GH4 Native Lenses vs. SpeedBooster & FF Lenses

J

JasonMillard81

Active member
Greetings,

I am looking for some banter on the topic of using native m43 lenses vs. a SpeedBooster + lenses.

Maybe you could provide both technical and anecdotal feedback on the following situations:

1. Video work - Narrative
2. Video work - Documentary
3. Photography

In each domain you would discuss the Pros and Cons of native m43 lenses vs. SpeedBooster + lenses.

I just got my GH4 and thinking about either getting a speed booster and working with my current line of lenses:

-Tamron 17-50 2.8
-Canon 50 1.8
-Samyang 85 1.4

OR

Sell them all and use the cash to buy native m43 lenses. A third option would be to keep them and slowly add native lenses. I personally do both photography and video and selling my 5d3 to pay for new lenses or speed booster.

Thanks in advance!
 
It just comes down to cost vs. DOF vs. AF vs. IS vs. focus throw vs. bulk/weight vs. future compatibility vs. AE capabilities. Simple!
 
I started with lots of Canon EF glass and thought I would be happy with that, using adapters and speedbooster, but I've gradually been selling off the EF lenses and buying native M43.

Why?

• The native lenses are smaller
• The native lenses are lighter
• I've found that in general day to day use the native lenses have been sharper edge to edge
• AF works for photography, though is less useful for video, and carrying around huge EF glass for manual only focus is a major pain (literally!)
• I can actually get 'enough' DOF while shooting wide open and still be sharp whereas I was often struggling with the EF glass to get either enough DOF or still be sharp wide open.

However, if you plan on shooting Canon again in the future then of course selling all the Canon gear now means you'd have to buy it all again in the future.

TBH, Canon seems really stuck on the idea of just trickling out new stuff and the last 3 or 4 bodies they've announced have been a little underwhelming (features that don't mean much to me). I don't care for all the front / back focus issues either. In 5,500 shots there hasn't been a single OOF shot from the GH4 that I can't point down to user error. I've never been able to say that for Canon (or Nikon for that matter - I've shot both).

I'm not ruling out shooting Canon again, I still have a 5D3 and C100, but they are getting very little use as the GH4 has stepped up to the plate for the vast majority of shooting I'm currently doing. Of course, that could change.

My bag has gone from weighing around 15Kg to one weighing 3.7Kg including 5 lenses!

I'm not knocking Canon, but for me, at this point in time, the micro four thirds kit is 'good enough'. I've stopped searching for perfection, it was just getting in the way.

HOWEVER, the native lenses are less follow focus friendly (smaller, different throw etc), so just keep that in mind if you're used to shooting that way.
 
100% shot using the 14-140 V1 Lumix.



I have the:
14-140
12-35
35-100
7-14
100-300

But I also have the speed booster to use all my EF glass. But most times I'm slapping on the Lumix glass.
 
I also do photography work and with the AF speed on the Panasonics along with the size advantage I definitely went native. Sold just about all my Nikon glass and got the three Panasonic zooms.
 
Wow so far an overwhelming push to ditch the Canon glass and go MFT completely! So far so good and surprised. Thanks! Look forward to any other perspectives on the topic.
 
Depends on what you do & how you work.

I have a single native M4/3 lens, the 14-140mm zoom. Sometimes it's the right lens.

I have a set of EF mount f2.8 zooms I use with an EF to M4/3 SpeedBooster when working quickly, as in run-n-gun.

I also have a set of Zeiss Contax primes & zooms I use with a C/Y to M4/3 SpeedBooster which I shoot the majority of my commercial projects with.

Just because a particular set of lenses might be right for the other guy, does not necessarily make them right for you!
 
If I were you, I would hold off selling your Canon gears, until you are fully confident that M4/3 system is for you and you have no more need of the Canon gears. If you are thinking only lenses, I will stick with M4/3 lenses as they are much smaller and lighter, with AF and IS, and the IQ of the latest Panasonic/Olympus prime and zoom lenses are almost as good as my best L lenses.

I am speaking from MY own experience. YMMV. I am one of the early M4/3 shooters, starting with G1, GH1/2/3, and own lots of good Panasonic, Olympus and Voigtlander lenses. I still own and use my GH1/2/3 regularly for both still and video, in addition to my Canon and Pentax gears. I just pre-ordered the Canon 7DII + the 24-70f4 kit as I was so unhappy about my GH3 body, which was practically falling apart on me. My GH1 & GH2 are still doing good. So, I have delayed my purchase of GH4 indefinitely due to the poor workmanship of the body. I hope the relatively light weight of the 7DII (I have been using Canon 1D series bodies for almost 10 years) will allow me to use it for traveling and tie-me over UNTIL Panasonic improves on their camera body quality. Until then, I plan to use my new 7DII as my main traveling camera body and use my M4/3 only as back up and for shooting handheld indoor under poor lighting condition.
 
Last edited:
I would buy the SpeedBooster right off the bat, as it's a very useful item to have in your kit, and it will give you a chance to evaluate if you want to keep any of your current lenses.

Myself, I use both native glass ( compact, sharp, OIS, AF ) and Nikon AI-S lenses with a SpeedBooster. There are definite advantages to both types of lenses, which is why I own both types.

My next lens will probably be the new Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 native because of it's range, ability to hold focus throughout the zoom range, and the lack of aperture "flickering" while zooming.
 
I love the rokinon cine lenses in MTF. I don't currently own an auto focus lens for the gh4, because I use it as a no budget cinematography tool. Still haven't unloaded my 60d yet.
 
Wow great insight all!

Very interesting almost contradictory hahaha :) thanks thought!


So then having read all that I may be leaning toward the following line of thought:


1. purchase a speedbooster for $600 and try out my lenses
2. purchase a tamron 24-70 for my "workhorse" equivalent to a 12-35 used for $900
3. Eventually get a native lense or two for AF photography
immediate cost = $1,500


Or


1. sell glass and recoup about $650 and buy a Lumix 12-35 used total cost = $400
Or
1a. sell glass and rcoup about $650 and buy a speedbooster + tamron 24-70 used total cost = $1,000
2. Wait until I figure out what I would need next in terms of photography/video for stills and lowlight




Thoughts?
 
I have a metric pantsload of lenses, from Speedboosted Sigma zooms (18-35, 50-150) to Leica and OM primes and others of various sorts.

However, on the GH4, my most-used lenses are:
1. Lumix 14-140 (V1)
2. Lumix 12-35
3. PanaLeica 25

It's just too dang handy having the AF capability at the flick of a switch for working fast, and they don't unbalance the camera like the Sigma zooms tend.

On my AF100, I use the Sigma zooms almost exclusively because it's still a balanced package, but the GH is much handier to sling around with the m43 glass, IMO.
 
I use almost exclusively an Olympus 17mm f/1.7 and the Panasonic 100-300 zoom for video work. Interestingly I almost always reach for my OM 50mm f/1.4 and speedbooster combo for photography. I know it's weird, but that's what works for me.

Cheers,
Pete
 
The biggest advantage of the MFT-system is made perfectly clear in this thread - almost maddening choice of lenses both native and adapted ones. I happen to love the Voigtlaenders because they are so fast and "old school". For video work still amazed by the Olympus 12 - 35 f 2.0 and in love with Nikon 70 - 200 f 2.8 (plus speedbooster). I have the strange notion that if you "like" a lens - apart from objective technical aspects - it will work for you. Same why some guitarist will prefer an instrument over another - or will own them all if he has the budget.
 
Good points guys! A few gents over at EOSHD have mentioned in forums they sold their GH4's because it looks "clinical" and "too sharp" and suggested I get a speedbooster and canon mount lenses because between the GH4's resolving of detail and super sharp native lenses it makes achieving a filmic look nearly impossible. Thoughts?
 
Opinions are like... well, you know how it goes.

Get what will work for you and let others rage on about what a poor choice you made while you happily go on making quality stories.

Native Lumix lenses work great for still photography and unlocking the electronic functions of the camera. Legacy lenses (I wouldn't really call Canon EOS 'legacy') work great for lending extra character when wanted. Both will take excellent images that you can use to convey whatever message you intend.
 
If you don't like super clear image the GH4 creates, simply put vintage lenses on the thing. It's super easy with a speedbooster to get softer, shallow depth of field. For some reason I happen to like the Olympus native m43 lenses on the GH4 because they aren't all processed out like the native Panasonic lenses are. No chromatic aberration correction. No distortion correction and they tend to be a bit softer in the corners. Whether that's from the glass or the lens correction in cam on Panasonic lenses I'm not sure. I can go a step further by using my vintage OM lenses on my OM speedbooster. The option to use native Panasonic, native Olympus, super fast Voitlander or speedboosted vintage lenses opens the door to do anything you could possibly want with a GH4.

Cheers,
Pete
 
What vintage lens do you suggest? I just sold the 5d3 and may have cash for 1 more lense. I have the GH4 and a Tamron 17-50. I am going to pick up the speedbooster Sunday in NYC and a fast SDXC 64gb card. I read so much on the Sigma 18-35...I'm wondering if I sell the Tamron and purchase or just keep the Tamron and get another prime for the GH4?

What vintage lenses would you guys suggest or current for the speedbooster?

I was also thinking about maybe the 20m 1.7 from Lumix for the gh4 for video and photo(autofocus)....

Thanks all!
 
Depending on what you shoot... Tokina 11-16mm, Sigma 18-35mm, or keep your 17-50mm, then something like a 70-200mm to fill out the long end.
 
You can't do autofocus when using a Speedbooster, right?

If so, for still photography you're going to want native m4/3 lenses. And then for video with "character" get some Voigtlander primes (or SLR Magic primes that are less expensive).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top