The new Speedbooster Ultra does everything the original first generation Speedbooster did…but it does it better! It has an advanced 5-element/4-group optical design incorporating ultra-high index tanatalum-based optical glass to achieve extraordinary optical performance with improved corner sharpness, distortion and reduced vignetting.
You can preorder them now at BHphoto:
Metabones Canon EF-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones QBM-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones Contarex-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones OM-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones MD-Emount Speed Booster Ultra -Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones FD-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones Alpha-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones Alpa-Emount Speed Booster Ultra -Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones Nikon G-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
Metabones Leica R-Emount Speed Booster Ultra-Black Matt (Click here).
This is the official press text from Metabones:
Sharper corners, less distortion, reduced vignetting
Like the revolutionary original Metabones Speed Booster announced in January 2013, the Speed Booster ULTRA has a magnification of 0.71x, and so it effectively reduces the crop factor of mirrorless cameras with DX-sized sensors, such as Sony E-mount and Fuji X-mount cameras, from 1.5x to 1.07x. However, the new ULTRA design makes very effective use of exotic materials at the furthest limit of glassmaking technology, and as a result is well corrected for use with virtually all fullframe SLR lenses regardless of exit pupil distance. Thus, the Speed Booster ULTRA performs extremely well with professional-grade f/2.8 zoom lenses such as the 24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 zooms by Canon and Nikon to produce 17-50mm f/2.0 and 50-142mm f/2.0 high-speed zooms, respectively. Similarly, high-speed fixed focal length lenses such as a 50mm f/1.2 will be transformed into a 35.5mm f/0.9 lens with excellent contrast and resolution from the center all the way to the edges of the image. (More information can be found in the press release here)
- Increase maximum aperture by 1 stop.
- Increase MTF.
- Makes lens 0.71x wider.
- Advanced 5-element/4-group optical design incorporating ultra-high index tanatalum-based optical glass by Caldwell Photographic in the USA (patent pending).
- Electronic integration of aperture diaphragm, controlled by or from the camera body.
- Partial autofocus support for late-model (post-2006) Canon-brand lenses.
- Powered by camera body. No external power source required.
- High performance 32-bit processor and efficient switched-mode power supply.
- The tripod foot is detachable and compatible with Arca Swiss, Markins, Photo Clam ball heads.
0 Responses
Does this work on a camera like A7s
no, its for crop cameras
It does work but you will have to enable APS-C mode in the menu.
It is rather odd for you to use a speedbooster on a full frame camera. It is designed for crop sensor cameras to take advantage of the “original” field of view of adapted full frame lenses, as well as provide an additional stop in aperture.
Philip Bloom touched upon this in his video review of the a7s and it was rather interesting. He talked about the rolling shutter in full frame mode and used a speedbooster in APS-C mode to show the difference in the extent of the rolling shutter, as well as other things. Link below and it starts around 28:18
http://vimeo.com/102448889
on the other hand, shooting video on A7 or any E-mount camera skips sizable percentage of sensor area and so wastes lens image circle compared to what is used for photo. A7 + SB is very much like square sensor some people were strongly asking for.
The question is which lenses did you want on it?
Zeiss 16-35 f 2,8 and Sony 70-200 f2,8
Those are already FF, just like your camera. What do you wish to achieve?
They are already full frame… nothing to gain by using this.
It’s probably interesting for m43 people but why should E-mount people care?
A plain A7…
1. will most probably cost less than A6000 body + this new SB
2. takes RF lenses
3. makes up for the 1-stop advantage with sensor size
4. has the same AF performance with Canon glass
5. has better overall features like better EVF
6. has better build quality
What am I missing?
A7 is BIG.
I agree. It is a dead end as far as the E mount is concerned.
Loxia is *an* answer to the speed booster. Small and compact lenses with superb IQ. 🙂
well, there are a few lenses, that while 2.8 and fine for day, i end up leaving at home if im doing some night handheld in ambient light and want to keep the shutter fast and the iso as low as possible.
i think thats the logic and target anyways.
I think you didn’t take the time to think that reply through.
why do you say? isnt the idea of a speedbooster to try and give you an extra stop?
You’re missing the fact that people already own APS-C E-mount cameras. If you were looking for a body to use MF glass on, solely, then sure, the A7 makes a lot more sense. However, if you like the wider lens selection and smaller size of the overall kit of the APS-C system, and already own an a6000 or NEX-7 or something along those lines, then this is $449 vs. $1200 for the A7, plus you don’t need to carry an additional body.
That’s a good point but it only applies if you’re completely devoted to a single mount. For people using MF glass from multiple mounts, this advantage quickly diminishes.
High end video cameras use super-35mm which is roughly APS-C size. The Arris, Reds, Canon cinema and video cameras like the Sony FS700 all use super 35. Most cinema glass is also super 35. I believe this new version of the speed booster is aiming the pro video crowd. The cheaper speed booster alternatives seem like a decent tradeoff for enthusiasts.
Having the speed booster also gives you flexibility with primes. Say your 50mm f/1.4 doubles as a 35mm f/1.0.
if aps-c being closer to super 35 matters then don’t use the speed booster. The adapter is there to get the full frame look.
On top of that, there isn’t that much of a ‘crowd’ out there. Rarely if ever I’ve seen any serious footage being produced with SBs even though all reviewers seem to be raving about it.
Super-shallow DOF is a niche application for video anyways. And the following two are identical in terms of FOV, DOF and exposure:
1. 30mm f4 on APS without SB
2. 45mm f5.6 on APS with SB
Not much of benefit…
It’s also supposed to improve the resolution but even 4K’s just 8MPs… if a lens can’t do that on its own there’s something really wrong with it.
This Speed Booster ULTRA is NOT fully compatible with full-frame Sony A7, A7R and A7S. When Speed Booster® ULTRA is used with Sony A7, A7R and A7S, the camera will turn on the “APS-C Size Capture” mode automatically.
… obviously, as this is designed for APS-C cameras.
Why would you use a speed booster on a full frame camera?
For video. Look up Philip Bloom’s tutorial on it. The idea has merit for certain video applications, namely reducing rolling shutter on the A7S.
Philip Bloom is full of shi*, if you wasn’t less rolling shutter just set the camera to APS-C capture mode, why muck up the image with this stupid adapter/speed-booster.
Precisely. The speedbooster is there so the focal length remains practically the same when using APS-C mode..
Probably the dumbest statement of the week.
Just wait, it’s only Monday.
Hard to surpass this one.
Not everyone understands how the speed booster concept works.
Thanks for posting this informative warning Guest.
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
Not everyone understands how the speed booster concept works.
Thanks for posting this informative warning Guest.
Don’t bother with the negative know-it-alls. Some folk just have to argue with everything, including the truth.
If you don’t understand something the best practice is to keep your mouth shut to avoid embarrassment, five minutes of research would have set the “Guest” straight as to the function of a speed booster. Why are you defending laziness and mediocrity, does this hit close to home?
When your mommy stops dresing you, understand that only children are afraid of being embarrassed. Adults make the world a better place by sharing information.
Now go blow your nose and put your jammies on. Tomorrow’s a school day.
Well now Sony’s lenses look even MORE ridiculously priced!!!
Canon cuts lens prices permanently – up to $1000 savings!
http://www.slrlounge.com/canon-cuts-22-lens-prices-permanently-1000-savings/
For a current pro kit
lets break this down a little with current pricing:
Canon 5d Mark 3
Canon 16-35 2.8 II
Canon 24-70 2.8 II
Canon 70-200 2.8 IS II
Total: $9500
Sony A99
Zeiss 16-35 2.8
Zeiss 24-70 2.8
Sony 70-200 2.8 G
Total: $9200
Add it up on B&H if you dont believe me
That should read Sony 70-200 2.8 G II
Before the price drop, you would’ve spent $10,200 for the same Canon kit.
What a great value!
And dont forget you get the a99 battery grip for free now too 😉
Zoom are good, but primes are better…. Especially if you want real quality shot.
But pros don’t care… it’s all money money money.
The newer 16-35/4L IS is better and cheaper than the 16-35 2.8L II from what I remember.
Also, the 70-200 2.8L IS II is very likely better than the Sony.
Always thought that you wouldn’t jump on this “better than…” train…
Ethan made a fair comparison with equal versions of lenses, so it doesn’t matter if the new f4 uwa zoom is better – btw, don’t forget to mention that the f4 version has IS, which is for some people an important info.
You are right. Technically the Canon tele zoom is better than the Sony.
But who cares? It doesn’t capture better images on its own…
Yes, I try not to but sometimes there are clear winners.
If we’re going to play the “the problem is behind the camera” card then let’s all pull out our iphones (I use samsung) and call it a day 🙂
Sure.
Hm, again I recognize that I didn’t came to the point.
What I wanted to point out is, that professional photographers (a real one) knows about the value (in terms of better income) of (even if only slightly) better equipment.
Secondly “better than…” is a question of individual perspective.
If you need the maximum IQ or maximum durability the Canon is the clearly better choice. If purchasing price is the primary point, than the Sony is the better choice.
Could of course be extended by the type of shooting, but then we’d need to add some more brands… 🙂
I have to hand it to A mount for having IBIS FF.
However, what we should also do when we compare different systems is use them the way they’re meant to be used instead of using the same technique. E.g. in reality we use a monopod if necessary but in A mount we may not.
Sony 16-35mm f2.8 has IS, so does the 24-70mm f2.8. Neither f2.8 Canon does. Though you are right, the 16-35mm f4 IS better and cheaper than the f2.8 in the Canon range, assuming f4 is sufficient (it is for many).
Sorry to cut-in but I use most of these lenses on Canon, and Sony FF DSLRs.
The 16-35mm f/2.8, and 24-70mm f/2.8 Zeiss lenses are better than their Canon equivalents with or without IS. They’re probably the best pair of zoom lenses in Sony’s entire line-up, for A-Mount users.
The Sony 70-200mm G2, and Canon are equally sharp, however the Sony lens is more responsive focuses faster, and has a better colour rendition “Minolta Blue”. The Sony also is much sturdier, and is very heavy. Sony’s disadvantage is its $3000.00 price tag, which is outrageous.
That’s why all around the world at any sporting event you see 90% of the pros who can choose to shoot on any lens system they want, shoot on Sony lenses. Oh wait… no, that sea of white lenses are Canon.
You might be right about the 16-35mm f/2.8, but the majority of working photographers and published professional reviewers call BS on the rest of what you said.
One question… are you using the Canon 24-70 2.8L II or I?
Again, I strongly doubt that the 70-200 G II is better than the Canon 2.8L IS II… but then again, they’re both zooms, so I couldn’t care less.
Canon is dropping prices out of fear, not because it wants to. Apparently something has Canon spooked. I’m guessing its either Sony’s 50mp A7X, or the 36mp, 12fps A99II.
And your package is screwed, the Sony is still $300.00 cheaper plus they throw in a free ($389) battery grip with every A99 purchase (689 difference). Plus you didn’t include a flash. If you look a tiny bit harder you can easily find better deals on the Sony gear.
Let’s see where the chips have fallen after Photokina.
nice try
Even Contarex but no Y/C?? Are they out of their minds??
awesome!
I am not really sure why speed booster reduce magnification ratio to 1.07 not to 1.01 🙁 Additionally, maybe they should consider true speed-booser for full frame body and medium format lenses. This would be better option like Planar 2.8/80 becomes Planar 2/50, Planar 2/110mm becomes Planar 1.4/70mm 🙂 Could You image that?
That’s exactly what metabones should release next. Contax 645AF to FE mount with autofocus! Plus Mamiya 645/PhaseOne645 to FE mount as well as Hasselblad to FE mount.
Gives us an extra stop of light, shallower depth of field than even a full frame DSLR offers, and most importantly… A reason for professional portrait photographers to shoot with the A7!
The issue is FF already has faster lenses than what a speedbooster adapter could give with mainstream medium format lenses.
It’s not “speed” in the sense of a higher light transmission that most portrait photographers are after. It’s the shallower depth of field and better subject to background separation that wide apertures afford.
And… F2 on a 645 negative is not only shallower than F1.4 on Full Frame, an 80mm standard lens also offers more compression than a 50mm standard lens does, plus less distortion with the same angle of view.
Trust me… Lots of portrait photographers would love to have a reasonable facsimile of the medium format “look” on a SONY A7.
You have a lot of things mixed up.
When “faster” was mentioned it wasn’t exclusively referring to transmission. It’s very common to say that one can use a fast lens for shallower DOF.
Also, 80mm on 645 translates to a 52mm equivalent FOV on the 35mm format… unless you frame diagonally. And the equivalent aperture is around f/1.3… but it’s ridiculous to think that using a generic adapter like this is going to give medium format-like results… heck, not even a purpose-built lens can do that easily.
No… a 80mm lens on 645 doesn’t offer more compression than a 52mm lens on the 35mm format. By that logic, when I use a 360mm lens on my 8×10″ I should get all flat people everywhere 😀
Hmm. Am I wrong about the compression? Are there any examples that you can think of that illustrate this? I always thought that because an 85mm lens brings the background closer behind my subject than a 50mm lens does, that the 80mm standard lens on 645 would have that same effect, only with a wider field of view because of the larger negative/sensor. Are 80mm medium format lenses different from 85mm Full Frame lenses in ways other than the different image circle that they cover? Do they compress the appearance of the distance between subject to background differently?
These are the very basics. Does a phone camera with a tiny sensor have less “perspective compression” compared to a dslr lens with the same field of view? The same law generalises between other formats.
Yes… waiting is good. Or you can buy a medium format camera and shoot and it’ll be better but nothing is as good as waiting, is it? ;P
If You have too much money, You may buy a medium format camera. I would like to stay with current FF camera and I could consider to buy medium-format speed booster. I am not sure if I really need it. I am already happy with my medium format lenses and full frame body. But if metabones need to make new products, which should be chosen by other to make some profits to them, I would like to propose them something which could interest other full frame camera owners. Other thing if it is really needed. But some soft of innovation are not really needed by most of population, they are need to make profits to owner 🙂
How is it too much money? Get a GW690III for $400 or so and you can easily match the quality that you get from a $55,000 80MP DMF kit. With the spare change you can buy 11,142 rolls of film (89142 shots). Or half that if you factor in processing costs.
You are right but I prefer not to use analog photography 🙂
Have you tried it?
It shouldn’t be Your concern, I had it at school practically.
I’ll take that as a no. Must be convenient to just shun things without learning to how to use them.
I always supposed that You cannot read with understanding. If I wrote You that I had this subject (analog photography + lightroom workshops) at school practically, it means I needed to make some outcome to graduate.
And from what you just wrote clearly you didn’t finish primary school grammar.
I am very grateful that I am able to write with such an expert in primary school grammar 🙂 I hope You would advice many other user too, I am sure they would be very thanksgiving too.
Can’t you already buy fast lenses for 35mm sensors anyway?
Yes, probably You are right 🙂 It is the same as buying faster lens for APS-C than addapting full frame lens with speed-booster. Both times You may buy faster lens but many times faster lens is more expensive than other lens with speed booster.
when i read “speedbooster ULTRA”
so excited, could it be true? the booster i had been waiting for years…
then i read and think “move on, nothing to see here”
Is there any reason there has never been a Sony Alpha to Micro 4/3rds speedbooster/focal reducer? Odd that less mainstream lenses with far lower available market have a micro43 speedbooster, but Sony/Minolta Alpha mount doesnt!
Probably lack of demand for that particular adapter, I suspect A-Mount users would prefer to use NEX or A7x cameras with Sony A-E adapters.
You may be right. Still, they do a Minolta MD to m43 one, presumably because there is a market for those looking for cheap video lenses (MD have full manual control, including aperture, and they are easy to de-click). MinoltaAF are not that far off, as they are cheap and its easy to control aperture (as its just a mechanical lever)
Does the Alpha to E version provide for AF and electronic aperture… like the Canon version does?
And does it provide for screwdrive Alpha AF?
No, if you want those features you need an LA-EA2/4 adapter and lose the Speedbooster.
More sensor envy, that’s what it is. Let’s face it your Cannon sensor sucks no matter how many lenses you have.
Your spelling sucks. So do your answers. But not as bad as your attitude.
It’s embarrassing that you guys have to rely on 3rd party adaptors so you can have lenses lol
I have all the lenses I need, other than the 16-35 which is coming
35
55
24-70
70-200
anything bigger ill just put 70-400 on my a77.
Same for every band….
It’s embarrassing you have nothing better to do with your superior system than coming here.
You’re confused, I think most here are using full frame cameras so we don’t need speed-boosters, it’s more for the cameras that use tiny sensors like the one you’re using. So shouldn’t you be embarrassed?
You know this isn’t Sony specific right?
I’d love to see some samples comparing the old version to this new one. I’ve been using the original since it’s release, and recently shooting in 4k with the O7Q and my EF glass and I haven’t really thought “hmm…. i sure wish this were sharper and better looking”
4k is just 8MP
maybe the update would be more important for photographers who want the full 24MP resolution
yeah, perhaps. but still, some direct comparison images would help. maybe the difference really is noticeable.
This ultra is crazy expensive…