ttbek

Hey Brian, how much opportunity cost are we talking here?  I'm not going to back down from my 10k offer though I suspect that wouldn't exactly cover things, just a feeling, lol.  On the other hand it would be a bit irritating to pay it out and then find out it wasn't so hard after all (possibly, I'll have fun taking a shot either way).  I'm referring to the electronics of course though rather than the lenses.  Also, a question about that for you, is something like an Arduino Nano micro controller really fast enough to handle the spi at native speeds?  I'm going to prototype with one in either case, but if it's not then I may move to FPGA later if the Nano is functional and just sluggish. 
Luca, I would prefer to be one of those supporters, but I guess I'll have to wait for those first shots from others if you're not feeling up to posting two raws, same lens, same framing (tripod), same focus, same aperture.  I know you have video samples, but since I'm not much of one for video that's just not my evaluative area.

Inazuma, in regards to that, at the time Metabones added that to their FAQ many of us thought it looked like bullshit because they didn't think there was enough of a market in part.  And the other part is that they had some qualifiers, something about not getting quite the quality they wanted, I suppose in a 1x crop situation for the adapter (disingenuous because they offer non 1x adapters for some other cameras).  I think Luca also could not do that as he has gone with what I think is a 1.1x crop that is using pretty much all available depth. 

Hey luca, I've been absent a while.  Could we see two raw files with the same lens (one with your NXL and one with just a glassless adapter).  Also, is there space in your current design for pass through electronic pins?  I do intend to take a (long) shot at the electronic communication and am wondering if I could work on one of these directly.  Waiting still for some parts from China to make my attempt at doing it with a glassless adapter. 

Hey luca, I've been absent a while.  Could we see two raw files with the same lens (one with your NXL and one with just a glassless adapter).  Also, is there space in your current design for pass through electronic pins?  I do intend to take a (long) shot at the electronic communication and am wondering if I could work on one of these directly.  Waiting still for some parts from China to make my attempt at doing it with a glassless adapter. 

Hey luca, I've been absent a while.  Could we see two raw files with the same lens (one with your NXL and one with just a glassless adapter).  Also, is there space in your current design for pass through electronic pins?  I do intend to take a (long) shot at the electronic communication and am wondering if I could work on one of these directly.  Waiting still for some parts from China to make my attempt at doing it with a glassless adapter. 

Hey luca, I've been absent a while.  Could we see two raw files with the same lens (one with your NXL and one with just a glassless adapter).  Also, is there space in your current design for pass through electronic pins?  I do intend to take a (long) shot at the electronic communication and am wondering if I could work on one of these directly.  Waiting still for some parts from China to make my attempt at doing it with a glassless adapter. 

I'm struggling to think of many examples for any system that cover that range.  24-70, plenty, 24-105, a decent number, 28-135 they're around, 24-150!?!  There are some 18-135 lenses that would hit that as an equivalent range, but you say you're looking for that as the APS-C range... so we're looking for a FF lens that's 42- 225ish.  The only things that come to mind are the other superzooms, none of which are optically stellar.  I guess there is the Sony 24-240 FE lens, only a 10x zoom rather than the more typical 20x+ of 18-200.  Fun fact, the 18-200 is the only NX lens that saw production in Japan, makes one wonder if there was any foul play, lol.  It's not missing focus so much in the bright sunlight as it is just that soft at the longer focal lengths, manual focus it, it isn't any sharper.  At 18 the lens is quite decent, but if you only needed the wide end then there's lots of other options.  Go with two lenses, even like the 16-50 PZ and 50-200 combo work out well and are cheaper together.  If you're using it for video it's quite decent, and I guess it's video where having that range in one lens is most useful.  Anyway, the 18-200 is the only lens I have bought for which I'm unsure why I still own it.  Sometimes I think I'll avoid the hassle of taking more lenses and just take the 18-200, give it another chance on a walk... 10 minutes later I'm back home to take two other lenses instead. 

For Sandro, the 18-200 is the problem.  I think f/6.3 is perhaps too dark for the on sensor PDAF points to be effective.  The lens focus speed itself is pretty wicked fast on that one, but if the camera doesn't know what to set it to.... you'll notice it sometimes jumps and that jump is super fast.  And yeah, there are situations where NX is a bit dumb, if the subject is small in frame the NX cameras love focusing on the background instead.  There are some issues like that, but I still find the NX1+50-150 quite capable of BIF and sports.  The 18-200 was exceptionally bad among NX lenses.  I can shoot a reasonable amount of BIF with the 50-200, the 45 and 85 primes are very fast focusing, just too short for BIF, but just fine for sports.  If you need to use the NX1 in truly low light, that green beam really works quite will in even absolute darkness to a decent distance.  Without it, yeah, it doesn't make it as low as a fair number of others. 
Jefbak and Marco: To be fair, they were speaking in the context of maintaining their current quality, but yeah, it could just have been an excuse because they didn't feel demand was high enough for NX. After all, some other mounts were able to have them at reduced levels of focal reduction.  Don't remind me of the 300 f/2.8... I still want it badly. 
If quality samples are looking good then I would be in for an EF version even without aperture or electronic controls so long as the price is in line with that.  I do have a number of FF fully manual lenses in EF mount that would be even nicer on NX that way (e.g. Samyang and Laowa).  I could chip in some for a production run, but that 10k is reserved for a fully functioning near native AF electronic adapter. 

Could you show an equivalent sample later on a tripod/set down on something solid?  Much appreciated.  It's looking pretty good. 

Could you show an equivalent sample later on a tripod/set down on something solid?  Much appreciated.  It's looking pretty good. 

Could you show an equivalent sample later on a tripod/set down on something solid?  Much appreciated.  It's looking pretty good. 

There are some potentially useful files for the AF in the NX30 open source firmware, just do a search of the extracted files for "lens" to find some interesting stuff.  By my reading of the agreement when downloading the files I can't just tell you what's in there.  I'm not sure if it tells us much more than ihkim's work, but it might fill in some values.  If anyone doesn't know where to download those yet:
http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/receptionSub.do?method=sub&sub=T&menu_item=photography&classification1=digital%20cameras
I don't remember if these were still in the NX1/NX500 released files or not, that firmware is on my laptop at work and I don't want to download it again at the moment. 
Regarding my interest only in the Canon side of things, I own 0 Nikon lenses but quite a few Canon lenses, including now some long glass (400 f/2.8).  Any optical design for the Canon will work for Nikon with only some length extension to the housing, but not vice versa if the Nikon design used that space.  There are more Canon lenses that need the aperture control.  So yes, a bit of a selfish interest, but that's how it is. 

ihkim's site is unfortunately not very intelligible for me through google translate.  While his English isn't perfect it is way way better than google translate and he seems to have set up another site (that is linked to from his blog) where he goes through what he knows of the protocol in English: http://blueringlab.com/
Unfortunately I have no interest in a speedbooster for Nikon lenses on NX.  For Canon lenses, yes, and such a design could be shared for Nikon lenses.  On the other hand though, a design for Nikon lenses that uses the extra space would not then work for Canon lenses. 

ihkim's site is unfortunately not very intelligible for me through google translate.  While his English isn't perfect it is way way better than google translate and he seems to have set up another site (that is linked to from his blog) where he goes through what he knows of the protocol in English: http://blueringlab.com/
Unfortunately I have no interest in a speedbooster for Nikon lenses on NX.  For Canon lenses, yes, and such a design could be shared for Nikon lenses.  On the other hand though, a design for Nikon lenses that uses the extra space would not then work for Canon lenses.