GH4 Newer .64x Speed Booster...

On the Metabones web site, under their list of supported lenses, they don't show two of my Canon EF lenses - the 24mm f/1.4 II and the 16-35mm f/2.8 II. But that doesn't necessarily mean they won't work, right? Just that they haven't been tested yet?
 
Not to bring this too far off topic, but why not cut lenses for NX-1 so they fit down into the tunnel, and have the mount rotate around the lens stack and lock the lenses into place with a ramp? Yes more complex than round lenses and fixed turning mount, but should be possible physically. Not sure what it would do optically to cut the edges of the lenses off, might cause all sorts of reflections even if they were painted (just a guess). Might be harder to make the metal that holds the lenses in alignment too, but there must be ways around that as well. Maybe just spacers and everything locks from top down when you can transition back to round and use a single threaded ring or series of screws.

Also Brianc, you need to do some work on your website, it's pretty sparse.
 
I'm just as bummed about the unboosterability of the NX1, I may have switched to it by now otherwise, but if you're not an optical engineer it seems a bit presumptuous to be telling Mr. Caldwell that something "should be possible". The BMCC and BMPCC boosters, not to mention this new booster that this thread is about, all have seriously-protruding rear elements/assemblies, which sit inside the mount/sensor cavity (almost touching the sensor), so I doubt that Mr. Caldwell is just gunshy on creating an NX1 booster with a protruding rear element/assembly. If anything, blame Samsung for making their mirrorless mount nearly as long as an SLR design.
 
aldolega said:
I'm just as bummed about the unboosterability of the NX1, I may have switched to it by now otherwise, but if you're not an optical engineer it seems a bit presumptuous to be telling Mr. Caldwell that something "should be possible". The BMCC and BMPCC boosters, not to mention this new booster that this thread is about, all have seriously-protruding rear elements/assemblies, which sit inside the mount/sensor cavity (almost touching the sensor), so I doubt that Mr. Caldwell is just gunshy on creating an NX1 booster with a protruding rear element/assembly. If anything, blame Samsung for making their mirrorless mount nearly as long as an SLR design.
Click to expand...

We've repeatedly tried doing designs with rectangular lenses and with round lenses, but could not get it to work to our satisfaction. I could force a crappy optical design to work, but I'm not willing to sell that kind of product. It might be possible to build a custom Speed Booster friendly version of the NX1 by removing some of the obstructions near the sensor, but that doesn't seem like a good business plan. If only the NX-mini would take off! - that camera practically begs to have a Speed Booster designed for it.
 
brianc1959 said:
We've repeatedly tried doing designs with rectangular lenses and with round lenses, but could not get it to work to our satisfaction. I could force a crappy optical design to work, but I'm not willing to sell that kind of product. It might be possible to build a custom Speed Booster friendly version of the NX1 by removing some of the obstructions near the sensor, but that doesn't seem like a good business plan. If only the NX-mini would take off! - that camera practically begs to have a Speed Booster designed for it.
Click to expand...

Is the issue the focal flange distance? or is it that... frame (whatever it is) that surrounds it?
 
brianc1959 said:
We've repeatedly tried doing designs with rectangular lenses and with round lenses, but could not get it to work to our satisfaction. I could force a crappy optical design to work, but I'm not willing to sell that kind of product. It might be possible to build a custom Speed Booster friendly version of the NX1 by removing some of the obstructions near the sensor, but that doesn't seem like a good business plan. If only the NX-mini would take off! - that camera practically begs to have a Speed Booster designed for it.
Click to expand...


I figured there must be some kind of performance issue, I know flat sides on lenses or not ideal. Maybe the next version of the camera will be more friendly.
 
Just a quick question for Brian, will any of these camera specific adapters come in other mount types like Canon FD? If not is it a technical limitation or just market size? I have a large collection of really nice FD glass and would love to use it with this.
 
aldolega said:
but if you're not an optical engineer it seems a bit presumptuous to be telling Mr. Caldwell that something "should be possible". The BMCC and BMPCC boosters, not to mention this new booster that this thread is about, all have seriously-protruding rear elements/assemblies, which sit inside the mount/sensor cavity (almost touching the sensor), so I doubt that Mr. Caldwell is just gunshy on creating an NX1 booster with a protruding rear element/assembly. If anything, blame Samsung for making their mirrorless mount nearly as long as an SLR design.
Click to expand...

Relax. I'm not saying " he must be an idiot for not being able to produce this"! I'm saying that to me it seems it should work, this opens the door for Mr. Caldwell to explain why it doesn't work so all of us can understand how these function and what is getting in the way. If I thought I knew how to make something like this, I would be making them and you'd probably be buying from me, but I don't know how to do this, or have the tools to make the lenses.

That said, if he is willing to say why it doesn't work on the gh2, I'd appreciate the info. It could be it doesn't cover in video mode, it could be the cover over the shutter is too far forward and physically prevent mounting it, or could be both. Again understanding more technical details is why I'm here, if I can't learn something, then I might as well spend my time elsewhere.
 
brianc1959 said:
We've repeatedly tried doing designs with rectangular lenses and with round lenses, but could not get it to work to our satisfaction. I could force a crappy optical design to work, but I'm not willing to sell that kind of product. It might be possible to build a custom Speed Booster friendly version of the NX1 by removing some of the obstructions near the sensor, but that doesn't seem like a good business plan. If only the NX-mini would take off! - that camera practically begs to have a Speed Booster designed for it.
Click to expand...
Sorry youve mentioned this before but i have to ask again. Since the bmc and gh4 have a diff filter thickness infront fo their sensor whats the consequence if i use the xl on the bmcc?
 
From a discussion I read somewhere else, matching the adapter to the filter thickness is required for the sharpest image. So I would expect some different corner smearing might happen on the Blackmagic cameras. I'd like to read a more detailed answer though.
 
Finster said:
On the Metabones web site, under their list of supported lenses, they don't show two of my Canon EF lenses - the 24mm f/1.4 II and the 16-35mm f/2.8 II. But that doesn't necessarily mean they won't work, right? Just that they haven't been tested yet?
Click to expand...

I use both those lenses on the current (0.71x) EF-M43, & EF-E Ultra, SpeedBoosters. Haven't noted any issues, & they seem to perform identically to my other "L" lenses.
 
LoganMackay said:
Just a quick question for Brian, will any of these camera specific adapters come in other mount types like Canon FD? If not is it a technical limitation or just market size? I have a large collection of really nice FD glass and would love to use it with this.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard anything from Metabones regarding lens mount types beyond Canon and Nikon. Other mounts are certainly technically possible, just as with the standard M43 version.
 
dcloud said:
Sorry youve mentioned this before but i have to ask again. Since the bmc and gh4 have a diff filter thickness infront fo their sensor whats the consequence if i use the xl on the bmcc?
Click to expand...

The filter stack error is only noticeable at large apertures, where you would get mostly spherical aberration. Stopping down gets rid of the issue. Another way to look at it: if you are using a Zeiss Otus on your BMCC then you really should use the dedicated BMCC version of the Speed Booster; however if you're using an f/2.8 zoom then don't worry about it.
 
wwjd said:
I see it is on metabones site... but do dealers have them yet? Hot Rod etc?
Click to expand...

For those who would like to pre-order a Metabones XL, (with no import fees), we'll be setting up a pre-order around 10:00 AM (PST) today. If we don't get it on the site when planned, call the office (323-230-3589) and we will add you to a call back for pre-order list.
 
brianc1959 said:
The filter stack error is only noticeable at large apertures, where you would get mostly spherical aberration. Stopping down gets rid of the issue. Another way to look at it: if you are using a Zeiss Otus on your BMCC then you really should use the dedicated BMCC version of the Speed Booster; however if you're using an f/2.8 zoom then don't worry about it.
Click to expand...
I see. Thanks! I do see the sphere becoming elongated when in 1.2 on my regular speedbooster.
 
Much appreciated for the response Brian. I'm happy to hear it isn't technical, probably just for sales purposes.
 
LoganMackay said:
Just a quick question for Brian, will any of these camera specific adapters come in other mount types like Canon FD? If not is it a technical limitation or just market size? I have a large collection of really nice FD glass and would love to use it with this.
Click to expand...

Yes i'd also like an FD version. I've got a full set of FD glass which a 0.64x speedster would be awesome for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top