You have to see this to undertsand how revolutionary that new Speed Booster adpater is! As you know you can get those adapters on the Metabones website. The latest released adapter works with [shoplink 17671 ebay]Contax Yashica lenses (Click here to see the lenses on eBay)[/shoplink].
Nice video really!
57 Responses
“we get full frame back” – lol, no, you just use focal reducer. Still got the APS-C sensor.
“We’re getting this beautiful, full frame, cropless view” – And the APS-C view is horrible and ugly? o_O geez… that’s what I call a “blind Full Frame propaganda”.
This “oval thing” he observed is a natural consequence of a focal reducer. Kinda like an issue with coma or CA near the edges. Focal reducers share one thing in common: center can be razor shapr, edges very much depend on a lens used.
You really get your full-frame back!
The smaller APS-C size is compensated by the light increase!
Means you have two times the light, means exactly compensating the smaller area (same noise level)
Same for deep of file. With one aperture wider you have the same deep of field as with a FF sensor one step lower.
So in summary you have the FF performance and the FF deep of field and the FF angle of view
=> you have your FF back
You got similar field of view (video quite nicely shows it’s not exactly the same), you get similar depth of field (although with skewed bokeh), but nope, you don’t have a FF performance.
And there’s no magical light increase. Light that passes through the lens is always the same, only it’s focused on a smaller surface than it’d be otherwise. And this has got it’s own implications.
Of course the light increase is not magical. It adheres to the physics of light. Have you never fried an ant with a magnifying lens?
hi skywalker, thanks for the info! i have a c/y to nex speed booster and have noticed that my 50mm lenses (1.7 and 1.4) do a lot worse in the edges than my 85mm w/ the sb (although center is very sharp). also more barrel distortion with the sb on. i was slightly dissappointed by this because i’m interested in getting wide angle back. do you know whether shorten focal lengths are generally worse with a reducer?
Without the SB, you are using only the middle of the image. Generally the faults of any lens are mainly seen at the corners and edges.
Add the SB and you now see those blurry corners and edges that were previously hidden. The lens hasn’t got worse – you are just seeing how bad it is.
It is harder to design a wide angle lens that is good right to the corners than a normal or long lens.
No, it’s not that. In WA lenses light hits the SB at far different angles than in normal lenses what leads to loss of sharpness, increase of CA, vignetting, etc. It doesn’t have anything with WA lens lacking in sharpness.
For anyone doubting this product please few my speedbooster folder on flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8539414@N07/sets/72157633126249795/
Corner sharpness, barrel distortion, pixel peeping, blah blah blah. These things matter to people sitting around on internet forums discussing and dissing products they have never used. Real photographers, however, get out in the real world and use amazing new inventions like this to create art. You simply cant base the use of a photographic tool on simply what someone on a internet review says. Mount it up to your camera, take it outside, and make ART. Learn what it can do, learn its strengths and weaknesses and then use both of those to your advantage.
No one in the history of photography has ever won a Pulitzer Prize for the sharpest photo or any other silly technical detail like that. Paying clients though are another matter entirely. If your client desires edge to edge sharpness then use the proper tool for the job. Personally, I would have no issue taking my speedbooster on a paying job with such requirements. This thing delivers on its promise and does exactly as advertised. And I think the whole “FF propaganda” is just silly. This product brings my lenses back to 99% of their original field of view. And for me, and many other shooters, that is a miracle.
Forum trolls bitch and moan. Photographers take photos and make art.
+1
Lovely colours in your macro shots btw. 🙂
false dichotomy between tech and art, and i’d say your post is pretty troll-like.
you take photos of bees. some people are (artistically) interested in landscapes with deep dof, where corner sharpness does matter.
Freddo, thank you 🙂
Alan, looking back my barrel distortion comment wasnt about you specifically. My apologies if you took that personally. And to clarify, I shoot a lot more then bees. 🙂
Photography is always about the best tool for the job. There is no one single catch all solution for everything. Since you shoot landscapes have you considered using Medium Format?
My overall point to this is that many people here are just commenting on the comments someone else made in an internet review and dismissing it out of hand on that fact alone. In actuality the overall tone of the Camera Store vid was incredibly positive. But the trolls have picked up on one or two minor negatives which have little to no real world effect and responded that the SB is dead in the water. Typical troll behavior. I question (1) have these people actually used a SB and (2) do these people actually shoot photography and (3) do they actually own a camera.
You seem to say there is barrel distortion from your 50mm. Which lens has exhibited this for you and do you have any photo examples we could see? I agree that for landscape this could be unwelcome.
On that note, I personally believe nobody should be able to post to photography forums without a link beside their name showing their portfolio, either amateur or professional. That way we can know if their words carry any weight of experience or if they just parrot what they read on the internet. And 50 different photos of brick wall dont count. 🙂
And for anyone wanting photos of something other then what I shoot, here is a flickr group dedicated to the speedbooster. There is some wonderful photography there.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/2168861@N23/pool/
I don’t understand the hype either.
This is helpful for people who have many lenses for a full frame body and want to use them on their APS-C camera. But it is a mere minification adapter, it is expensive, and it brings some inconveniences with it.
It is certainly worse and more expensive than a proper lens with the same characteristic numbers.
you dont understand?
where can i get a 35mm f1.0 or a 16mm f1.0 to my nex 7?
this speed booster is very good for stills and huge for video!
Agreed!
100% agree with “huge with video”. Anything that can help me to use ISO 1600 instead of ISO 3200 with my existing equipment is worth the few hundred dollars.
If Sony can combine the quicker AF with metabones optics for a A to E mount adapter, that would be ideal. I would then start buying A mount primes for my NEX.
you can expect the lens prices to go up now when and if they make a A-mount version. Minolta has some very good lenses that don’t cost that much now that are a constant f4 to 5.6. like the 100-200 70-210 35-70 35-135 28-85. all those can be gotten for less than 100.00. I think I will get a few while the prices are low and resell later. This will be awesome for video but I am sure they will probably improve this adapter in the future. When I was younger I always wondered why I could not just get a camera and use whatever lens I want. This is now possible because of the Nex. I really think the NEX is the future of photography.
Wow, there are actually people who can’t see the benefits of the Speed Booster? 😎 I can accept that some thinks it is too pricey, we don’t all have the same economy or photo budget. That’s fully understandable. But Torsten, please tell me where I can get those cheap Carl Zeiss 25mm, 35mm, 60mm, all f/1.0. I am dying to know!
I think he does understand the benefits, only he doesn’t agree with the hype (eg. yay! Cheap Carl Zeiss f/1.0 – as you nicely demonstrated in here).
Sure, I am probably a dumbass who can’t see why people are not impressed by an adapter that helps you take a huge leap towards a FF NEX experience, fine. But the question still remains, where are those cheap 24mm f/1.0 lenses?
Freddo, Sky_walker is correct: I see the benefits, and I even mentioned a valid usecase for the speed booster.
But my impression is that people speak about it as if it were technically suprising in some way. It is not. The additional aperture comes from the fact that the original lens must work on a FF sensor. This requires more effort than creating a lens for APS-C. So you get more, and you invest more — no miracles here.
PLUS: You have to by the speed booster for $450.
Apparently only very few people are interested in f/1.0. Otherwise, such lenses would have more than a tiny tiny market share.
But the point is, you have two possibilities:
1. Use a focal length x, aperture y, with FF coverage(!) + speed booster.
2. Use a focal length x/crop, aperture/crop with APS-C coverage.
Both makes the same picture, but (2) allows for the better IQ and the lower price.
Note that lenses with shorter focal length allow for smaller f number as well because aperture can be kept constant (unless you want to go below f/1).
I know that adapters are nice — but no adapter is as much hyped as this one, and I don’t see why.
So, what you are claiming is that f/1.0 lenses are rare because people don’t want them? Wow, that was all news to me.
So, for the rest of you claim, my C/Y CZ 50mm f/1,4 with Speed Booster is $650. So please tell me, where is that sub $650 35mm f/1,0 lens with superior IQ you keep talking about? Tell me, I want to buy it.
I have never said you can buy your *EXOTIC* lens somewhere. All I say is that I don’t understand this hype, and gave reason for this.
And then: Why do you think the market for f/1.0 or f/1.2 is negligible? I’m curious. A speed booster lens could be glued to every lens by every manufacturer after all.
You WOULD understand if you had tried shooting with the (now discontinued) E 16/2.8 vs the Speed Booster and a 20/3.5 Nikon AiS lens. The difference in image quality is too big to miss. 😀
Discontinued where? Sony still lists it at Sony.jp and .com and nowhere does it say discontinued.
Anyone seriously compares anything to the Galaxy-worst-lens title winner?
“It is certainly worse and more expensive than a proper lens with the same characteristic numbers.”
It was a response to that statement. I agree it is not fair to compare anything with the E 16/2.8. 😀
Yeah, it is discontinued. Sony probably have loads of this unsold and are trying to unload it
Name me a more reliable source than Sony, to state that it’s discontinued. Rumors and hearsay don’t count.
Correction: Yup the famous 16/2.8 is on the list! I was too quick to give credit to Sony! 🙁
i am really enjoying using old c/y zeiss lenses for photo and video. tactile manual focusing and aperture control are much better than using e-mount lenses, and quite crucial for video especially. also the c/y speed booster is $200 cheaper than the canon.
on the downside, i do think people should be more aware of geometric distortion and edge sharpness. my 50mm lenses seem to suffer severe field curvature with the speed booster, plus more serious barrel distortion.
after watching this, i don’t feel too impressed.
the idea behind it is ingenious, but the price and the idea of using expensive autofocus lenses on the Nex is a bit of a turn off for me, the price i can sort of understand, but there is a lot of extra stuff going to waste like all the money i spend on the USM only to MF it
using Nex cameras as my main cameras for hobby, i would still much prefer getting a full frame Nex and just using compact Leica mount glass like the voigtlander 40mm f1.4 on this since i’m going to be manually focusing anyway…. might as well do away with the motors and such
and yes, i do also have a lot of money invested into canon lenses, including a 24-70 f2.8, 85mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4, 28-135mm IS USM, and many others… but still i would much prefer having smaller lenses on my Nex, thats one of the reasons i switched to the Nex anyway
Imperceptible? The guy doesn’t even runs a fully fledged comparison and claims that. And as stated previously, seriously, all this praise for FF? That sounds a tad like BS to me
I´m still waiting for the Canon FD to NEX adapter. Come on Metabones, I want it before my Nepal trip in August!
***IMPORTANT***
Admin, as of today, the Chrome desktop browser detects malware code running on your website. I’m posting it here so others are aware too and the feedback system tends to… work slower.
same problem here
not here
That’s because it was just fixed. 😉
This guy got PAIDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
honestly, lol at the price of the metabone, plus i got no EF lens. you might as well save that money and wait for a FF NEX.
It’s true, if you don’t have EF lenses, you’d be better served waiting for the new mirrorless. But if you happen to have EF lenses, the Speed Booster is an amazing tool for the price, especially considering that an EF->NEX adaptor without the optics will set you back $300-500.
I shoot the TCSTV videos along with Chris, and we’d like to make it clear that we have NEVER received money from any manufacturer for our reviews, have always tried to be honest and unbiased, and sometime a product comes around that we give an almost entirely positive review to, because we feel it’s really well designed and functional. We decided to look at the Speed Booster because I’d been using one and loving it on my Sony FS700, and we wanted to see how it would perform for stills as well.
Jordan @ The Camera Store TV
Hey Jordan, welcome to SAR. Always enjoy your energetic videos.
So many people here with criticisms haven’t used it before, and so many of you complain about price, are you all immensely poor or something?
Well the Speed Booster is great, I get sharp extreme corners on my NEX-7 with my AiS 50mm f1.2 lenses (yes, I have several of these lenses), also I get less vignetting with the AF-S 35mm f1.8 (yes, the DX lens) with the Speed Booster than on my D800, it is pretty freaking cool.
This is a typical comments that makes be suspicious: How can vignetting be reduced? Where is the additional light supposed to come from?
This is one of the comments that make me suspicious: How can vignetting be reduced? Where is the additional light supposed to come from?
I’ll attempt to answer you, but understand that I’m not much of photographer, just a enthusiast with a fair amount of understanding of physics.
The way I understand where the “extra” light comes from is the fact that the booster is focusing the image on a smaller area. So the amount of light per given area is, in fact, greater than “normal”.
Example: Think about using a magnifying glass to start a fire. There’s no extra light causing that extreme brightness and subsequent heat, it’s just refocusing the existing light to a smaller point.
This is not correct as far as I can see. grev compared the vignetting on a FF sensor with that on an APS-C sensor + speed booster. The speed booster simply makes the image smaller by a factor of 1.5. It is after the main lenses, so it must cope with the vignetting of the main lenses.
In other words, the speed booster indeed concentrates the light on a smaller area, but the relative brightness of different areas remains the same. Unless it darkend the centre area.
I would guess that the booster could help with vignetting since it is changing the angle of the light to the corners of the sensor. Since the light path angle is not as acute out the back of the lens (like on a longer lens), it might help with the fall off.
But without more advanced knowledge of optics, all of this is just educated guessing and I’m going to have to trust the people that have done hands-on reviews.
It does look interesting tho, I’d love to take one for a spin on my NEX6…
It (Speed Booster) does not darken the center or brighten the edges. What it does is to increase the modulation transfer so the edges are sharper on the APS-C than it is on a full frame (without the Speed Booster). Read the white paper available on the web and try to understand it instead of these one line debates. It answers a host of aspects.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll yell it again. Sony needs to couple this telecompressor/reducer with the SLT to compensate for the light loss. Add it as part of the SLT bodies, on E-mounts to accept FF NEX lenses, and an LA-EA_ that also supports tracking. There would be less need to even have a FF sensor and save consumers considerable money while getting the DoF of FF. Add a mirror flip up to SLT, and the stop faster of the reducer puts it on par with FF. Also, if the reducer were able to be at the mount in front of the sensor, the body could be fully sealed preventing dust onto the sensor.
Is it me or has Sony left its DSLR/SLT customers high and dry? If I didn’t have so much invested in this camera system I would look elsewhere. I love the Sony IQ and features/price compared to the competitors but can I least get a kiss after you screw me Sony with a new camera instead of a firmware update.
Yep. It’s just you. They just released as tack of excellent lenses, with brilliant 70-400 and even more outstanding 50 f/1.4 ZA. Seems like it’s quite contrary to what you imagine: they make a nice push with excellent glass and some really great accessories (I’d argue that HVL-60AM is the best flash for wedding photography on a market, especially if you love shooting vertical).
*a stack (not “as tack”)
yep, all waiting for full frame mirrorless, even dreaming medium format, but…
the future is in small sensors, small sensors give you natural human vision, the “artistic” defocus big apertures in 35mm is just that, a gimmick photograph trick, humans never see that way.
thats why if you show photos from a cell phone camera and a dsrl to average people on a tv, they will chose the cell ones, its a more natural human depth of field, sure the defocus has a wow factor, just like pop color, toy camera, etc but for real life shots, tiny sensors its the way to go.
with tiny sensors you get big apertures, more ligth with a big focus area, not like with a 35mm 1.2 where you get eyes in focus and the ears blurred.
jeliok I couldn’t disagree more with everything you just said.
jeliok, that is the biggest pile of horse shit since Louis XIV ordered up all the horse shit in France to fertilize the palace grounds at Versailles.
Here is another perfect example of why people commenting on photography blogs and forums should be required to post a link to their portfolio. jeliok, do you (1) even shoot photography? and (2) do you even own a camera?
Photography isnt about what the human eyes sees. Its about moving the human soul and making the human spirit sing.
I’m so ready to buy this, but the promise of a near-future MD version gives me the strength to resist.