APS-C and Super 35mm just went full frame - Metabones Speed Booster

[andy lee]

Hey Andy.

 

Please can you let me know the century model number for the wide angle adaptors with 72mm rear elements?  Im looking for one for anamorphic use

 

Century Optics Pro Series HD 0.7X WIDE ANGLE CONVERTER

for Sony HDV

 

front element glass is 82mm

rear is 60mm

72mm with the bayonet mount

 

Its big heavy and stunningy sharp!!

and makes your 50mm full frame into a 35mm full frame equivilent

 

I use it on my Tecnoir Cinema Rig supporting it using a clamp and rails

 

there is one on ebay here

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Century-Precision-Optics-0-7x-Wide-Angle-Converter-Lens-f-Sony-HDR-FX1-HVR-Z1U-/230903460835?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item35c2eb33e3

[tomekk]

Just to confirm. Does it mean all the high end L glass will be faster with better quality on a crop sensor? For example 24mm 1.4 which had FOV equivalent to 38mm on FF will have 24mm FF FOV with improved quality (will be 1.0 or whatever the math is).

 

WOW, If this is true, implications can potentially destroy FF cameras lines (unless it'll be possible to do similar magic for FF sensors). Companies could now make much better lenses for smaller sensor which outperform all the best lenses that exist now. By better I mean, they'll fix AF issues which from what I understand is the only known downside to this converter at the moment.

The question is when should I start selling my L primes and DSLR before nobody will buy them ;). sigh

[Xiong]

 

We can pretty much leave math out of it and pretend you have FF sensor, much easier. 

 

Yeah this makes it easier for me haha

[powderbanks]

so the one going on sale is an ef to e adapter, with the speed booster. for the m4/3 adapter that is supposedly going to be coming, will it be m4/3 to m4/3? or some other mount? if it is m4/3-m4/3, in theory, you should still be able to take your existing adapters and then use your legacy lenses, correct? it would be frustrating if they made a different speed booster for every lens mount; especially if they're $600 a pop.

[Andrew Reid]

It wouldn't be M43 to M43 that would be impossible! This takes a FULL FRAME lens and reduces it down, giving you a brighter image as a side-effect.

 

It can also take an APS-C lens and reduce that down to M43.

 

If you take a M43 lens and reduce it down you will have black edges to the image Powderbanks. Also focus would be completely broken.

[powderbanks]

It wouldn't be M43 to M43 that would be impossible! This takes a FULL FRAME lens and reduces it down, giving you a brighter image as a side-effect.

 

It can also take an APS-C lens and reduce that down to M43.

 

If you take a M43 lens and reduce it down you will have black edges to the image Powderbanks. Also focus would be completely broken.

 

yeah, i thought about that, and it doesn't really make sense. i was only thinking that you could use your current *insert mount* to m4/3 adapters on top of the speed booster, thus only needing one for a variety of lenses. but the physics of it don't make sense. most of my legacy lenses are canon fd, so i hope they make a fd to m4/3.

 

someone on mu-43.com claimed they got a response from metabones that the ef to m4/3 is supposed to be out in june, and others in feb-march

[richg101]

@ powerbanks

a m3/4 to ef 'speed booster' adaptor will still allow you to use a ef-fd, ef-OM, ef-m42 and ef to contax lens adaptor for use with vintage MF lenses. Just plan your lens choices based on if you owned an ef mount canon dslr. you can fit almost any old full frame lens to ef.

the only ones you wont be able to use is minolta MD mount which are not able to be adapted to canon ef.

[Tzedekh]

Wow, if I'm understanding this right, then an optical reducer could enable smaller sensors to achieve a shallow DOF when desired, but a deeper one when needed (e.g., shooting at night). Why limit yourself with a large sensor?

[tony wilson]

do not purchase straight away i guarantee already in china someone is copying the prototype.
within 3 months 5 different versions will be on the market.
as the china sharks copy and feed off each other the price collapses.
metabones will have the better engineering but a crap copy for 90 dollars who will turn that down.
who knows the copy might come from the same massive factory as the original.

[tomekk]

Wow, if I'm understanding this right, then an optical reducer could enable smaller sensors to achieve a shallow DOF when desired, but a deeper one when needed (e.g., shooting at night). Why limit yourself with a large sensor?

Total depth of field is virtually constant with focal length. Only limit with FF sensor is you can't use this thingy on it so u can't get faster apertures so yeah ;)

[Sean Cunningham]

Just read the write up on Philip Bloom's site.

 

If you read the comments you get Canon owners asking if they can use it with their Canon lenses. Bless em!

 

ROFL, they should say, "yes, but it'll cost you $6K."

[richg101]

do not purchase straight away i guarantee already in china someone is copying the prototype.
within 3 months 5 different versions will be on the market.
as the china sharks copy and feed off each other the price collapses.
metabones will have the better engineering but a crap copy for 90 dollars who will turn that down.
who knows the copy might come from the same massive factory as the original.

Sad but true. Innovative products need to be manufactured out of China if there is any chance of it retaining long term value. the locusts devour all profit margin and end up rotting the company to the point where it is no longer running and breaking the mould with new stuff. Based on western greed, sending all manufacture to china and paying peanuts, now the only option is to manufacture in China otherwise your prices are too high, and usually this means your product will soon appear under a number of different brand names, for less than a 3rd of the price you have to sell them to cover your initial R+D outlay and pay your overheads.

@ Tony. Do you think the Chinese will be able to mimic the optical design? moulding plastic and soft metals, and copying circuits but adding loads of hot glue to hide the bad soldering is something the chinese factories do well, but will the copycats actually be able to acquire the glass elements? I cant see them remaking elements without proper data or a direct supply

[Sean Cunningham]

do not purchase straight away i guarantee already in china someone is copying the prototype.
within 3 months 5 different versions will be on the market.
as the china sharks copy and feed off each other the price collapses.
metabones will have the better engineering but a crap copy for 90 dollars who will turn that down.
who knows the copy might come from the same massive factory as the original.

 

I'm kinda shocked, Tony.  Given that this is an optical and not simply a mechanical design to reproduce wouldn't these be in a similar boat with the knock-off designs for anamorphic adapters out there?  You pretty much universally hate those.

 

Just an observation, not an indictment.

[jbgeach]

I have no idea why we even need large sensors when small sensors can gain 4 stops with an optical reducer completely overcoming any shortcomings with regards to noise and a shallow depth of field

 

The reason is enlargement ratio. There is always a degradation of image quality when enlarging an image. The smaller the sensor, the more times an image must be enlarged to make the display size. Example. MFT has to be enlarged about 10 x to print an 8x10. A Full frame sensor only has to be enlarged about 5 times. This means that the larger sensor will be able to hide more defects than a smaller sensor, because it has been enlarged so much. 

 

My wife as recently watching an American Civil War documentary and commented on how clear the images were for being taken 150 years ago. I explained to her that most of these prints were contact prints, with no enlargement taken on 8"x10" film. 

 

Larger sensors will always have a greater quality to them, however, this prevents the camera from "wasting" all the information that was just thrown away before, by focusing the full frame image onto a crop sensor.

 

A better way to think about this for those who understand anamorphic, is that an anamorphic lens makes you lens wider by compressing a very wide image onto the sensor, so no image is lost (cropped) the allows you to use a longer lens. 

 

Mine is on order

[Purpleone]

@ powerbanks

a m3/4 to ef 'speed booster' adaptor will still allow you to use a ef-fd, ef-OM, ef-m42 and ef to contax lens adaptor for use with vintage MF lenses. Just plan your lens choices based on if you owned an ef mount canon dslr. you can fit almost any old full frame lens to ef.

the only ones you wont be able to use is minolta MD mount which are not able to be adapted to canon ef.

fd-EF adapters that give you infinity focus use a glass element usually about 1.33x multiplier even on the good quality glass. So totally negates the gain given by the adapter.  I don't see this as usable for FD glass, hopefully they will make an FD to m43, but until then for me it will means complete new lens set.  Initial excitement wanes but still excellent product.

[KirkGaydon]

The question is when should I start selling my L primes and DSLR before nobody will buy them ;). sigh

 

Ha, I'll take your L primes off your hands cheap if they actually produce a m43 to EF adapter, but you can keep the DSLR body  :D

[userage]

Holy crap that is amazing :D

[tomekk]

The reason is enlargement ratio. There is always a degradation of image quality when enlarging an image. The smaller the sensor, the more times an image must be enlarged to make the display size. Example. MFT has to be enlarged about 10 x to print an 8x10. A Full frame sensor only has to be enlarged about 5 times. This means that the larger sensor will be able to hide more defects than a smaller sensor, because it has been enlarged so much. 

 

 

I don't get this part. James said optical performance increases due to image compression. So I guess the question is: by how much?

[tomekk]

Sad but true. Innovative products need to be manufactured out of China if there is any chance of it retaining long term value. the locusts devour all profit margin and end up rotting the company to the point where it is no longer running and breaking the mould with new stuff. Based on western greed, sending all manufacture to china and paying peanuts, now the only option is to manufacture in China otherwise your prices are too high, and usually this means your product will soon appear under a number of different brand names, for less than a 3rd of the price you have to sell them to cover your initial R+D outlay and pay your overheads.
 

This is a little bit offtopic but I'd like to point out you got it backwards. Customers want the lowest possible price for the best possible product. So by saying greedy do you mean yourself? Companies in order to deliver what customers want look for ways to make production as cheap as possible for customers. It's good for everyone. Don't want to make it long so I stop here.

[QuickHitRecord]

Micro Four Thirds sensors are not all alike. There's a 1.86x crop on the GH2 and a 2x crop on the GH3. I wonder how they will accomodate this?