Speedboosted Lenses Info Thread

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Reflector, Sep 8, 2017.

  1. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    A sort of continuation of the Speedboosted F Mount Lenses Info Thread. I'm converting over to EF mount since there will be AF and I realized how some of my lenses are woefully outdated in terms of performance. That is on top of being able to still use F mount, just through another adapter.

    Using a Metabones Speedbooster Ultra in EF mount for these unless indicated otherwise. I still have the first gen Speedbooster, but I don't know for how long.

    Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8
    Effective 8-14mm f/2.0
    Tokina 11-20.
    For the curious types asking "why does your E-M1II have an ugly thing attached to where the eyecup is?" The answer to that is: I have a 1.22x magnifier attached to my EVF and since Olympus moved to some odd standard, I had to make my own adapter. Now I enjoy a 0.90x magnification EVF. Yes there is a little clipping of the corners but this isn't much of a problem with EVF style 1/2. Style 3 you will have to move around but it beats my FM2n's viewfinder handily!
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Tokina 11-20 f/2.8
    Lens was at f/5.6 @ 20mm (f/4@14mm)
    P9080194.
    Rose anthers.
    Check out the anthers of the rose at 100%. From an UWA!

    Personal notes:
    UWA just like the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, but optically better, especially for the far edges. It is still weak at the very corners. It also has the "it rips my soul out and murdered my inner child" bokeh rings for anyone that viciously despise APS-C UWA bokeh rings. Excellent low light performance when combined with IBIS, just don't expect it to not have lens flares.

    It feels more "plastic-y" than the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6, especially the hood. The hood is pretty tight but putting a tiny bit of (plastic safe...) grease on the bayonet surface really helps out. There are screws visible on the side of the barrel but the plasticiness levels don't reach the levels of my Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D. I don't know why reviewers seem to hate the clutch ring for switching from AF to MF. It reminds me of the Tamron SP 90mm Macro's clutch mechanism, just less refined. Maybe they're all rotten to the core spoiled from modern focus override systems. Lens cap has center pinches, unlike the Sigma. Nothing moves when you zoom or focus it, so it is unlike the Sigma in that zooming it won't present an opportunity to pinch something. Has a red dot on the lens mount (Canon EF mount feature? This is new for me as a former F mount user.)

    Autofocus works and appears to be fast and reliable. Apparently this is the opposite of what happens with some reviewers and on DSLRs, but I have no clue what's going on there. I can only hazard a guess that the combination of UWA, large aperture and PDAF off sensor (And no CDAF) leads to some iffiness combined with a lack of AF fine tuning. Autofocus on a UWA is also a very funny thing since you really don't need it most of the time since you can set it to hyperfocal and leave it there. This works great if you manually set the focus distance then only back button focus or set the camera to MF since you can't really nudge the focus setting once the focus ring is returned to the "AF" position. No indicators for depth of field on focus distance window which is very, very lame for a UWA. Also it is a "bigger" lens in the sense that it is slightly longer (By a mount cap) than the Sigma and a tiny bit larger in diameter.*1 It does feel really light and not as dense as the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6. Apparently it is one of the lighter(or lightest?) UWAs for APS-C. Funny how it has a f/2.8 aperture too.

    It makes clicking sounds when the aperture is closed down to take a shot and definitely makes sounds when the aperture is adjusted during aperture preview. This is especially audible with electronic shutter on the E-M1II. I kind of like this since I wished Olympus included a fake shutter release sound with adjustable volume so there's a confirmation of a shot. Also it doesn't have strange stars like the Sigma when there are bright point sources of light.

    Center is sharpest at f/5.6 (11mm) and f/4 (16-20mm). Shooting wide open while on widest end doesn't seem to hurt if you only care about the center. It does very well in that regard. Everything but the center seems to vary between f/5.6 (11mm, 16mm) and f/8 (20mm). Subtract 1 stop off to get the value you see in camera. Clearly beats the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 by leagues once you get towards the edges. The corners are "soft" but not crazy distractingly soft like the Sigma. This lens is supposedly one of the sharpest UWAs and I believe it since it is optically one of the newest designs.

    Mine most likely an international/gray market version.

    *1 I'm from an APS-C/35mm background. Practically all Micro Four Thirds glass is microscopic and alien to me. This is why I find the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art as being a "normal" lens for me in that it is effectively a collection of f/1.2 primes spanning the 12.5-25mm FL range. It is a perfect fit on the E-M5 with grips and the E-M1II with grip for me.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
    • Like Like x 4
  3. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Sigma DC 18-35mm f1.8 HSM

    1835sb.
    Personal notes:
    Auto focus is fast and accurate on an E-M1-1.
    Sequential shooting speed is slowed down by the camera to around 6fps rather than 10 while stopped down, this is artificial as the lens can go faster (the camera limits it as it's imitating a 4/3 lens). Wide open it will still shoot at maximum speed.
    It's always sharp, if something wasn't you made a mistake of some kind.
    The plastic finish is tough and doesn't show much wear at all despite abuse.

    It's mine, you can't have it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    DSC_2753_1.

    I don't suppose you're going to get a 50-100 f/1.8A too?

    Still need to get mine mount converted.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Wow Wow x 1
  5. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Sigma DC 50-150mm F2.8 EX HSM II

    50150sb.

    Personal notes:
    At f2.0 it's soft in the corners however the center is reasonably sharp, by f2.8 the entire frame is sharp (at 2.8 it's capable of causing aliasing with hair).
    It has somewhat strong longitudinal color aberration (green fringing in out of focus areas) however it's mainly limited to the background as in testing it's hard to get magenta to show in foreground OOF areas.
    Auto focus is fast and accurate on an E-M1-1.
    Sequential shooting speed is slowed down by the camera to around 4fps rather than 10 while stopped down. Wide open it will still shoot at maximum speed. This appears to be the maximum speed of the lens (I don't have a high speed Canon body to test with currently).
    The finish is crap and will show lots of marks if you abuse it or anything rubs against it.

    I replaced the Olympus 35-100mm f2.0 with it as it's absolutely tiny and weighs nothing by comparison, the Olympus completely destroys it optically however it's double the size and weight. Much faster focusing than the Olympus.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2017
    • Like Like x 2
  6. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Nope, I'm really happy with the 50-150mm, it was basically a drop in replacement for my Olympus SHG 35-100mm f2.0.

    While I have had a play with it and it's an impressive lens it's just a bit big for my tastes and I don't really want to go back to a larger kit unless needed (I still have 300/400mm lenses, however their size is a result of their function).

    I'm probably going to buy a second speedbooster at some point though, I currently have the standard version not Ultra and two E-M1 bodies, it would be good to have the option of two lenses mounted on boosters at the same time rather than one on a straight adapter.
     
  7. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    I've heard some real interesting things in regards to the .64x adapter working on the E-M1II (Mostly the whole "touching the flexible shutter cover maybe" thing).

    I have a Canon 70-300II (The one with nano USM) coming in soon. Should be real interesting to see how that lens will do. It does something similar to the 40-150 Pro + TC, but I believe it'll be sharper at 210mm. Otherwise the 40-150 Pro will beat it in the 40-150 range (At least from what I can tell with charts and estimations.) I have a Nikon 70-300VR but at 300mm it is atrociously not sharp.
     
  8. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014

    It's funny you should mention it, I was recently looking at the newer Canon 70-300mm (with the LCD display) and while it's a good performer I was torn between it and the EF-S 55-250mm STM which is smaller and half the weight. The 55-250mm on a Speedbooster would replicate the range of my Panasonic 45-175mm f4-5.6 with an extra stop of speed.

    I then realized I was being silly, I already own the 50-150mm f2.8 and with it on a plain adapter it's basically the same range, stop it down one stop and there's doubtful to be much difference in performance. In my lust for something new and exciting I had forgotten the main reason I love and use the Panasonic which is because it's small and discreet, something not shared by the other lenses.

    It wasn't long ago when I wouldn't have thought twice about the size or extra weight however my priorities have shifted, while I don't want to sacrifice performance where avoidable I'm more and more conscious about how quickly anything extra adds up. I still see the 70-300mm in my future if/when a good deal comes along, however it's not a priority at all.
     
  9. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    I went for the 70-300II since it was a refurb and on sale... At least that's my excuse for getting one to try out before the 50-100 myself.

    Plain adapters can be iffy if the lens is optically designed for a filter stack that's significantly thinner than m43's thick, 4mm stack. At least that's what I've noticed in some cases.

    Regarding the EF-S 55-250mm: Do you just pop the plastic baffle off and mount them?
     
  10. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    TBH, with telephoto lenses it really doesn't matter all that much, it's more of a problem with wide angles. Given that I mainly use supertelephoto lenses on the plain adapter and it only uses the very center of the image circle I personally regard it as an academic and not real world concern.

    Because it uses a plastic bayonet to save weight the baffle is molded into the lens mount rather than a separate piece, you unscrew it from the lens, mount it in a lathe and machine the center out.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    On finding out they're available for around $100-or-less used... I have the vaguest temptation to want to pull the mount off one, epoxy fill the back space and then cut off the baffle... Thank you for bringing that up, sometimes having a (short reach, inexpensive) alternative wouldn't be too bad at all.

    A real shame that there's no Micro Four Thirds 40-150 f/4 or f/2.8-4 zoom of that sort, at these prices, at the mild cost of "experimentation and a little"?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. eteless

    eteless Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 20, 2014
    Remember there's three versions available, the first two use older coatings and motors - the newest is the STM and it's meant to be a significant step up in flare performance and autofocus speed over the older models.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    I'm looking at the prices, the STM is basically $150 new and less than $100 second hand... Wouldn't touch most older optics unless they're a known good*1 given the rapid rise in pixel density these days with sensors*2 and how modern lenses are practically built for that. In my case the Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 was showing its dated design when I moved it from the D200 to even the 16mp sensors of m43s, with a Speedbooster.

    *1 My Nikkor 50 f/1.2 AI-S being one of those cases, sharper than all the modern Nikon 50mms earlier on and matching or exceeding them in center performance. Only route for me is to go Sigma instead of Nikon in that case...


    *2 And there are those who don't know why I keep saying "optics before needless megapixel gains over all other sensor performance aspects."
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler Subscribing Member

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
  15. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Just confirming the Canon 70-300II works. That's the Canon with Nano USM. AF is fast. Micro Four Thirds fast. Except when the E-M1II thinks it is at the lens' MFD or its a dark, low contrast target. Then it doesn't even move the AF, you will have to help it get slightly closer to focus instead of sitting at all the way out.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 II ("Nano USM")
    Lens was at f/6.3 @ 300mm (f/4.5 @ 212mm) for both shots.

    P9130286. P9130287.
    100% crop

    P9130287N.

    Will report in more about this lens later. I'm extremely impressed with it, especially for a $400 "refurb". This is exactly like an Olympus "refurb." Lens looks brand new, bubblewrapped into a generic cardboard box.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Impromptu pseudo-MTF testing results (Don't take this too seriously or remotely close to serious, misaligned, printed on pearl paper, etc)
    Done on MTF Reader. Through a Speedbooster Ultra unless noted:

    Canon 70-300II NanoUSM @ 300mm, min/max ("Corners/Center" approximated lpmm*1
    f/5.6 (f/4) 50/70
    f/6.3 (f/4.5) 55/70
    f/8.0 (f/5.6) 63/Lower 80s
    f/11 (f/8.0) 62/75 (Diffraction starts here)
    Notes: Excellent lens. "Poor man's 40-150 f/2.8+TC, with TC built in." "Weak" at 70mm. My results most likely are not accurate and highly misaligned, I will have to retest later.

    @200mm
    As good as the Olympus 40-150 f/4-5.6 @ 135mm f/7.1 if not better...
    Basically amazing.

    Nikon 70-300VR @ 300mm (With an F to EF adapter as well)
    f/5.6 (f/4) 17/27
    f/8 (f/5.6) 20/36
    f/11 (f/8.0) 30/37
    Notes: Pain and suffering. This lens is very weak at 300mm. You don't want to use it minus an adapter as well


    Nikkor 50 1.2
    f/1.2 (f/0.9) 15/25
    f/2 (f/1.4) 20/43
    f/2.8 (f/2) 30/60
    f/4 (f/2.8) 38/80
    f/5.6 (f/4) 40/Mid 80s+?
    f/8 (f/5.6) 38/Mid 80s+?
    f/11 (f/8.0) 36/Lower 80s (Diffraction starts here?)
    f/16 (f/11) 35/Upper 50s

    Nikkor 50 1.2 WITHOUT Speedbooster
    f/1.2 16/23
    f/2 35/53 (Not sure if I messed up the results or anything here or if focus shift occurred and I forgot to refocus on the boosted lens)
    f/2.8 41/60
    f/4 41/60
    f/5.6 43/58
    f/8 43/53 (Diffraction starts here)
    f/11 41/Lower 50s
    f/16 33/Lower 50s

    *1 Maybe close to Lenstip's numbers. I used them to approximate performance using my 60mm Macro. Go slap a +/-5 on all the numbers here. Or even a -10.
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2017
  18. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro initial notes:
    "Poor Man's" 42.6mm Summilux (f/1.4).
    AF is slooooooooooooow if it racks and makes a geared motor noise, turn on the distance limiter in the E-M1II if you're not shooting macro with it. This thing needs a focus distance limiter badly! Maybe this is why I didn't buy the 30mm Olympus macro when it was on sale with the Olympus 60mm (...Which did find a home with me).

    With a focus limiter: Behaves well enough, appears to be decently fast.

    Focus accuracy: Misbehaves if you don't have the focus limiter on and you're at the far extents of the focus range. It'll miss focus slightly or be confused as the E-M1II asks it to do a focus dance.

    Sharpness: Awesome at f/4 on the lens.

    Macro: Yes, 1:1.

    Slows down past 1:2 magnification. But only by a tiny bit (...f/2 -> f/4?)
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    Update in regards to firmware V2.9
    Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro:
    Autofocus appears to be super reliable now without a distance limiter
    My lens appears to sweep from whatever to MFD to infinity if the camera is powered on and the switch is left in AF. Leaving the switch in MF and then setting it to AF after the camera powers on avoids this.

    Canon 70-300II NanoUSM:
    Autofocus appears to be super reliable if you're very out of focus and works really fast.
    Autofocusing on slightly out of focus subjects near MFD is slower now?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Top Veteran

    757
    Aug 31, 2013
    ...Redid the test on a 30x20" chart which isn't perfectly printed, but better than a piece of glossy photo paper...
    f/8 results

    Nikkor 50 1.2 f8.
    Yes the chart is probably not coplanar to the sensor as much as I like but WOW.