GH5 Samyang ef or mft
- Thread starter Martinh
- Start date
With the .64 Speedbooster the DOF would be like a 105mm lens on a Full Frame camera. Without the Speedbooster it's more like a 180mm lens on a Full Frame camera.
Look at it this way, if you buy EF, you can run it with booster or without booster depending on needs. If you buy it native mount, you ONLY have the choice of the without booster angle of view. You also lose the ability to use it on a different camera if you upgrade or rent a camera. Not saying EF is great, but it is more "universal" than micro 4/3.
Yes.
The exact focal lengths would be...
108.8mm FF field of view ( 105mm was the closest real lens to this )
170.0mm FF field of view ( 180mm was the closest real lens to this )
ozmorphasis
Well-known member
Definitely get the EF. I have gotten a lot of mileage out of my Rokinon 85mm with and without speedbooster. More use from it with speedbooster as 85mm is VERY long on m43 sensor. For two cam interviews, I've often used the 85 with speedbooster for my tight shot.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Glass is the same.
When talking about lenses with features like auto focus, stabilization and so forth there is still some valid arguments to going m43 mount. In the case of fully manual lenses however it doesn't really matter so you might as well go EF.
Only issue is cost. Going EF requires an extra investment. You can use a $20 dummy adapter for the same focal length as the m43 mount but once you want to change that focal length buying a Speedbooster can be a large extra investment. If that investment is not an issue for you then by all means go the EF route.
When talking about lenses with features like auto focus, stabilization and so forth there is still some valid arguments to going m43 mount. In the case of fully manual lenses however it doesn't really matter so you might as well go EF.
Only issue is cost. Going EF requires an extra investment. You can use a $20 dummy adapter for the same focal length as the m43 mount but once you want to change that focal length buying a Speedbooster can be a large extra investment. If that investment is not an issue for you then by all means go the EF route.
Don't get either mount, get it in Nikon F mount:
http://ironfilm.co.nz/rokinon-cine-lenses/
The glass inside the lens with any of the mounts from Samyang/Rokinon are exactly the same across the range of mounts offered, thus you might as well buy it in the mount which gives you the MOST flexibility for the future in terms of what you can mount it to. Thus that means buying it in Nikon F mount.
http://ironfilm.co.nz/rokinon-cine-lenses/
The glass inside the lens with any of the mounts from Samyang/Rokinon are exactly the same across the range of mounts offered, thus you might as well buy it in the mount which gives you the MOST flexibility for the future in terms of what you can mount it to. Thus that means buying it in Nikon F mount.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
When it comes tofu manual lenses I would agree but what if somebody wants to use electronic lenses someday? The Nikon mount lenses will always be dummy lenses. No optical lens stabilization, no communication with the camera, no auto focus or control of the iris. Going the Nikon route can be a bit limiting if one wants the lens to function as they would expect the features they paid for to actually work.
With that said Nikon does have a major advantage and that is that is rarely ever has any issues on adapters. EF lenses have very sloppy support for electronic control. some lenses work and others not so much. Some EF lenses are even known to freeze the camera. That will never happen with a Nikon mount adapter because there are no electronic contacts at all. So you sacrifice features of the lens for 100% stability and support.
Finally EF-S lenses can be a PITA and sometimes require cutting off part of the mount in order to fit on adapters. Again Nikon just works no matter what lens you have. If it physically screws onto the adapter it works.
ozmorphasis
Well-known member
Plus, it's nice to be able to have manual iris control sometimes. Not that the throw on a Metabones Nikon to mft is super fine, but still it's nice to have that control.
Lastly, the nikon speedboosters are significantly less expensive than the EF counterparts.
Lastly, the nikon speedboosters are significantly less expensive than the EF counterparts.
There is no technical reason that electronic Nikon G adapters couldn't be made so that VR or AF for instance can be enabled (and a few such adapters do exist). But you don't *need* to use adapters like that, which means greatly improved reliability with Nikon adapted lenses (as really, almost nothing can go wrong!) and massively massively cheaper adapters too!
Thomas Smet
Veteran
And that is why Nikon will fade into the history books. In the cinema world EF is a non official standard. EVA1, Varicam, C200, C300, C500, BMD all use a Canon EF mount. If Nikon doesn't open up they will fade away. Professional DSLR sales continue to fall. Canon is a really dumb company but when it comes to opening up their lens mount they were pretty smart.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Denny, RED has had electronic Nikon mounts for years. Not sure what kind of electronics you may be referring to, but the current one supports AF and iris control:
http://www.red.com/store/products/dsmc-nikon-lens-mount-captive
"The DSMC® S35 Nikon Mount enables you to equip a wide variety of Nikkor AF-S and AF-D compatible lenses to your DSMC or DSMC2® BRAIN. The DSMC Nikon Mount offers modularity and convenience, while supporting autofocus and electronic iris control with compatible lenses."
Granted it's $2200 though, lol...and some lenses may not be supported but that's the same with everyone else.
Bern Caughey
Veteran
AFAIK Canon never published their EF lens protocol, rather 3rd Parties have reverse engineered it.
Yes, but the EF protocol is more,than 10 years old, and no longer under patent protection. The Nikon Electrnic Mount is on,y a few years old and still protected. Reverse engineer it to sell, and you will end up in court vs Nikon. It took Metabones more than a year to work out the EF protocol, but it had a big enough retail base to make it worth while. Nikon E lenses are in much more limited circulation, not worth the investment if you could do it.
Cheers
Cheers
There comes a point where reverse engineering isn't worth the trouble, I'm pretty sure the most of the big name cameras that use EF are not using a reverse engineered software stack. I bet the licensing is pretty cheap when you get down to it. The camera companies know that they don't really make their money on camera bodies, but on lens sales. Anything that helps sell lenses is worth doing, especially when you can get a small amount of money in a licensing deal. That said I could be wrong and Canon charges a bucket load for licensing.
That won't work well on an MFT camera, because EF lenses require active electronic adapters to provide aperture control (as well as auto-focus and IS features). As IronFilm points out, if you want a speedbooster-compatible lens with straightforward manual lens control, Nikon-mount lenses are the most MFT-friendly option. This does NOT include the recent electromagnetic-iris "E-type" lenses from Nikon and Tamron, as discussed above. But most Nikon enthusiasts in the MFT ecosystem aren't looking to use the latest electronic models, we're into the vast range of classic MFT and speedbooster-compatible lenses.
Last edited: