Jump to content

Close
Photo

Prototype Metabones Speed Booster equipped NEX 7 *VS* full frame (5D Mark III)

* * * * * 5 votes

  • Please log in to reply

#81
Sean Cunningham

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:17 PM

Sean Cunningham

    Pixel Cowboy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 979 posts
  • LocationAustin, Texas

M4/3, at least the GH2, is going to be bigger than S35.  It's going to be closer to the FOV you get with a 1DC shooting 4K, almost exactly like a RED Epic shooting 5K, which is between full-on, full-frame and S35.

 

More excited yet?


  • jgharding likes this

#82
JohnBarlow

Posted 19 January 2013 - 10:16 AM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

Whilst I am not a patent lawyer, I think Metabones may be in the clear on the SB. Looking at the Kodak patent US5499069.pdf, all the claims are to do with SLR in the wording or implied. Of course mirrorless cameras are not SLRs and they may have a clear path on this technicality.

 

From what I see it is a 1.4x teleconverter mounted backwards and the beauty of the design is the excellent correction of spherical aberration. Nevertheless there will be copies (using different lens prescription) from third parties which may include Canon themselves for future expansion of the EOSM system. 



#83
richg101

Posted 19 January 2013 - 05:58 PM

richg101

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,067 posts
  • LocationBristol. UK

Whilst I am not a patent lawyer, I think Metabones may be in the clear on the SB. Looking at the Kodak patent US5499069.pdf, all the claims are to do with SLR in the wording or implied. Of course mirrorless cameras are not SLRs and they may have a clear path on this technicality.

From what I see it is a 1.4x teleconverter mounted backwards and the beauty of the design is the excellent correction of spherical aberration. Nevertheless there will be copies (using different lens prescription) from third parties which may include Canon themselves for future expansion of the EOSM system.



I like it! I have a 2x rollei tele converter. very good quality. I will try it backwards..:)

I wonder how it would work with a lens designed for a bigger area such as a hasselblad zeiss lens.

#84
JohnBarlow

Posted 19 January 2013 - 06:17 PM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

I like it! I have a 2x rollei tele converter. very good quality. I will try it backwards.. :)

I wonder how it would work with a lens designed for a bigger area such as a hasselblad zeiss lens.

Be prepared for lots of SA :P

 

Regarding Medium Format, there is enormous scope for 'blads and SK angulons, digitars etc because there is acres of space due to the large FFD and the booster would not be restricted to a 4 element design.

 

Great news for big lens formats.



#85
richg101

Posted 19 January 2013 - 06:39 PM

richg101

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,067 posts
  • LocationBristol. UK

I just tried a very basic test and the 2x adaptor spun around does indeed work.  at least 1 stop brighter, what looks like wider too, but it is hard to tell due to the macro only focus due to the 2x tele converter bayonet positioned against the lens bayonet.  in effect i have increased the flange / plane distance by about 10mm which has limited maximum focus to about 25cm.  

 

I wonder if I should remove the optical module and rehouse it in a dumb adaptor using a turned aluminium centering shim?  The optical module could be adjusted to change the distance between sensor and lens.  I suppose if I do the maths I can turn an adaptor which goes straight from a Hasslebald Planar 80mm f2.8, through the inverted 2x element and onto the sensor.  There are sl35 to SLX / Rollei 6000 series adaptors available too.  In my head i think the image circle from a medium format lens would be scaled down about enough to be slightly bigger than APS-C?  I'd be looking at a -1.0 focal reduction instead of a 0.71 for the metabones.  I bet the Rollei optics are on a par or better than that of the metabones as well?



#86
richg101

Posted 19 January 2013 - 06:41 PM

richg101

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,067 posts
  • LocationBristol. UK

Maybe a 2x tele inverted would be ideal for full frame to m4/3 sensors?



#87
JohnBarlow

Posted 19 January 2013 - 07:02 PM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

TCs are optimised for light flow in the 1.4x direction. To make them work in the 0.7x direction it is more that the simplicity of reversing the unit (which is only relevant for proof of concept), because the lenses have to be optimised for minimum aberration in the 0.7x direction. 

 

If you want to do private study in lens design an excellent book is 'An introduction to Lens Design with Practical Zemax Examples' by Joseph Geary.

 

Zemax is not cheap (about $10k), but sometimes you can pick up an older and legitimate version on places like ebay.

 

 

 

 

I just tried a very basic test and the 2x adaptor spun around does indeed work.  at least 1 stop brighter, what looks like wider too, but it is hard to tell due to the macro only focus due to the 2x tele converter bayonet positioned against the lens bayonet.  in effect i have increased the flange / plane distance by about 10mm which has limited maximum focus to about 25cm.  

 

I wonder if I should remove the optical module and rehouse it in a dumb adaptor using a turned aluminium centering shim?  The optical module could be adjusted to change the distance between sensor and lens.  I suppose if I do the maths I can turn an adaptor which goes straight from a Hasslebald Planar 80mm f2.8, through the inverted 2x element and onto the sensor.  There are sl35 to SLX / Rollei 6000 series adaptors available too.  In my head i think the image circle from a medium format lens would be scaled down about enough to be slightly bigger than APS-C?  I'd be looking at a -1.0 focal reduction instead of a 0.71 for the metabones.  I bet the Rollei optics are on a par or better than that of the metabones as well?


  • richg101 likes this

#88
richg101

Posted 19 January 2013 - 07:09 PM

richg101

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1,067 posts
  • LocationBristol. UK

I'll leave it then:)  Just pick up a metabones adaptor.  thought it could be a fun project.  I'll keep my 2x tele intact for when i sometimes need it.  cheers



#89
JohnBarlow

Posted 19 January 2013 - 11:10 PM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

if you are looking for a fun project, then try placing a +8 dioptr between the lens and sensor in say a tube and play with placement position :P



#90
Julian

Posted 20 January 2013 - 02:42 PM

Julian

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,259 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

I have some really cheap old 2x and 3x TC's lying around. The quality is crap, but it'd be fun to see if it works! I might try getting the glass into a dumb adapter onto my GH2 :)

 

/Edit: Just tried with a 2x teleconverter mounted into a Minolta MD adapter and a lens hand held in front of it. I can turn the teleconverter in whatever way I want, but it keeps working as a teleconverter (loss of light, and longer focal lenght) either way?



#91
JohnBarlow

Posted 21 January 2013 - 12:00 AM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

Thats because your TC lens is still a negative lens - it has to be positive to work

 

 

Try the dioptr trick I posted earlier - I will post pix to show you in a minute

I have some really cheap old 2x and 3x TC's lying around. The quality is crap, but it'd be fun to see if it works! I might try getting the glass into a dumb adapter onto my GH2 :)

 

/Edit: Just tried with a 2x teleconverter mounted into a Minolta MD adapter and a lens hand held in front of it. I can turn the teleconverter in whatever way I want, but it keeps working as a teleconverter (loss of light, and longer focal lenght) either way?



#92
JohnBarlow

Posted 21 January 2013 - 12:06 AM

JohnBarlow

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts
  • LocationLiverpool, England

Here I have a Helios 44-2 2/58mm lens (my James Bond lens 'cos it has serial N007xxx).

 

By just balancing a +8 dioptr on the back I can increase the FOV about 2x - magnification is reduced to 0.5x

 

Looks pretty good to me :P

 

 

_DSC4572.JPG

 

_DSC4573.JPG



#93
Julian

Posted 21 January 2013 - 12:18 PM

Julian

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,259 posts
  • LocationNetherlands

Nice :) The magnification reduces 0,5x, so the minimum focus distance is getting longer?

Sadly I don't have any small diopter lenses, but I'd be tempted to fit one into a dumb adapter just for fun.

 

Will this let in more light like the speed booster? Could you hold the combination in front of the camera/adapter and give it a try?



#94
Andrew Reid

Posted 22 January 2013 - 02:48 AM

Andrew Reid

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 4,054 posts

Preview of coming attractions...

 

metabones-speed-booster-fs100-vs-5d3.jpg

 

Settings on both cameras: Shutter 1/50, ISO 1600, physical aperture F2.0, 1080/25p.



#95
jcs

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:24 AM

jcs

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • LocationBeverly Hills, CA

While I can significantly sharpen 5D3 footage in post (60+ "Sharpen" in PPro CS6), I can only sharpen FS700 footage around 10 or so (kit lens; waiting for Speed Booster to arrive), not that it needs it though. I think we all understand now that the 5D3 is really a 1620x910 or so camera vs. the FS100/FS700 being full 1920x1080 cameras. The 1DC (and 1DX) are slightly better in full frame, but still not full 1920x1080 cameras. I'm beginning to think perhaps it's a hardware design issue vs. business-feature-holdback. That said, the 5D3 looks great as a close up camera, especially with post sharpening (and will look a bit better when the 422 HDMI out firmware is released).

 

As dark and blurry as your example shows the 5D3, it looks more like film (analog) than the FS100 image (more digital artifacts, sharp transients- looks more like video). I'll try to match the FS700 + Speed Booster to the 5D3 look when I do further testing.

 

Attached is a quick tweak to the 5D3 shot- sharpened, brightened, noise reduced, color adjusted. Can't match a true 1920x1080 camera, but isn't as bad as the original.

5D3.jpg



#96
EndCredits

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:54 AM

EndCredits

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Hey Andrew just a thought, could an anamorphic version of the adapter be made? Squeezing the horizontal but not the vertical?

Ive never shot with Anamorphic lenses so I might be missing something but was thinking it could be a easy, cheep and cool option if it was possible. I guess you wouldn't get the same flare characteristics?? Just an idea any way.



#97
Andrew Reid

Posted 22 January 2013 - 05:06 AM

Andrew Reid

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 4,054 posts

Hey Andrew just a thought, could an anamorphic version of the adapter be made? Squeezing the horizontal but not the vertical?

Ive never shot with Anamorphic lenses so I might be missing something but was thinking it could be a easy, cheep and cool option if it was possible. I guess you wouldn't get the same flare characteristics?? Just an idea any way.

 

I think it may be possible. There's already a LOMO anamorphic (a zoom) which has the anamorphic element behind the rear element of the aspherical lens rather than in front of it.

 

One possible problem is that manufacturing and machining of anamorphic glass is expensive and difficult to get done because it is an unusual thing to do. 99% of lenses are aspherical so the machining is all designed to make those rather than anamorphic.



#98
conurus

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:09 AM

conurus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • LocationVancouver, Canada

if anything i think a hacked gh2 or BMCC with same field of view as s35 and 1 stop of extra iso headroom before noise becomes a problem is more exciting than the benefits of a s35 chip becoming full frame.

 

What with the EF version of the BMCC I think it would be quite easy to remove the optical element (at the point where infinity focus tweeks are done) of a dumb speed booster and fit it into a small cone of machined aluminium which jams into the ef recess on the ef bmcc:) 

The Speed Booster is shorter than a regular adapter. The optics shortens the flange distance so unless there is some way we hacksaw 6mm away from the EF BMCC it is not going to work.



#99
Andrew Doyle

Posted 21 October 2013 - 07:35 PM

Andrew Doyle

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 9 posts

Would a LOMO anamorphic with PL mount work with a soon to be released Metabones PL to micro 4/3 adapter? A LOMO 35mm anamorphic with Speedbooster on a BMCC would be a great thing.



#100
Andrew Reid

Posted 21 October 2013 - 07:43 PM

Andrew Reid

    Andrew Reid - British Filmmaker - Editor EOSHD

  • Administrators
  • 4,054 posts

On BMCC should work. Might have soft edges or vignetting on the GH2 though.

 

GH2 is APS-H with Speed Booster. That's larger than Super 35mm, for which the LOMO anamorphic is designed for.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users