what do you think about the metabones speed booster+canon 24-105/4 on fs 100 ?

This exact same debate has happened countless times, not just here but on the photo forums.

Yes, Erwin, a 24mm lens is always a 24mm lens, regardless of frame/sensor size (which affects the FOV but not the focal length). And in an ideal world where people use language with 100% precision, we'd speak of focal length in absolute terms and FOV in frame-size-relative terms.

But one might also defend the "0.71x" view by considering the Speed-Boosted lens a new lens. Arguably 24mm with an SB attached does, actually, become a 17mm lens. The SB is an optic after all.
 
To answer the op, the 24-105mm on the Fs100 with a speedbooster is freaking awesome. Good sharpness where it counts and the extra stop makes a huge difference in low light and getting those fullframe dof looking shots. It's just a very versatile lens similar in use to my 17-55mm on my 7d i.e IS, 2.8f, plenty sharp, except with the extra 20mm on the zoom end.
 
I'm just testing the 24-105 right now.

It's the perfect focal range - the f2,8 is just right and still sharp enough throughout the picture.
But there is some barrel distortion at the wide end which stops being visible at 35mm.
It's not that heavy but I would still avoid coming to close to faces and vertical lines in the edge
of the frame. Just to mention it...
 
I just got the combo as well, and used it on a job. I thought a long time about choosing either this lens or the 24-70 4.0L IS.
The latter I was considering because I would prefer that one for photography with my 6D, it's sharper and less distortion and has better IS and macro mode. I have the 70-200 F4L IS too.

But the 24-105 of course has better range. I found though, that even being able to go up to 105 doesn't really make it that useful for a one lens setup. When you need range, you often need a lot. I found that even 200mm doesn't always cut it in these situations.

So I would still need my 70-200 F4L IS lens. What is the purpose then? I also decided to keep the kit lens for now. Autofocus comes in handy with simple zoom-pulls.

In the end I choose the 24-105 mainly because it's a few hundred dollars cheaper second hand here.
For now I will keep it, and see if it's good enough for my needs. My first job with it gave some nice images. But if I find out I cannot live with the softness and distortion wide open, I will sell it and get the 24-70 F4 IS.

In any case, the color rendering from these canon lenses plus a nice picture profile can have this camera match the 5d Mark III/6D I believe. Getting great colors with it and will not go back to sigma lenses.
 
Hi,

I spent 2 weeks with the 24-105 for a documentary. It's sharp enough, the barrel distortion isn't that much of an issue.

But it really doesn't like backlight, especially on the speedbooster. It flares pretty easily and strong even with the sunhood.
You'll need a small mattebox with frenchflag when filming under backlight conditions.
When I realized it, I didn't have any mattebox with me so that I improvised a french flag, which I taped under the mic-handle
with some gaffers tape.

The last 6 weeks I traveled in the US also with the 24-105 having serious issues with it and ended up using only the
Canon 24-70/2,8L II, which showed none of the issues from the 24-105/4 L IS.

As the 24-105/4 L IS was borrowed only, I decided not to buy it. I just can't take a mattebox setup all the time.
I will test the Tamron 24-70/2,8 VC as I like the position from the focusring close to the mount of the lens and the
image stabilizer. As "zwarte kat" already mentioned, you'll need a longer focal range nevertheless sothat the wider
focal range of the 24-105 isn't the "one for all" solution pretty much anywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top