Hello Mike.

Bit of a blow to here that there maybe a problem with Olympus lenses and the Speedbooster.
I have a 24mm 2.8 and a 40mm f2 which I have with a eos adapter and I was thinking of using with a Fuji X-pro when and if I buy one.
It would be interesting to see if there is any type of workaround and when they do bring out more adapters there will be a solution.
My hope was to have all my MF lenses with eos adapters and then just one Speedbooster, eos to Fuji X...Life is never so straight forward it seems.

Sean

The 58mm Rokkor being a problem too is also a nasty knock.

I don't think you can conclude that lenses getting hit by the mirror on an SLR will have problems with the Speedbooster. A simple drawing with dimensions of the SB would help sorting this out.

Makten,
You are right, none of the OM lenses have issues with the 1Ds or 5Ds I've had. I will take some measurements over the weekend. And as I've said there is a straight forward workaround if I were prepared to cut back the fin... maybe just a few mm.

Yarrums,
Yes, this is exactly what I wanted to do as well. I have very few EF lenses and only a couple (of Alt's) with permanent conversions so most of my lenses would have been with an additional adapter. I was prepared to look very carefully to see if I'd have infinity issues or L-R issues. I'll test some more lens/adapters tonight to see if others have connection problems to help winnow what I take out to test tomorrow. I did put a 100/3.5 C/Y on last night (has a Son adapter) and it appeared to have the problem as well.

Sebboh,
I'll take a few shots with the Rokkor, I also have a Rokinon 35/1.4 which should be interesting to see if it renders similar to FF.

Mike

Makten wrote:
amsterdem wrote:
Nex 7 Canon 200mm 2.0L 140mm 1.4, basically straight from camera.

What the heck is the point of using such a lens on that camera?

The half a stop you get over a ZA 135/1.8 maybe?

Actually, I'd consider using a 200/2 on my 7, but not with a SpeedBooster.

mcbroomf wrote:
Looks like OM lenses will need to be de-fined to fit in the adpter. I picked mine up today and just looked at the 18mm. I read a caution of this on GetDPI I think so I only lightly mated the lenses and could see that they would not sit properly so I started looking closer. The 18mm has a pretty deep fin that is just to protect the rear element. It will foul either the lens or part of the surround in the adapter (I need my calipers to measure and I'll be able to do that over the weekend). The 90/2 is the same, the fin isn't as deep but it's further out as the element is so much bigger. The shroud that the adapter uses angles out as it get closer to the barrel so if fouls even this shallower fin. Lastly my 58/1.2 Rokkor with a Jim B adapter is v.slightly loose and I have to jiggle it to get it to be recognized as a manual lens. If I don't do this the adapter keeps the Nex7 shutter closed and it won't over enable in the menu for a manual lens to allow the shutter to operate.. wierd.
I'll probably try a couple more lenses over the weekend just to check optical performance but it's going back as my hope was to have a small handful of OM lenses and a 35-70 with a regular adapter and this one to cover 18-135 FOV range. I could de-fin the OM's of course but I don't think I want to leave them open to the elements if I remove the shroud that has the fin, and I don't think I want to cut off the fin.

Mike

That's really a shame. Any idea if the Oly 21 3.5 would have the same issue?

Michael,
I do have a 21/3.5 as well as the F2. I eyeballed it last night and thought it might be a problem, certainly not as clear an issue as the 18mm. I'll be checking measurements on my OMs tonight + a few others and the SB. I hope I'm wrong on a least some of the lenses. You can see a x-section schematic I put up in a gallery to see what I'm talking about. I'll add any photos taken from the weekend outings and the measurements for the arrow positions, together with the height of the fins for the lenses. I'll do as many as I can, mainly wide to normals.

One thing I realized last night as a side benefit for anyone who chooses to use the SB permanently is that you will be completely free of the risk of getting dust on your sensor during lenses changes, as there's no way any dust can get past the lens and shroud.
http://www.pbase.com/mike_broomfield/image/148468721

FYI here's the ongoing thread on getdpi as more are testing the compatibility, it will be great if there is a table to show the lenses that have been tested:

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/43130-speed-booster-nex-3.html

mcbroomf wrote:
Michael,
I do have a 21/3.5 as well as the F2. I eyeballed it last night and thought it might be a problem, certainly not as clear an issue as the 18mm. I'll be checking measurements on my OMs tonight + a few others and the SB. I hope I'm wrong on a least some of the lenses. You can see a x-section schematic I put up in a gallery to see what I'm talking about. I'll add any photos taken from the weekend outings and the measurements for the arrow positions, together with the height of the fins for the lenses. I'll do as many as I can, mainly wide to normals.
...


Thanks for the information.

Personally, the lenses I would like to try with the Speedbooster would be:

Oly 21 3.5, Zeiss C/Y 28 2.8, C/Y 50 1.7, C/Y 85 2.8, CZJ 35 2.4, Nikkor AIS 55 3.5 macro and maybe the CZJ 135 3.5

thanks Aleksanderpolo,
One individual at the getdpi address above finds that some of his Leica Rs do not work with the Leica R SB. While the SB website does not mention these lenses as not working, the question arises in the discussion as to whether some of the older Leica R lenses have issues that later 3 cam versions avoid.
This is pretty serious because the person actually damaged his Leica R SB with a Leica R lens!

Yes, it was that thread on getdpi that tipped me off to check before slamming a lens on it. 1/2 way down the 3rd page... I don't have the 28/2.8 or 50/1.4 OMs but glad I checked carefully 1st.

"7.Some manual focus lenses (e.g. OM 28/2.8, OM 50/1.8, Leica R 15/3.5) have rear protrusions which would damage the optics and/or housing of Speed Booster™"

amsterdem wrote:
mawz wrote:
Auto-Magnify will only work with E-mount lenses, you need to set the camera to DMF or MF and manually engage magnification, the same limitation exists for A mount lenses.
Auto-magnify works with my metabones II for canon 50L, 70-200, but not my speed booster

Please refer to the online manual
http://www.metabones.com/smart-adapter-operation-manual/147-green-power-save-mode

In a nutshell we can't both autofocus and auto magnify at the same time, but we need to choose the right mode beforehand to select which one we want.

The "Green Power Save" mode emulates an LA-EA1. Sony had placed some limitations and removed some functionalities (e.g. auto magnify). The "Advanced Manual Focus Mode" emulates a native E-mount lens sans autofocus.

Mirror clearance and Speed Booster clearance are equally nasty but rather different animals. Mirror would hit the bottom part of the frame but Speed Booster is tallest in the center.

Anyone have an eos converted contax n 17-35 to throw on this puppy?

cyberstudio wrote:
amsterdem wrote:
mawz wrote:
Auto-Magnify will only work with E-mount lenses, you need to set the camera to DMF or MF and manually engage magnification, the same limitation exists for A mount lenses.
Auto-magnify works with my metabones II for canon 50L, 70-200, but not my speed booster

Please refer to the online manual
http://www.metabones.com/smart-adapter-operation-manual/147-green-power-save-mode

In a nutshell we can't both autofocus and auto magnify at the same time, but we need to choose the right mode beforehand to select which one we want.

The "Green Power Save" mode emulates an LA-EA1. Sony had placed some limitations and removed some functionalities (e.g. auto magnify). The "Advanced Manual Focus Mode" emulates a native E-mount lens sans autofocus.

Mirror clearance and Speed Booster clearance are equally nasty but rather different animals. Mirror would hit the bottom part of the frame but Speed Booster is tallest in the center.


It works, thanks!

Picked up my SpeedBooster today. Cold and dark here as well, so please accept some boring tests.
Canon 40 mm 2.8 STM pancake. NEX 7.
Compared to CV Ultron 28 2.0 (Category 2).
Also compared to the 5DII.(Category 1)
All wide open, identical manual exposure. The 5DII was pushed 0.7 stops to get the same brightness.

[Edit: added full images with SB for crop location reference]

Thank you alundeb for your contribution. Very interesting.

Edit - The nex 7 has reported bad corner performance, I wonder if results would actually be better from a 5N, etc.

Makten wrote:
I don't think you can conclude that lenses getting hit by the mirror on an SLR will have problems with the Speedbooster. A simple drawing with dimensions of the SB would help sorting this out.

I agree, I also (would hope) that the SB is under stricter tolerances or rather more uniform construction. None of the variations in mirror boxes of the 5D and 5DII gamble people have had. I got really lucky with my 5D, since i've used lenses without issue so far that are marked as iffy at peppleplace.

Thanks! Could you show one of the uncropped images, so we can see exactly where this is cropped from? Also, I assume each lens was shot at its widest aperture?

sweet comparison, thanks!

alwang wrote:
Thanks! Could you show one of the uncropped images, so we can see exactly where this is cropped from? Also, I assume each lens was shot at its widest aperture?

Ok! Post edited.

Yes, all at widest aperture possible.