GH4 Lense comparison with the Metabones Speedbooster on MFT

AD Tom

AD Tom

Active member
Hi guys,

here is a 4k test I made with the Panasonic 14-140, Nikon 17-35, Nikon 24-70, Tokina 11-16 and Nikon 50 1.4 on the Panasonic G7. If you just judge the sharpness the 14-140 it's the clear winner (what really surprised me). But see for yourself:


Cheers Thomas.
 
Well...that's one way to define it.

I have all of those lenses except the Tokina, and I PREFER the others for exactly the reason you prefer the Panny.

If you're after "documentary sharp" then the 14-140 certainly is that. All the other lenses still showed the impressive resolution without that edge that the Panny always has. I see them as taking off a part of the detail that I'd usually want taken off.

The Nikon 50mm f/1.4 has a great look to it, but I have 2 old Nikkor manual zooms that are sharper at the 50mm spot, although they're much slower lenses. So I don't know if that 50mm is necessarily a lens that's known for its sharpness.


I must say I've always liked the way that Panny 14-140mm gets control of the distortion at the 14mm end.
 
Last edited:
I don't "prefer" the Panasonic over the other lenses (I use them daily on my RED Dragon). I just wanted to find out how these lenses behave with the metabones speedbooster. So many users are talking about encreasing quality of their lenses with the adapter. In case of sharpness I see something different...
I'm planning another test series where I'll compare these lenses directly on the RED and on the G7 (with the metabones)
Cheers
Thomas.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand how any of you guys can seriously use the focus by wire lenses. It's a total deal breaker with the utmost extent. Trying to be fast and nimble with a non manual lens is toture. Just shot two weeks in Nicaragua with GH4 and canon 24mm pancake with a speed booster on a MoVI M5 and the focus by wire on that thing killed me. Was so freaking annoying. Never doing that again
 
There's talk of Panasonic cameras applying internal sharpening to the pictures when native Panasonic lenses are used. It can't be turned off. So Panasonic lenses appear to be sharper... even the cheap kit lenses look sharp... maybe even too sharp.

I use my old vintage lenses (Canon FD and Rokkors) to emulate the old film look for narratives. For documentaries and events I stick to the panasonic lenses, as I find autofocus very useful (I'm old.... eyes aint that good no mo').

I also use the Samsung Nx1, and find the 50-150S zoom much sharper than even my vintage, but renowned, teles like the Vivitar 90mm f2.5 macro ("Bokina"). I think it has to do with improved lens design and elements.

But thanks for the lens comparo! It's always interesting.
 
stabwound said:
There's talk of Panasonic cameras applying internal sharpening to the pictures when native Panasonic lenses are used. It can't be turned off. So Panasonic lenses appear to be sharper... even the cheap kit lenses look sharp... maybe even too sharp.

I use my old vintage lenses (Canon FD and Rokkors) to emulate the old film look for narratives. For documentaries and events I stick to the panasonic lenses, as I find autofocus very useful (I'm old.... eyes aint that good no mo').

I also use the Samsung Nx1, and find the 50-150S zoom much sharper than even my vintage, but renowned, teles like the Vivitar 90mm f2.5 macro ("Bokina"). I think it has to do with improved lens design and elements.

But thanks for the lens comparo! It's always interesting.
Click to expand...

Some good points.
If I had the time this month I would put all these lenses on one of my Blackmagic Pocket cameras because it's an MFT mount - that would negate any "Panny System" sharpening taking place with the 14-140mm. That would reveal if it is indeed a sharp lens in itself, or if it is being assisted by the internal Panny system.
One thing I do know for certain is that the Panny 20mm f/1.7 is not so notably sharp on the Pockets....so I think you're right.
 
Hi,

here is a continuation of our test with some more lenses (Nikon 50mm 1.2, Nikon 50mm 1.4, Nikon 24-70mm 2.8, Nikon 80-200mm 2.8, Sigma 50-500, Tokina 11-16mm 2.8, Nikon 105mm 1.8 und Panasonic 14-140mm):


Cheers
Thomas.
 
Which 14-140? Mk1 (f/4-f5.8) or Mk2 (f/3.5-f/5.6)? I've heard that the Mk2 is quite a bit sharper than the Mk1, but not sure if it's only noticeable on stills. The Mk2 is also supposed to have massive problems with micro-jitters.
 
DPStewart said:
Well...that's one way to define it.

If you're after "documentary sharp" then the 14-140 certainly is that. All the other lenses still showed the impressive resolution without that edge that the Panny always has. I see them as taking off a part of the detail that I'd usually want taken off.
Click to expand...

Hi,
Will turning setting Sharpness at -5 get rid of the additional Pannyy sharpness that seems to distinguish the native Panny lenses from all others? Will that result in a softer and less video look so that it's comparable (or better) than something like the Sigma 18-35 (besides aperture)?


Thanks
 
andvx said:
Hi,
Will turning setting Sharpness at -5 get rid of the additional Pannyy sharpness that seems to distinguish the native Panny lenses from all others? Will that result in a softer and less video look so that it's comparable (or better) than something like the Sigma 18-35 (besides aperture)?


Thanks
Click to expand...

Not exactly. This is because there is some extra degree of hidden automatic in-camera sharpening that the Panasonic cameras do when connected to their own Panasonic lenses.

So that over-sharp look of those lenses won;t be there if you put them on a different M4/3 camera that is not Panasonic.

I found a good solution though - if you don't mind spending a few bucks - get a Tiffen "Black Diffusion FX" filter. That one specifically - not the "Black Pro Mist". And get it at a low strength like 1/4. This is a diffusion filter that does a really great job of taking off that "digital edge" but without making the image look "misty" or "glowing" or any of the other things we usually associate with the use of a diffusion filter. In fact most people would never even guess you're using a diffusion filter at all. This particular filter is about the least intrusive looking of all the top-quality diffusion filters. And it is most definitely a top-quality filter. You can certainly use it with any other lens you could think of.

My guess is that if you tried one of these on your Panasonic lenses on a Panasonic camera - you'd never go back to shooting without it.
 
DPStewart said:
Not exactly. This is because there is some extra degree of hidden automatic in-camera sharpening that the Panasonic cameras do when connected to their own Panasonic lenses.

So that over-sharp look of those lenses won;t be there if you put them on a different M4/3 camera that is not Panasonic.

I found a good solution though - if you don't mind spending a few bucks - get a Tiffen "Black Diffusion FX" filter. That one specifically - not the "Black Pro Mist". And get it at a low strength like 1/4. This is a diffusion filter that does a really great job of taking off that "digital edge" but without making the image look "misty" or "glowing" or any of the other things we usually associate with the use of a diffusion filter. In fact most people would never even guess you're using a diffusion filter at all. This particular filter is about the least intrusive looking of all the top-quality diffusion filters. And it is most definitely a top-quality filter. You can certainly use it with any other lens you could think of.

My guess is that if you tried one of these on your Panasonic lenses on a Panasonic camera - you'd never go back to shooting without it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the suggestion. Looks like an interesting option and alternative.

Will the diffusion filter at all impact focus? And can the extra sharpening always be added back in post to achieve the no-filter sharpness look if required?

Besides the 18-35 aperture benefit, is there any benefit to going with the 18-35 over the native Panasonic with OIS, etc?

Thanks
 
andvx said:
Thanks for the suggestion. Looks like an interesting option and alternative.

Will the diffusion filter at all impact focus? And can the extra sharpening always be added back in post to achieve the no-filter sharpness look if required?

Besides the 18-35 aperture benefit, is there any benefit to going with the 18-35 over the native Panasonic with OIS, etc?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Once you use any real filter on the front of your lens - whatever it does is baked in to the image. So no, you can never "undo" any diffusion effect that you shoot with.

Diffusion doesn't really affect "focus", it softens all edges and also slightly reduces contrast. Although this is just the most basic description of a diffusion filter - each one will have its own characteristics.

Here is an EXCELLENT set of videos that will acquaint you with how many of the most popular diffusion filters actually LOOK.

https://vimeo.com/user2332866/videos


As for the Sigma 18-35mm Art lens - the overall image quality is so much better that the loss of OIS is not enough to recommend any Panasonic lens over it. Especially because you cannot use any speedbooster with Panasonic lenses.
 
DPStewart said:
Once you use any real filter on the front of your lens - whatever it does is baked in to the image. So no, you can never "undo" any diffusion effect that you shoot with.

Diffusion doesn't really affect "focus", it softens all edges and also slightly reduces contrast. Although this is just the most basic description of a diffusion filter - each one will have its own characteristics.

Here is an EXCELLENT set of videos that will acquaint you with how many of the most popular diffusion filters actually LOOK.

https://vimeo.com/user2332866/videos


As for the Sigma 18-35mm Art lens - the overall image quality is so much better that the loss of OIS is not enough to recommend any Panasonic lens over it. Especially because you cannot use any speedbooster with Panasonic lenses.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying and thanks for the Vimeo link.

Re: the Sigma with SpeedBooster. Is there any advantage to getting a SpeedBooster over a Lens Turbo Adapter II besides the obvious aperture advantage? The XL SpeedBooster is the cost of a Sigma lens itself. What are the benefits of the SB?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top