GH4 This Should Make Lots of Canon Lens Owners Happy...

mcbob said:
Same boat, same thought but only for a moment... I'd rather have the clickless infinite mechanical manual aperture via the Nikon adapter than the electronics-dependent Canon iteration. If the Sigma had stabilization, I'd reconsider.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd rather stick with Nikon for now. The clickless aperture is nice, plus it would cost the same amount to get my Sigma converted and buy the Canon Speedbooster rather than just buy a Nikon adaptor. The only reason I considered going for a Canon Speedbooster was the possibility of working with the C100 in a few years.
 
wwjd said:
any of you tech geek/gods know if my 10-22mm Canon EF-"S" would fit in this? Seems like the S part makes it not fit other adapters I have. Thoughts?
Click to expand...


All third party lenses, whether designed for APS-C or Full frame, are EF mount, not EF-S. Only Canon lenses that are designed for APS-C are EF-S, and only these are incompatible with the Speedbooster. So yes a 10-22mm EF-S will not work. You can use all Canon EF Full frame lenses and all third party APS-C and Full frame lenses, just not Canon's APS-C lenses.
 
If old school ENG lens with huge focal ranges and constant apertures were and still are made, then why not stills glass? Planned obsolescence perhaps?
 
Sonny Bill Williams said:
If old school ENG lens with huge focal ranges and constant apertures were and still are made, then why not stills glass? Planned obsolescence perhaps?
Click to expand...

Expense and size. Old school ENG lenses were (and are) typically $10,000-$40,000+ and only need to be as good as 1920x1080 pixels (or less). High end film zooms (like the Angenieux 24-290) have to be huge (25lbs with a 162mm front outer diameter) to have great imaging quality (higher resolution than HD, say 4k), and even then the sensor size covered is closer to APS-C than Full Frame.

Since most Full Frame stills shooters have even higher resolution requirements than 4k and wouldn't really want a massive lens (the Sigma 50-500mm f6.3 constant is nicknamed the Bigma, but it's only 4.3 lbs with a 95mm threaded front) the market for bigger lenses is smaller, which means that the cost of the lenses would have to go prohibitively high to cover R&D and production, plus profit.
 
Not to mention larger sensors by the laws of physics need larger lenses to cover larger sensors. Just look at the Panasonic 35-100 2.8 vs Canon 70-200 2.8. Both lenses offer the same FOV but is 4x the size in order to cover a FF sensor.

To make a zoom with ENG lens range, fast speed and IS like ENG lenses it would be so massive and so expensive few would ever purchase one and no manufacturer would ever embark down that money losing path.
 
Honestly. I cant believe I'm actually reading that people are disappointed and splitting hairs on this adapter. I have thousands of dollars in Canon EF L lenses and other EF mount glass too like the Rokinon's and Sigma ART that I can now use with my GH4. This is such a big deal for the folks like me that have been waiting for over 4 years for a adapter that doesn't require external power and even adds the benefit of adding an extra stop plus makes the FOV around the same as an S35 camera like the C100 and C300.

Clickless? Really? How is this that important? If that is then pony up and get a PL mount and some $10K cine primes and zooms.

This adapter is a gift and at $600 it's a bargain.

Just sayen.....

Rant over.
 
Erik Naso said:
Honestly. I cant believe I'm actually reading that people are disappointed and splitting hairs on this adapter. I have thousands of dollars in Canon EF L lenses and other EF mount glass too like the Rokinon's and Sigma ART that I can now use with my GH4. This is such a big deal for the folks like me that have been waiting for over 4 years for a adapter that doesn't require external power and even adds the benefit of adding an extra stop plus makes the FOV around the same as an S35 camera like the C100 and C300.

Clickless? Really? How is this that important? If that is then pony up and get a PL mount and some $10K cine primes and zooms.

This adapter is a gift and at $600 it's a bargain.

Just sayen.....

Rant over.
Click to expand...

Erik I respect your work and all that you contribute but I don't see much complaining just each person discussing how product options relate to them.

Most of the people including myself already own Nikon glass and have adapted away from Canon for the lack of an adapter and no current canon bodies. Nothing wrong with talking about the differences between the two adapters as people consider going back to Canon's playground. Yes clickless apature on the Nikon adapter is important to me. When shoulder mounted the last thing I want to do is move my right hand back to the body to change aperture in changing light. It was important enough for people to buy Rokinon Cine lenses over the clicked original ones which are cheaper. I'm contemplating buying the Sigma 18-35 and do use & rent the C series cameras but up to this point have just used a Nik-EF dumb adapter. Deciding if something might not be for you right now isn't complaining. Its discussion.
 
Erik Naso said:
Honestly. I cant believe I'm actually reading that people are disappointed and splitting hairs on this adapter. I have thousands of dollars in Canon EF L lenses and other EF mount glass too like the Rokinon's and Sigma ART that I can now use with my GH4. This is such a big deal for the folks like me that have been waiting for over 4 years for a adapter that doesn't require external power and even adds the benefit of adding an extra stop plus makes the FOV around the same as an S35 camera like the C100 and C300.

Clickless? Really? How is this that important? If that is then pony up and get a PL mount and some $10K cine primes and zooms.

This adapter is a gift and at $600 it's a bargain.

Just sayen.....

Rant over.
Click to expand...

If I had a bunch of Canon glass, I sure as hell would buy this thing TODAY. But, I just sold my Canon lenses when I went over to the GH4. It simply doesn't make sense to pay a couple hundred dollars to get my lens re-converted back to Canon and buy an adaptor that has no immediate benefit. Will it improve my image? No. Will it improve my current workflow? No. Does it make shooting easier? No.

My stance is that if I have $5,000 for a C100 in a few years (or whatever it may be called. C200?). I will also have set aside the money required to switch the necessary lenses. I'm only 18 and don't make a large paycheck, so I'd rather invest in things I find necessary for now.
 
I was once paid nearly $600 for Redrock micro LiveLens MTF active lens mount with an ugly/hard to mount external battery. :) For folk with lots of "L" lenses, this is a great deal. Think about that 85mm f/1.2 mk II mount to your GH4... :)
[h=2][/h]
 
Erik Naso said:
Clickless? Really? How is this that important? If that is then pony up and get a PL mount and some $10K cine primes and zooms.
This adapter is a gift and at $600 it's a bargain.

Just sayen.....
Click to expand...
Shooting interview outside, partly cloudy, interviewee is opening up and a cloud starts moving across the sun (or sun breaks through clouds). In ideal situations, sure, set all sorts of scrims etc and reshoot when necessary, but in doc stuff situations are rarely ideal. Sigma zooms (18-35, 50-150) with Metabones adapters make that adjustment easy. Doing the same even with my Lumix zooms or Canon lenses on Canon cams, you get those steps in exposure. Those Sigma zooms are pretty much as close to cinema zooms at 1/10 the cost as anything I've used.

You are completely correct that this is a boon to any owner of Canon EF glass, and a no brain purchase. Being a non-owner of EF anything, plenty of Nikon, and especially with EF-NikG adapters, switching systems to EF doesn't make sense... UNLESS OIS was vital enough to me.
 
Excellent, been waiting for this release! Anyone know of a good European seller to place an order with? Don't need the hassle of import duties/taxes etc if ordering direct from Metabones.
 
I'd love click-less aperture on all my lenses but it's nowhere near as important (to me) as focus rings that rotate in the proper direction. If I only used Nikon lenses, or always used a follow focus (with reversible gears), I could deal with Nikon lenses, but since I don't I need to work with lenses that focus the same direction as cine models.

Just ordered the EF>m43 Speed Booster & hope Metabones offers a non-boosted smart adapter too.
 
mcbob said:
Shooting interview outside, partly cloudy, interviewee is opening up and a cloud starts moving across the sun (or sun breaks through clouds). In ideal situations, sure, set all sorts of scrims etc and reshoot when necessary, but in doc stuff situations are rarely ideal. Sigma zooms (18-35, 50-150) with Metabones adapters make that adjustment easy. Doing the same even with my Lumix zooms or Canon lenses on Canon cams, you get those steps in exposure. Those Sigma zooms are pretty much as close to cinema zooms at 1/10 the cost as anything I've used.

You are completely correct that this is a boon to any owner of Canon EF glass, and a no brain purchase. Being a non-owner of EF anything, plenty of Nikon, and especially with EF-NikG adapters, switching systems to EF doesn't make sense... UNLESS OIS was vital enough to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying people should switch over to Canon. If you have invested in Nikon stay with it. Nikon owners have had a MFT speed booster for some time now that gives you what you want. When I bought my first MFT the AF-100 I purchased several Nikon mount lenses and the focus direction thing drove me crazy. Sold them and went native. At work we have a C300 with all Canon L. I have a C100 and a nice collection of EF mount. I'm considering getting another GH4 for a project I want to shoot in 4K but the added expense of getting more native lenses was a concern. Now for $600 i'm set. All I need is the GH4 and the EF to MFT speed booster.

If you are a Nikon guy stay with it. Going back and forth is a money pit decision. If one decides to switch I would look at the used lens market. Hurts a little less.
 
Daniel Brown said:
If I had a bunch of Canon glass, I sure as hell would buy this thing TODAY. But, I just sold my Canon lenses when I went over to the GH4. It simply doesn't make sense to pay a couple hundred dollars to get my lens re-converted back to Canon and buy an adaptor that has no immediate benefit. Will it improve my image? No. Will it improve my current workflow? No. Does it make shooting easier? No.

My stance is that if I have $5,000 for a C100 in a few years (or whatever it may be called. C200?). I will also have set aside the money required to switch the necessary lenses. I'm only 18 and don't make a large paycheck, so I'd rather invest in things I find necessary for now.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't consider buying an adapter for a camera that you might buy in six months. That's plain and simply crazy! You have a GH4 that is awesome and so capable of delivering amazing images. Us old farts would have killed for a camera like this. Love it and use it. Your 18. Shoot more and dont worry about camera upgrades.
 
Sonny Bill Williams said:
Good for you, but why gloat?
Click to expand...

Awesome. Stating you have $100's of thousands in cine glass on a forum would be gloating a bit. $1000's is absolutely normal and expected with any professional and achievable by most.

...kinda like saying "I spent hundreds of dollars on groceries this month." Thats not gloating, its expected and what most people do.
 
RatLabProductions said:
Erik I respect your work and all that you contribute but I don't see much complaining just each person discussing how product options relate to them.

Most of the people including myself already own Nikon glass and have adapted away from Canon for the lack of an adapter and no current canon bodies. Nothing wrong with talking about the differences between the two adapters as people consider going back to Canon's playground. Yes clickless apature on the Nikon adapter is important to me. When shoulder mounted the last thing I want to do is move my right hand back to the body to change aperture in changing light. It was important enough for people to buy Rokinon Cine lenses over the clicked original ones which are cheaper. I'm contemplating buying the Sigma 18-35 and do use & rent the C series cameras but up to this point have just used a Nik-EF dumb adapter. Deciding if something might not be for you right now isn't complaining. Its discussion.
Click to expand...

I get it. Maybe a little grumpy but I'm better now. :-D

I decided to go native with MFT because I didn't like the focus direction thing and no IS with Nikon lenses. That hasn't changed. Also the iris adjustments with the adapter had so little throw I felt I couldn't adjust it smoothly.
The best decision I made was getting both the Lumix 12-35 and 35-100. Solved all my problems and will still continue to use them with my Canon L. I still believe those two lenses are a better option than buying into Canon L and the adapter. Size, weight and portability of these very fine zooms makes the GH4 shine for usability. For the most part adapters suck. If you have used them you know what I mean. The Metabones Canon to NEX even with the update still crashes and autofocus is very slow for stills. I dont expect this new EF to MFT to be any better in the AF department.
IS and iris control for video is all I care about for this adapter so the short comings of AF are something I can live with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top