Metabones Speed Booster
/forum/topic/1181879/31

1       2       3              31      
32
       33              47       48       end

LightShow
Registered: Aug 03, 2009
Total Posts: 4796
Country: Canada

Using a fast lens wide open in bright conditions will almost certainly be near the shutter's limits.
If you really want to use a fast lens in bright conditions, you will have more options available to you with something like a Singray Vari-ND http://www.singh-ray.com/varind.html I have one and it's great for dragging the shutter while using shallow DOF, and there is no need to remove it all the time vs a regular nd filter.
One benefit of the Speedbooster I like is the shorter overall length of the adapter + lens .



ISO1600
Registered: Jul 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4388
Country: Korea, South

man, that vari-ND is $$$$$$$$



ken.vs.ryu
Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Total Posts: 3342
Country: N/A

I'll use a c-pol or a 3 stop nd when outdoors. I'm used to dealing with 1/500 top speed on film cameras.



LightShow
Registered: Aug 03, 2009
Total Posts: 4796
Country: Canada

Yeah not cheap, I've seen cheap variable NX filters create an X of across the image as you get close to the maximum effect. And Singray are not cheap in the first place.



alwang
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 969
Country: United States

Anyone have any samples of the Speedbooster with a Zeiss 35 1.4 (ZF,ZE, or C/Y)?



R.Young
Registered: Jul 01, 2011
Total Posts: 874
Country: United Kingdom

LeadyGonzales does I think



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 9688
Country: United States

R.Young wrote:
LeadyGonzales does I think


yeah, look in the official zeiss 35/1.4 thread.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1098
Country: Netherlands

alwang wrote:
Anyone have any samples of the Speedbooster with a Zeiss 35 1.4 (ZF,ZE, or C/Y)?


I posted some in the NEX thread, I think.

Here are some.



















I did not spend much time with SB and the lens, though. I have a fader on order to shoot the lens wide open at daytime.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1098
Country: Netherlands

Here is one with the 18 Distagon







alwang
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 969
Country: United States

Thanks, Michiel,

The 35/1.4 looks like it retains the excellent Zeiss contrast, though I feel like I don't see as much of a 3D effect as I normally see with this lens used on a FF DSLR.

Is that Zeiss 15 the C/Y 15/3.5? I wasn't aware there was a Zeiss 15/4 for SLRs. How are the corners on that lens using the SpeedBooster?



contaxpano
Registered: Apr 18, 2013
Total Posts: 22
Country: N/A

The Distagon 15 is impressive. Anyone with a C/Y Distagon 18?



Makten
Registered: Jul 14, 2008
Total Posts: 4035
Country: Sweden

Sculptormic, any chance we could get to see some crops? I hope this won't offend you, but honestly I think the image quality looks real bad for such fine lenses. It could of course be the post processing and/or downscaling though.



0jjcpa123
Registered: May 29, 2006
Total Posts: 63
Country: Canada

Hi, I am going to buy a Nikon F to EF adaptor so I can use my Nikon F lens on 5DII and also mount them to NEX thru EF-NEX SB.

Do I need to buy the one with chip or not?

BTW, I also have C/Y to EF adaptor with chip. I hope I can use the above SB with them too

thanks,
JJ



itaintrite
Registered: Jan 09, 2011
Total Posts: 10
Country: United States

0jjcpa123 wrote:
Hi, I am going to buy a Nikon F to EF adaptor so I can use my Nikon F lens on 5DII and also mount them to NEX thru EF-NEX SB.

Do I need to buy the one with chip or not?

BTW, I also have C/Y to EF adaptor with chip. I hope I can use the above SB with them too

thanks,
JJ


I wouldn't stack electronic adapters on top of each other. Never know when you might damage/short something.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1098
Country: Netherlands

alwang wrote:
Thanks, Michiel,

The 35/1.4 looks like it retains the excellent Zeiss contrast, though I feel like I don't see as much of a 3D effect as I normally see with this lens used on a FF DSLR.

Is that Zeiss 15 the C/Y 15/3.5? I wasn't aware there was a Zeiss 15/4 for SLRs. How are the corners on that lens using the SpeedBooster?


Silly mistake, that is of course the 18/4 Distagon. Changed it.

3D effect is not always there with the 35/1.4 (Although those tourist look rather 3D to me)
You have to shoot stopped down when there is so much light in combination with the Speedbooster, so you get more dof and less chance for 3D.
That your lenses become faster is one thing but what I like above all is the fact your lenses represent their true FL again. (almost)



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1098
Country: Netherlands

Makten wrote:
Sculptormic, any chance we could get to see some crops? I hope this won't offend you, but honestly I think the image quality looks real bad for such fine lenses. It could of course be the post processing and/or downscaling though.


Explain?

No different processing and downscaling as usual. Or all my images would look real bad or it must be the Speedbooster in your opinion. One thing I must change in PP, I think is adding less contrast because the Zeiss lenses become somehow edgyer with the Speedbooster, I think.

BTW I don't know if I will make the time to do all kinds of scientific crops, it is not my strongest point.
It will raise another amount of questions about my procedures, unsharpened, sharpened RAW JPG etc etc et...
Boring work as well, but may be.

I am shooting a lot with it lately to find out what I think of it, and for now what I like the most about it that your lenses are back to their real FL again. I don't want a big DSLR body again and wait patiently for a FF mirrorless camera.



Makten
Registered: Jul 14, 2008
Total Posts: 4035
Country: Sweden

sculptormic wrote:
Explain?

No different processing and downscaling as usual. Or all my images would look real bad or it must be the Speedbooster in your opinion. One thing I must change in PP, I think is adding less contrast because the Zeiss lenses become somehow edgyer with the Speedbooster, I think.

BTW I don't know if I will make the time to do all kinds of scientific crops, it is not my strongest point.
It will raise another amount of questions about my procedures, unsharpened, sharpened RAW JPG etc etc et...
Boring work as well, but may be.

I am shooting a lot with it lately to find out what I think of it, and for now what I like the most about it that your lenses are back to their real FL again. I don't want a big DSLR body again and wait patiently for a FF mirrorless camera.


I haven't followed your work with other gear, so I can't comment on that. I just think those last shots don't look good. Lots of CA, smudgy transitions from sharp (which doesn't look very sharp) to unsharp and weird colors.
I don't think the images are boring; I'm just curious if the Speedbooster degrades the performance of the lenses or if it is because of PP.

With some crops, perhaps we could help you make it look better. It doesn't have to be boring to enhance the look, I promise!

Edit: I understand if this really is offending, but it was never my intention. Just want to know, and help of course.



alwang
Registered: Sep 02, 2011
Total Posts: 969
Country: United States

Makten wrote:
sculptormic wrote:
Explain?

No different processing and downscaling as usual. Or all my images would look real bad or it must be the Speedbooster in your opinion. One thing I must change in PP, I think is adding less contrast because the Zeiss lenses become somehow edgyer with the Speedbooster, I think.

BTW I don't know if I will make the time to do all kinds of scientific crops, it is not my strongest point.
It will raise another amount of questions about my procedures, unsharpened, sharpened RAW JPG etc etc et...
Boring work as well, but may be.

I am shooting a lot with it lately to find out what I think of it, and for now what I like the most about it that your lenses are back to their real FL again. I don't want a big DSLR body again and wait patiently for a FF mirrorless camera.


I haven't followed your work with other gear, so I can't comment on that. I just think those last shots don't look good. Lots of CA, smudgy transitions from sharp (which doesn't look very sharp) to unsharp and weird colors.
I don't think the images are boring; I'm just curious if the Speedbooster degrades the performance of the lenses or if it is because of PP.

With some crops, perhaps we could help you make it look better. It doesn't have to be boring to enhance the look, I promise!

Edit: I understand if this really is offending, but it was never my intention. Just want to know, and help of course.


I actually think the picture from the Distagon 18 looks quite good, and even from this web-sized print it looks very classically Zeiss. I agree though, that the 35/1.4 shots don't look quite right to me. Actually, at the risk of offending folks, I have to say I'm very interested in the Speedbooster conceptually, but from the images I've seen from it, it doesn't capture the full-frame look for me quite right. I'm primarily interested in shooting FF with fast aperture lenses just stopped down a little: that gives you a combination of shallow depth of field and image clarity that's difficult to replicate on APS-C. I haven't seen that sort of aberration-free clarity in a lot of the SB shots. I hope I'm wrong, because it would be a great option in a lot of ways.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1098
Country: Netherlands

When people say "I don't want to offend you" you can be sure of the fact that you get a slap in the face. It is like Nixon who said "I am not a crook" We know all about that now.
Or like a debating politician who starts with "With all due respect" and then subsequently wipe the floor with their opponent.
But Makten you got me going now, as they say in Holland "brutals own half the world" , so here are your crops.
Also you could take in consideration to look at peoples work before making bold statements.

BTW Tryed to find out how to put the flickr link under one's avatar? Can anyone tell me?

Awang you are right the 18/4 picture looks rather good to my eyes as well, although there was harsh sun reflection in the upper side of the building. So I took this picture for pixel peeping because it looked more fit it.
That Zeiss photo with all the tourist can't be used for it because it is a fast snapshot to grab the moment. No time for balanced fine tuning. And I didn't post it for that reason but because I thought it is an interesting picture.

Original file, which I changed a little bit from the former one, less contast, vivity and suturation.
Because this discussio I did find out that my usual PP does not work well on Speedbooster files. Thanks Makten!







Center 100% crop






Lower left corner 100% crop






Upper right corner 100% crop






I leave the conclusions to the audience

I also worked on this file a little and I think the upper right tree (purple fringing) looks a little better. This photograph was already cropped for the right composition and I placed it because I think it is an interesting picture the way all those people are busy with diffrent things.

Makten I don't think you can learn me anything about cropping. Actually I don't like and use cropping often but do good framing in camera instead. It is a waste of pixels I have been an art teacher for 26 years and might say I know a little about composing images. You are very nonchalant with making superiour remarks like that and put a silly smiley behind it.

In this picture I cropped out some of the people because they where half in frame or didn't fit in the theme.

Also changed my colour settings







mortyb
Registered: Feb 15, 2009
Total Posts: 1361
Country: Norway

Agree with Makten, but I think it's because of your PP/downsizing which doesn't look optimal in bringing the best out of these lenses. I've seen the same with your Sigma photos as well which leads me to believe it's your downsizing.



1       2       3              31      
32
       33              47       48       end