GH4 mitakon turbo
- Thread starter Lindquist
- Start date
brianc1959
Active member
The "smart" Canon-EF to m4/3 Speed Booster is $599, not $700. Other versions of the m4/3 Speed Booster cost around $400. The special Blackmagic versions of the Speed Booster also use the m4/3 mount and are a bit more expensive, but these are specialized products with a more complex 6-element design optimized for the unique sensor sizes and filter thicknesses found in the BMPCC and BMCC cameras.
The "smart" version allows you to change the aperture of Canon-EF lenses, and also supports image stabilization. The m4/3 Speed Booster and Lens Turbo use completely different optical systems, with the Speed Booster giving superior results, especially at large apertures. At small apertures the Lens Turbo suffers from a pronounced central hotspot, which can be a problem with certain subjects and lighting conditions. See http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3627547 for more details (note, tests done on a G6, not GH4).
I own both and find the Mitakon adapter to be quite usable, though not as good as the Metabones adapter. (which is to be expected given the price difference)
I haven't had a chance to do performance test comparing to the two, but will try and get this out soon.
Also, if you're not using a "smart" (electronic) Metabones adapter (like the Nikon G adapter) the cost is about $400 US, or about 3x the price of the Mitakon.
I haven't had a chance to do performance test comparing to the two, but will try and get this out soon.
Also, if you're not using a "smart" (electronic) Metabones adapter (like the Nikon G adapter) the cost is about $400 US, or about 3x the price of the Mitakon.
DPStewart
Veteran
Beware!
i have the Mitakon Nikon to m4/3 booster and although it's fine indoors and in low light....it is UNUSABLE outdoors in daylight.
im sending it back. The blue/purple spot in the center is Extremely visible at f5.6! Not just when stopped down. I just did a shoot outdoors with the sun BEHIND me, the clouds in front brightly lit, and if even a little bit of the the sky at zebra 95% got in the shot then ZAP goes the big spot right smack in the middle.
It's going to hurt...A LOT....but I have to trade this thing in for the Metabones.
i thought it was great indoors and in lowlight until this shoot......fail.
Im actually going to spend the extra $60 and get the $490 BMCC version because it will boost even more, and if you're careful, it fits on the Pannys.
i have the Mitakon Nikon to m4/3 booster and although it's fine indoors and in low light....it is UNUSABLE outdoors in daylight.
im sending it back. The blue/purple spot in the center is Extremely visible at f5.6! Not just when stopped down. I just did a shoot outdoors with the sun BEHIND me, the clouds in front brightly lit, and if even a little bit of the the sky at zebra 95% got in the shot then ZAP goes the big spot right smack in the middle.
It's going to hurt...A LOT....but I have to trade this thing in for the Metabones.
i thought it was great indoors and in lowlight until this shoot......fail.
Im actually going to spend the extra $60 and get the $490 BMCC version because it will boost even more, and if you're careful, it fits on the Pannys.
I have had similar color "ghosting" in the blacks from the Metabones Nikon adapter when there is a strong backlight source in the frame, so the Metabones adapter is not completely immune to this problem. When I finally get around to shooting a proper test, I will have to see if I can rig a back-lit shot to see how the two adapters compare under these strong back-lit conditons.
DPStewart
Veteran
OK - I need to revise my warning about the Mitakon Lens Turbo (original, not the Lens Turbo II) for Nikon to M4/3.
Revision Revision Revision:
I did a bunch of far more in-depth tests and I was able to determine EXACTLY what will cause the Blue/Purple spot in the middle of the image.
It's not nearly as bad as I feared.
It happens when some portion of your shot, that is roughly 5% of the frame or greater, is significantly over exposed/CLIPPED. But it does not seem to happen if the total area of over exposure is less than 5% of the frame.
This is almost always a portion of the sky, or a significantly bright light shining close to or directly at your lens.
And it DOES need to be "significantly" clipped.
I found (I didn't record - I just looked at my 7" monitor as I varied what I was pointed at) that the degree of over exposure that causes the blue/purple spot to appear is roughly 1/2 OF A STOP or greater. Meaning that if even 1/4 of my whole frame was clipping - but only clipping by about 1/2 of a stop or less - then the blue/purple spot did NOT appear. Whew!....
Once a clipped area is clipping by more than 1/2 of a stop then the artifact appears.
THIS MEANS:
This means that clipped skies in your frame will probably almost NEVER work.
It means that lights in your frame need to either be clipping by only a small amount, or simply be very small in size within your frame.
I shot through a dense Orange Tree and found NO artifact spot even though the sun peaking through the leaves was clipping by at least a whole stop. The spots of light coming through were each very small and did not make up more than 5% of the entire frame.
I also found NO ARTIFACT spot in a frame that showed about 1/3rd of the entire frame being clipped - the outside walls of a house reflecting sunlight - because although my GH2 blinkies were flashing on it - I DID record that one, and by bringing down the gamma in the computer I saw that those areas were really only just barely clipped - maybe by only 1/2 of a stop at most.
CONCLUSIONS:
Of course the Metabones is better even if it's not perfect.
But $430 vs. $135 (For the Nikon to M4/3 version) just simply IS going to be a factor for many people - myself included.
But INDOORS? With any thing even like controlled light? It's fine. It's not going to be a problem.
Even OUTDOORS, many shooting scenarios will not pose any problems.
But in some cases - and common cases at that - it is just not going to work.
But for $135 I feel very strongly that I got a very respectable tool at a very affordable price.
BTW: You see that member who posted the first response - brianc1959 ?
That's the man who INVENTED the lens for Metabones to create this whole speed booster thing! (Or "designed it". We know focal reducers already existed.)
Yeah, that blows my mind that FOR FREE we can just sit here with our smug little keyboard poking selves and actually converse with the guy who helped invent a tool that has significantly changed photographic equipment for the whole planet.
And he's not the only one here like that.
This place is really freakin' incredible.
Revision Revision Revision:
I did a bunch of far more in-depth tests and I was able to determine EXACTLY what will cause the Blue/Purple spot in the middle of the image.
It's not nearly as bad as I feared.
It happens when some portion of your shot, that is roughly 5% of the frame or greater, is significantly over exposed/CLIPPED. But it does not seem to happen if the total area of over exposure is less than 5% of the frame.
This is almost always a portion of the sky, or a significantly bright light shining close to or directly at your lens.
And it DOES need to be "significantly" clipped.
I found (I didn't record - I just looked at my 7" monitor as I varied what I was pointed at) that the degree of over exposure that causes the blue/purple spot to appear is roughly 1/2 OF A STOP or greater. Meaning that if even 1/4 of my whole frame was clipping - but only clipping by about 1/2 of a stop or less - then the blue/purple spot did NOT appear. Whew!....
Once a clipped area is clipping by more than 1/2 of a stop then the artifact appears.
THIS MEANS:
This means that clipped skies in your frame will probably almost NEVER work.
It means that lights in your frame need to either be clipping by only a small amount, or simply be very small in size within your frame.
I shot through a dense Orange Tree and found NO artifact spot even though the sun peaking through the leaves was clipping by at least a whole stop. The spots of light coming through were each very small and did not make up more than 5% of the entire frame.
I also found NO ARTIFACT spot in a frame that showed about 1/3rd of the entire frame being clipped - the outside walls of a house reflecting sunlight - because although my GH2 blinkies were flashing on it - I DID record that one, and by bringing down the gamma in the computer I saw that those areas were really only just barely clipped - maybe by only 1/2 of a stop at most.
CONCLUSIONS:
Of course the Metabones is better even if it's not perfect.
But $430 vs. $135 (For the Nikon to M4/3 version) just simply IS going to be a factor for many people - myself included.
But INDOORS? With any thing even like controlled light? It's fine. It's not going to be a problem.
Even OUTDOORS, many shooting scenarios will not pose any problems.
But in some cases - and common cases at that - it is just not going to work.
But for $135 I feel very strongly that I got a very respectable tool at a very affordable price.
BTW: You see that member who posted the first response - brianc1959 ?
That's the man who INVENTED the lens for Metabones to create this whole speed booster thing! (Or "designed it". We know focal reducers already existed.)
Yeah, that blows my mind that FOR FREE we can just sit here with our smug little keyboard poking selves and actually converse with the guy who helped invent a tool that has significantly changed photographic equipment for the whole planet.
And he's not the only one here like that.
This place is really freakin' incredible.
Last edited:
I noticed this problem with my Metabones adapter when I was shooting a corporate interview against an office window that overlooks the city of Toronto. The person being interviewed was wearing a dark brown jacket with a black sweater underneath, and I had him framed against a large window that overlooks the city, with the city being over exposed about 2 F-stops. With the Metabones adapter his black sweater was turning a bright deep blue that had the appearance of almost lens flare. I noticed the problem while shooting, but did not have time to fix it. I know from past experience that I would not get this color bleed when I shot with my Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8 under similar conditions, but at the time I did not want to switch lenses and have to restart the interview.
Batutta
Major Contributor
One consideration as well is that if you're shooting outdoors on a bright day do you even need a speedbooster? The biggest advantage of using a speedbooster is getting a wider field of view (useful indoors in small spaces), as well as more f-stop and shallower depth of field. But outdoors you can usually position yourself further from the subject and don't need to go as shallow with your DOF to get good background separation, and during the day you're certainly not lacking for light even with a slow lens.
DPStewart
Veteran
You're completely right of course.
I was using the speed booster outdoors on a couple of "outdoor cafe" scenes and I needed it to deliver both a wider field of view on my favorite Nikon lenses, which are not very wide on the M4/3 GH2 (I could only back up so far), and also to gain as shallow a depth of field as reasonably possible for the closer shots.
I ultimately decided that for a paltry $135 it is still a very high-value tool. It's just not a "set it and forget it" tool like a simple adapter.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
This is why I bought mine from RJ Cameras (very similar to the Mitakon, wouldn't be surprised if they sourced mostly the same factory). RJ was actually answering my emails about his product and sent me the latest batch since the original ones all had the "blue dot" problem.
I did a test the day I got it outside, and while this lens flares up a lot anyway, I think it came out pretty good. I was actually *trying* to make it happen at some points.
I did a test the day I got it outside, and while this lens flares up a lot anyway, I think it came out pretty good. I was actually *trying* to make it happen at some points.
M. Gilden
Canon DSLR Moderator
^ to be clear, I *have* seen the blue dot appear in studio settings when I'm trying to do things like blow out a white background. The RJ version of this adapter is NOT immune. But it ain't bad. Neither is as reliable as the Metabones, but for less than the price of one I bought 2 of these (EF and FD, so I can effectively use my Canon mount glass, Nikon mount, and FD mount, which is 90% of my collection).
Bruce Foreman
Veteran
More on the "blue dot" problem...
I just received an RJ unit purchased from a forum member and am in the middle of testing it first with a 24mm f2.8 Nikkor in Nikon F mount (from about the late 1950's to 1960's era, but in almost brand new "pristine" condition). First look through the lens in my dining room near a bay window facing afternoon sunlight...The viewfinder literally "FLOODED" with blue internal flare and reflections! Even when not pointed in the direction of the bay window.
The cure...A deep lens hood.
Nothing works if pointed into a bright source, but you have flare and internal reflection problems with any "bare" lens wide enough to be susceptible to strong stray light. But when dealing with a focal reducer you have added about 8 more reflective surfaces to those already in your prime or zoom lens.
The hood I use is an inexpensive 52mm rubber lens hood that "collapses" in two stages allowing one hood to be used with "long normal" to "wide normal" perspective lenses. Fully extended it provides an awful lot of lateral shading which can prevent a lot of lens flare from stray strong sunlight (or other sources) even when not pointing at the strongest source.
And it seems to do this without any vignetting fully extended on that 24mm with focal reducer giving me about a 35mm ff equiv FOV ("wide" normal).
I often found on location shoots sunlight coming from a 45 degree angle could be a real problem as my employer (USAF) and supervisory personnel did not understand the importance of having REAL lens hoods available.
We were often working with "naked" lenses (I'd been accustomed to using some kind of hood on everything except "wides" since the 1960's).
So I would have someone shield the lens from unwanted direct stray light with a clipboard or something like that.
What I've suggested here may not fully "solve" the problem but coupled with an awareness of lighting problems it will go a long way towards minimizing it.
It may take some testing to find the right "depth" lens hood that won't also run the risk of vignetting. But the "blue spot" is not a problem I'm having. This looks very close to the hood I'm using (I've had mine for a few years now).
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1068778-REG/sensei_lhr_t52_52mm_3_in_1.html
Not bad for a $6.95 solution...
I just received an RJ unit purchased from a forum member and am in the middle of testing it first with a 24mm f2.8 Nikkor in Nikon F mount (from about the late 1950's to 1960's era, but in almost brand new "pristine" condition). First look through the lens in my dining room near a bay window facing afternoon sunlight...The viewfinder literally "FLOODED" with blue internal flare and reflections! Even when not pointed in the direction of the bay window.
The cure...A deep lens hood.
Nothing works if pointed into a bright source, but you have flare and internal reflection problems with any "bare" lens wide enough to be susceptible to strong stray light. But when dealing with a focal reducer you have added about 8 more reflective surfaces to those already in your prime or zoom lens.
The hood I use is an inexpensive 52mm rubber lens hood that "collapses" in two stages allowing one hood to be used with "long normal" to "wide normal" perspective lenses. Fully extended it provides an awful lot of lateral shading which can prevent a lot of lens flare from stray strong sunlight (or other sources) even when not pointing at the strongest source.
And it seems to do this without any vignetting fully extended on that 24mm with focal reducer giving me about a 35mm ff equiv FOV ("wide" normal).
I often found on location shoots sunlight coming from a 45 degree angle could be a real problem as my employer (USAF) and supervisory personnel did not understand the importance of having REAL lens hoods available.
We were often working with "naked" lenses (I'd been accustomed to using some kind of hood on everything except "wides" since the 1960's).
So I would have someone shield the lens from unwanted direct stray light with a clipboard or something like that.
What I've suggested here may not fully "solve" the problem but coupled with an awareness of lighting problems it will go a long way towards minimizing it.
It may take some testing to find the right "depth" lens hood that won't also run the risk of vignetting. But the "blue spot" is not a problem I'm having. This looks very close to the hood I'm using (I've had mine for a few years now).
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1068778-REG/sensei_lhr_t52_52mm_3_in_1.html
Not bad for a $6.95 solution...