means less LP/IH. At least with a standard adapter.
The speed booster shrinks the image circle. This *could* preserve the LP/IH ratio if the shrink factor matches the sensor size ratio. However, APS/MFT size ratio times the speed booster factor is 0.9 which means a small loss of resolution measured in LP/IH. Add the loss due to the optical elements in the speed booster and you get some more percent loss in image quality compared to using the APS-C lens on an APS-C camera. The speed booster is based on physics, not miracles. Just like tele converters, you always lose some image quality.
Another wrong assumption. If you wanna talk about physics the compressing and image will actually increase its acuteness. And a aps c lens doesnt perform worse on a m43s sensor because (physics again) its using the sharpest portion of it
I would be very interested in this if it would autofocus. I also hope it has a tripod mount and sturdy construction. I have an FD to mft adaptor that works well but slows down photography and makes it difficult to take self portraits at a wide aperture.
There are lots of possibilities with the ef speed booster. Imagine turning the 50 1.4 into a 70 1.0! And you would have access to zoom ranges that aren’t available on mft and they would at wide apertures. The 15-85 3.5-5.6 would become a 21-120 2.5-4!
Now all we need is good focus peaking for fast manual focusing, early FP in oly and pana is not really there yet
While the 15-85 idea sounded great, Metabones says EF-S lenses don’t work with the NEX adapter. Will mft be the same? And for the price, you could almost buy a Canon body.
“Metabones says EF-S lenses don’t work with the NEX adapter. Will mft be the same?”
– True, when putting the speedbooster on a APS-C sensor EF-S will not work.
EF-S will work on the MFT mount.
Because EF-S is APS-C lens, and NEX is already APS-C (slightly bigger than the Canon APS-C mind you)
Won’t work because EF-S lenses have a rear protrusion which may interfere with the front element of Speed Booster. However, third-party (Sigma, Tokina et al) DC/DX lenses in Canon mount and Nikon DX lenses (+adapter where applicable) won’t pose any issues (other than the fact that APS-C is 3:2 and MFT is 4:3, and you may have to crop MFT to 3:2 or else the petal-shaped hoods of some ultrawides such as the Sigma 8-16 would get inside the frame).
Not sure about the rear protruding element : usually something concerning RF lenses rather than SLR lenses (which have to leave space for the mirror movements). But with or without the protruding, they won’t work because the speed booster reduces the image projected on the sensor, so an EF-S lens won’t fill the frame of a Nex, already having an APSC sensor.
Where is my drum? Canon FD Canon FD Canon FD
“Largest lens range in the world” I don’t think so. Nikon & M42 users might disagree.
In fact I disagree 😀
i don’t know, i thought that too but then i was thinking that i can’t put an Canon lens on a Nikon…. or a c-mount lens on a nikon… but i can on my GH3….
Well, that’s kinda irrefutable given F mount lens to EF adapters do exist. No?
I am pretty certain your source mixed up Canon FD and Canon EF. That said, Canon FD in August is good news too!
Why would people want to “sue their Full Frame lenses”?
You Americans and your sue happy culture!
Probably for the same reason that they need a second camera to compliment their first.
Admin meant “USE” but I’m still sure Canon will “sue”. 😉
Great news!! I’ve been waiting for so long… There is no such a good EF to MFT adapter in the market!! Specially with autofocus and speed booster!! Really need to get one 😛
Now we need usable PDAF on sensor.
Working on it…
Who’s gonna put the new 200-400 f4 on a m43 body ?? 😀 You would have a nice 140-280 f2.8 ! or with the 1.4x extender a nice 200-400 f4 !! However some could look at you strangely 😀
I can’t get excited by that news at all : why would I want to use ne of my huge Canon lenses on the tiny E-M5 ? It completely defeat the purpose of having a light system ! At the price these adapters are costing I really don’t see the point. Better to invest that amount in native glass, in the 20mm F1.7 Panasonic or in the Olympus 45mm F1.8 or the 17mm F1.8 …
If I want to use my EF lenses, then I bring the 6D. Or I could get one of the new tiny Canon bodies : 100D or EOS-M.
I agree if you own a set of MFT primes and no EF lenses it doesn’t make much sense.
Still some interesting options at longer focal lengths were MFT is less well served or expensive.
The Samyang 85mm 1.4 is around £240 and becomes an approx 120mm equiv F1
it makes perfectly sense if you want get closer to the lens’s original field of view and image rendering without needing to use/buy another sensor format body.
You’ve missed the point.
It doesn’t make sense to fit a large, heavy manual focus (or slow AF) lens to an MFT camera if it has a similar focal length to a lens you may already own like a 20mm 1.7 or 45mm 1.8 for example that’s small, light, autofocuses and very sharp.
You forget the rendering of DOF. If I would use a legacy 20mm or 50 mm 1.8 lens wide open, the DOF would be shallower then the lenses you mentioned. For the ones who need this, its a subtle but important advantage of a focal reducer.
I’m afraid ite not that simple.
Changing the focal length does change the rendering somewhat. With longer focal lengths the difference is so small it can be ignored, but at short focal lengths it will become more obvious. This doesn’t depend on field of view but purely on focal length. The change manifests itself in how much of the dof is in fron and behind the plane of sharpest focus, the shorter the lens, the more dof will move behind the plane of sharpest focus.
Use your favorite dof calculator to compare the dof of a 50/2.8 on 135 format to the 25/1.4 on m4/3, both with the same subject distance. It should show the same amount of dof, but it will start and end further away for the 25/1.4
Certainly a 2x difference in focal length is more then the speed booster gives, but the effect remains, and affects how your out of focus background will be rendered.
Also see the section ‘CLARIFICATION: FOCAL LENGTH AND DEPTH OF FIELD’ at http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm
Bart, it is simple; if it was a 0,5x focal reducer, it would mean the whole image, as normally captured by 24×36 would be compressed into the smaller mft format, resulting in exact dof rendering as in 24×36. But since this speed booster just restores a part of the original view, let’s say around one stop,the mft can give the dof comparable to aps-c. So a focal reducer side effect is the shallower dof. since we talking about one stop its subtle.
The entire assembly acts as ‘the lens’ with a focal length and an aperture. That you can detach what now has become the rear group doesn’t really matter for optics, the reducer could also be permanently attached and you simply have a lens of said focal length and aperture.
What you say is a good way of imagining what happens, but, to really get what you describe, there would need to be some kind of focus screen inbetween the adapted lens and the speed booster, and you’d be taking a macro picture of the focus screen.
It doesn’t make sense even for someone having EF lenses like me, because it defeats the purpose of the MFT system. I have got adapters for my RF lenses (Zeiss Contax G and Leica), but it didn’t even cross my mind to get an ordinary adapter for the EF lenses. I’m even less interested by the speed booster at the price they are offering it. If you want to se EF lenses, do yourself a favor and get one of the smallest Canon bodies !
Nobody is forcing you to use them, but it’s nice to have a choice… OTOH, some lenses will never be made for m4/3, F1.2 zoom ( that was already mentioned several times ) for example. That’s why this is such a great news.
It’ll mean I can use my EF 400mm f/5.6 L USM, until such time as P&O come up with native micro-4/3 telephoto primes.
rrr_hhh, I agree…I own 10 top notch lenses for my Canon 5D3…
I can see no reason to buy an adapter and mount them on a micro system where they would be ridiculously huge and operate poorly…
I prefer native glass as well.
Finally a senseful reaction !
I really don’t understand hy someone would want to mount a 400 mm or something like that on an MFT body..
I miss a shift lens on the MFT format, but my 24 mm would become a 48mm, or a 34mm with the speed booster, not wide enough to become interesting. And that lens already weight 800gr, so adding it to the 500gr. E-M5 or the 770 gr. 6D doesn’t make a big difference. Mounting the 12mm on the E-M5 makes a much lighter combo however..
it makes sense you find his comment making sense, because he said the same as you lol.
I think this work better with videographers than with photographers 😉
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I’m afraid if electronic interface means autofocus then it can take only a little time before those Canon lens focus drives go bust under the regular load of contrast detect hunting, similarly to some unhappy stories about Olympus “legacy” 4/3 lenses attached to m43 bodies.
This is awesome news for those of us that use the MFT system for FILM work -albeit the adapter provides image stabilisation! Panasonic’s pancake lenses are friggin’ useless for pulling focus.
Anyone know about the reliability of Dicahub? All previous rumours I read were putting the EF to M43 much later and every report of an August release seem to stem from this one Dicahub article…
Hi,
I’m asking myself if it will work with Zeiss Compact Primes too ?
WHERE IS IT??? ITS NEARLY THE END OF SEPTEMBER FFS!!!