Advice for an adapter (Zhongy, Metabones, RJ)

[JazzBox]

Ciao!

I'm thinking to buy a Speedbooster (or something similar) in order to have a Super 35 crop on my GH4 and a 2x crop on Micro Cinema Camera.

Searching an adapter that could work on both I saw this Lens Turbo: http://www.zyoptics.net/product/zhongyi-lens-turbo-adapters-for-micro-four-thirds-cameras-m43/ 

What do you think about it? I don't really need an active adapter since my lenses are Zeiss CY with CYtoEF ring. Any problem with flange?

What about RJ?

Thank you very much! 

[jagnje]

I just ordered the same one. Will share my results in a week or so.

[fuzzynormal]

In my experience, cheap Chinese speed boosters can struggle with QC.  You may find that shorter lenses mounted to a "dumb" speedbooster will not focus to infinity because the build is slightly off.  I can't mount a 24mm to mine and make it work, for instance.

I've read on a forum or two that Metabones suffers from a reputation of questionable QC as well.  Since I heard that on the internet it must be true.

[Vladimir]

Just getting excited about this one: http://www.zyoptics.net/product/zhongyi-lens-turbo-for-sony-e-mount-cameras-sony-nex-a7/ for 120fps a7sII (make it atleast APS-C and one stop of light which is very usable in HFR mode) but turns out "It cannot be used in Sony A7". Whats that mean?.. Only A7 or whole A7xx series? Or they mean that their adapter don't turn FF into MF for A7?)

3 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

I've read on a forum or two that Metabones suffers from a reputation of questionable QC as well.

So why payin more? It they both suggest manual calibration)

[JazzBox]

10 hours ago, jagnje said:

I just ordered the same one. Will share my results in a week or so.

Thank you!

6 hours ago, Vladimir said:

Just getting excited about this one: http://www.zyoptics.net/product/zhongyi-lens-turbo-for-sony-e-mount-cameras-sony-nex-a7/ for 120fps a7sII (make it atleast APS-C and one stop of light which is very usable in HFR mode) but turns out "It cannot be used in Sony A7". Whats that mean?.. Only A7 or whole A7xx series? Or they mean that their adapter don't turn FF into MF for A7?)

So why payin more? It they both suggest manual calibration)

I think it was designed for APSC, not for FF.

[BrorSvensson]

6 hours ago, Vladimir said:

Just getting excited about this one: http://www.zyoptics.net/product/zhongyi-lens-turbo-for-sony-e-mount-cameras-sony-nex-a7/ for 120fps a7sII (make it atleast APS-C and one stop of light which is very usable in HFR mode) but turns out "It cannot be used in Sony A7". Whats that mean?.. Only A7 or whole A7xx series? Or they mean that their adapter don't turn FF into MF for A7?)

So why payin more? It they both suggest manual calibration)

you can use it on a7 (i have done it). They just mean you "cant" use it in full frame mode because you get a massive vignette. In apsc mode it works great.

[JazzBox]

39 minutes ago, BrorSvensson said:

you can use it on a7 (i have done it). They just mean you "cant" use it in full frame mode because you get a massive vignette. In apsc mode it works great.

How good is the quality? Is it true that using speedsters you could have some "blue spot" in particular light's condition?

Thank you!

[Justin Bacle]

I have both an RJ FOcal reducer (MD -> FX) and Mitakon Lens Turbo II (MD -> M43) and here is my thought on both of them.

The RJ, is cheap and fun to use. But corners of the image gets very soft and it is not good for fast aperture lenses (my 50/1.4@1.4 is dreamy like with the RJ adapter). Built quality is good enough though. I'll just think that the RJ focal reducer is good if you are not seeking sharpness and contrast. (Plus the RJ suffers from "blue flare" which was also present on the first versions of the lens turbo but corrected on the lens turbo II.

The Mitakon is very good in terms of quality. No loss of contrast or sharpness. Build quality is good except that the mount is not stiff enough. The lens can move on it by a degree. Which makes follow focusing a hell ... I do not know if it is a QC problem as I do not know anyone else with a Lens Turbo II MD -> M43.

I used the Metabones once. I dont think it worth the extra money compared to the lens turbo II. Build quality is a bit better, but thats it. Image quality wise, both are very good.

[Bioskop.Inc]

I've got the RJ Focal reducer M42 to M4/3 & its just fine - no blue spot that everyone goes on about & have even fooled people thinking that it was the official SpeedBooster.

However, I've heard/seen some pretty awful example footage of both the Mitakon & RJ - so all I can think is that QC isn't the best or that some lenses don't play well with these cheaper versions. Personally, i'm using Vintage M42 lenses in combo with Anamorphic lenses (Isco 54 & WS 2000) with no problems encountered (perhaps they hide the ugly stuff?) and I do believe that the newer sharper lenses just exaggerate all the defects inherent in the cheaper SBs. Or are the M42 cheap SBs just not experiencing the troubles - don't know.

Then again, people have had issues with the official SpeedBoosters too, so go figure. Are the official SBs worth so much more, that's between you & your wallet.

I need a Nikon to M4/3 version for my Tokina AT-X Pro/Nikon Ai-s lenses & am on the fence between the Mitakon & the RJ - so much debate about which ones are better & it has become soooo confusing.

Anyone had experience with Nikon to M4/3?

[mercer]

19 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

I've got the RJ Focal reducer M42 to M4/3 & its just fine - no blue spot that everyone goes on about & have even fooled people thinking that it was the official SpeedBooster.

However, I've heard/seen some pretty awful example footage of both the Mitakon & RJ - so all I can think is that QC isn't the best or that some lenses don't play well with these cheaper versions. Personally, i'm using Vintage M42 lenses in combo with Anamorphic lenses (Isco 54 & WS 2000) with no problems encountered (perhaps they hide the ugly stuff?) and I do believe that the newer sharper lenses just exaggerate all the defects inherent in the cheaper SBs. Or are the M42 cheap SBs just not experiencing the troubles - don't know.

Then again, people have had issues with the official SpeedBoosters too, so go figure. Are the official SBs worth so much more, that's between you & your wallet.

I need a Nikon to M4/3 version for my Tokina AT-X Pro/Nikon Ai-s lenses & am on the fence between the Mitakon & the RJ - so much debate about which ones are better & it has become soooo confusing.

Anyone had experience with Nikon to M4/3?

A little off topic, but I am looking at a couple AT-X lenses... Which ones do you have? I'll also pick up a Turbo II as well, so this topic came up at the perfect time. 

2 hours ago, Justin Bacle said:

I have both an RJ FOcal reducer (MD -> FX) and Mitakon Lens Turbo II (MD -> M43) and here is my thought on both of them.

The RJ, is cheap and fun to use. But corners of the image gets very soft and it is not good for fast aperture lenses (my 50/1.4@1.4 is dreamy like with the RJ adapter). Built quality is good enough though. I'll just think that the RJ focal reducer is good if you are not seeking sharpness and contrast. (Plus the RJ suffers from "blue flare" which was also present on the first versions of the lens turbo but corrected on the lens turbo II.

The Mitakon is very good in terms of quality. No loss of contrast or sharpness. Build quality is good except that the mount is not stiff enough. The lens can move on it by a degree. Which makes follow focusing a hell ... I do not know if it is a QC problem as I do not know anyone else with a Lens Turbo II MD -> M43.

I used the Metabones once. I dont think it worth the extra money compared to the lens turbo II. Build quality is a bit better, but thats it. Image quality wise, both are very good.

I also have a few MInolta lenses. And am looking at the Turbo II. Which lenses do you use with yours and have you noticed that the turbo looks better with certain lenses?

[Justin Bacle]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

I also have a few MInolta lenses. And am looking at the Turbo II. Which lenses do you use with yours and have you noticed that the turbo looks better with certain lenses?

The lenses I use are the 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 50/1,4, 85/1.7 and 135/2.8

These lenses work as they should. There are only minor problems : 
- On the 85/1,7 (MC version), the aperture sometimes gets "stuck" when you close it. You just have to rock the DOF preview switch (on the lens) to unblock the aperture.
- On the 135/2.8, the aperture is stuck @ 2.8.

These aperture problems however can be fixed by removing a millimeter from the aperture pin on the lens, and is quite easy to do. I didn"t do it yet, as I still use my lenses with minolta SLRs and don't want to modify my lenses (yet).

I already shot basic tests of the lenses but haven't got to edit yet. Only the 28mm is visible here : 

 

[funkyou86]

I bought the Lens Turbo I 4 months ago, since that I had no problems with the IQ. I use with a 50mm Pentax SMC f1.7, 85mm Canon f1.8, Tamron 24-70. 

This is a great comparison:

 

Here are my latest two videos shot with it (there are also some canon shots)

 

[Michael Coffee]

I've got an RJ - happy with it but will definitely go the lens turbo ii for my next one - seems 95% as good as metabones, and less than half the price..

 

[Bioskop.Inc]

22 hours ago, mercer said:

A little off topic, but I am looking at a couple AT-X lenses... Which ones do you have? I'll also pick up a Turbo II as well, so this topic came up at the perfect time. 

I have the AT-X Pro 28-70mm f2.6/2.8 (the Angenieux designed version) & it's excellent, as it really adds that extra Angenieux something to the images - with a SB it will be even better.

[mercer]

21 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

I have the AT-X Pro 28-70mm f2.6/2.8 (the Angenieux designed version) & it's excellent, as it really adds that extra Angenieux something to the images - with a SB it will be even better.

Nice. I have been looking for one of those for awhile but I think Andy Lee inflated the market... Because they are pretty pricy... Lol. I have been looking to pick up some Angenieux c-mounts though... As you said... That Angenieux something. 

[Bioskop.Inc]

On 17/06/2016 at 0:25 PM, mercer said:

Nice. I have been looking for one of those for awhile but I think Andy Lee inflated the market... Because they are pretty pricy... Lol. I have been looking to pick up some Angenieux c-mounts though... As you said... That Angenieux something. 

If you look carefully there are lots around at decent prices - £150 to £250. I personally call that a bargin for what you get, especially considering you'd have to pay nearly £1000 now for the Angenieux original. Don't think Andy has inflated prices at all, only the people who are trying to rip lazy people off.

Look & you'll find a bargin - even if you have to buy from, say, Japan.

[mercer]

8 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

If you look carefully there are lots around at decent prices - £150 to £250. I personally call that a bargin for what you get, especially considering you'd have to pay nearly £1000 now for the Angenieux original. Don't think Andy has inflated prices at all, only the people who are trying to rip lazy people off.

Look & you'll find a bargin - even if you have to buy from, say, Japan.

Yeah, I'm sure there are. I saved the search on my eBay page. For the time being, I just picked up the Angenieux 10mm and 15mm c mount lenses. Am having a blast with old c-mounts and the BMMCC. 

[JazzBox]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I'm sure there are. I saved the search on my eBay page. For the time being, I just picked up the Angenieux 10mm and 15mm c mount lenses. Am having a blast with old c-mounts and the BMMCC. 

Could you please tell me more about those lenses? I also own the BMMCC and I'd love to know more about them

[mercer]

1 hour ago, JazzBox said:

Could you please tell me more about those lenses? I also own the BMMCC and I'd love to know more about them

The Angenieux are old 16mm film camera lenses from the 60s. I haven't shot with them yet, because I just ordered them, but from what I've seen online, they seem to be a little soft and dreamy wide open, but sharp enough stopped down a little... With an innate filmic look to them on the BMPCC and BMMCC. If you're looking for tack sharp lenses, then they probably aren't a good choice for you... If you're looking for softish lenses with character and a filmic look... Then they might be something you might like. Check out the c mount lens thread under blackmagic cameras for other options and there has recently been a few posts with c mount lenses under the lenses section as well.

[jonpais]

Personally, if I were to do it all over again, I'd check out the Aputure LensRegain: a focal reducer and electronic follow focus all-in-one. I believe it costs no more than a Metabones, and has additional functionality, which can come in quite handy when shooting on a gimbal stabilizer like the DJI Ronin. According to Cheesy Cam's tests, the optical quality doesn't suffer in comparison to the Metabones, either. I was quite disappointed when, after paying over $700 for my Metabones adapter (incl. shipping and customs fees), it was unusable because the infinity screw had come loose. I had to take it to a local repair shop, where it took a technician around 30 minutes to adjust. And according to Lens Rentals . com, this is a common issue with Metabones, which is why they can't recommend the device.