New Lens-Turbo m4/3 adapters for m42, FD, MD

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by tkbslc, Jan 13, 2016.

  1. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. GBarrington

    GBarrington Mu-43 Veteran

    Not sure I'm all that interested. So It will turn my 28 mm FL lens into a roughly 40 mm equivalent lens, and my 200 mm FL lens into an equivalent 145 mm lens. I have those focal lengths covered with native lenses, and the way I shoot, the modest increase in effective aperture is not a big deal to me.

    I'm not saying NO one should buy something like this, but I am saying this isn't a 'no brainer' purchase. Could that $150 (USD) be better spent some other way?
     
  3. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    I think I'll put my $150 toward my property tax at the end of the month ;)
    Fred
     
  4. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I bought a no-name Canon FD focal reducer for $99 a year or so ago. It doesn't see a ton of use these days, but it does produce combinations with my existing lenses that are - if not impossible, at least extraordinarily expensive with native options.

    50/f1.4 = 36/f1.0
    50-135/f3.5 = 36-96/f2.5
    28-70/f2.8-4.2 = 20-50/f2.0-3.0

    So the middle one is achievable, with better quality, less weight, and autofocus, for $1000 with a native Panasonic. But the 50-135/3.5 only cost me $60, and is far sharper than it has a right to be, especially with the focal reducer. So there's that.

    I also tend to think about lenses that will provide utility to me both with and without the focal reducer. I almost jumped on a Canon FD 200mm/2.8 SSC that I saw for $50, but was too late. That would have given me a 200/2.8 and a 140/f2. Does not exist in M4/3 land, certainly not anywhere this side of $1500.

    The quality is not good with ultra-fast lenses when wide open, but stopped down 1 stop it produces about the same quality as you can get from the native lens when wide open. So you have the same effective speed, just a wider focal length. With the zooms it improves quality across the board, even wide-open, and I imagine that holds true for primes up to ~f2.8 as well.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    So it will turn my 50mm F1.4 Super Takumar into a 73mm (EQ) F1.0.

    Interesting...
     
  6. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    That is specifically the lens I have used it with. But don't expect stellar results wide open. Nice for web use, but pretty soft with lots of CA at 100%.

    Couple examples that I know have been shot wide open:
    Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    Some nice shots there. Have you tried portraits with that setup? That softness and dreamy background may actually be good.

    The reality is that the only time I look at images at 100% is...when I'm looking images at 100%. I like sharpness as much as the next person, but we're deluded into thinking that 100% is an actual use case. If there are qualities of the image that are otherwise desirable, I'm willing to forgo some sharpness.
     
  8. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    Thanks. I've typically used the 50/1.4 without the focal reducer for portraits, as it has a similar dreamy look wide-open and the DoF is the same whether I use it at 50/1.4 or 36/f1, and the focal lens feels a bit better suited to portraits.

    Actually though, the FD 50-135/3.5 with the focal reducer is a gorgeous portrait-making machine. Low contrast with creamy bokeh and extreme isolation at the long end.

    But it probably would work pretty well. Maybe I should try that out again...