Why I Speedboost on m43s

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Reflector, Feb 14, 2014.

  1. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    You could call this part 2 on my essay on the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8A with a Speedbooster and why I bought it over m43 primes, even if I consider them highly respectible lenses for their performance.

    A disclaimer: I personally really like the Olympus 17mm 1.8. I like how it has a physical focus scale that lets me manually focus effectively. I like that it is a solid feeling, dense and compact little lens. I would like to own one very much but the price makes it so very hard to justify as a purchase, especially when I have have other, more flexible options avaliable...


    Prices given in US Dollars, no discounts or sales.

    Code:
    Olympus 12mm f/2.0:	130g	$800 / $1,100(!) to buy in black
    Panasonic 14mm f/2.5:	55g	$320
    Olympus 17mm f/1.8:	120g	$500
    Panasonic 20mm f/1.7:	87g	$385 (II version)
    Panasonic 25mm f/1.4:	200g	$530
    			592g	$2,535 / $2,835 to buy the black 12mm f/2.0
    Five lenses, all with autofocus, but I would have to mount and demount to get the 12-25mm focal lengths and the fastest lens is only f/1.4 and the average aperture range is between f/1.7 and f/2.0.


    Code:
    Sigma 18-35 f/1.8A:	811g	$800
    Metabones Speedbooster:<180g	$430
    		       <991g	$1,230
    I really would like to own several of those m43 primes. I really would. But at the prices they're at I really have to make a tough decision, especially when I know how much optics matter. I'll state this clearly: I have already planned to buy a D3s for years and I will not give on that. That means I will not give up my existing collection of lenses at a loss to me and I am given further incentive by Speedboosting to keep them around and use them to their fullest.

    I don't have autofocus, but I have an effective range between 12.8 to 24.8 = 13-25mm. Its not the 12mm of the Olympus but its not a f/2.5 of the Panasonic 14mm and it goes a little wider. But it is at f/1.2 across the range for about 400 grams of weight difference.

    I personally don't mind the weight and the lack of autofocus. I come from a D200 so the E-M5 is 270 grams lighter without the grip. With the grip the weight is only approx 40 grams lighter which I pay for with an extra battery but I have a much more usable camera that packs into a bag barely bigger than the D200 yet assembles into a fully gripped camera once I take it out and bolt on the vertical grip. All while I have the same weathersealed build to the buttons and body as I would on the D200 (One of the things I liked about it.)

    The lack of autofocus is nothing horrible of a loss for me with my personal experiences on the D200, I keep the 14-42PZ with me if I feel that 50mm f/1.2 and manual focus will not allow me to keep up. I keep a focus scale so I can reliably infinity focus or to set the lens to a range and "fire from the hip" so to say.

    But I get a f/1.2 lens that wide open, will optically outperform everything listed above when they're wide open. If not, a single stop down will keep that optical performance. All with minimal CAs. The distortion from the 18-35 optically is less than the Olympus options which means I have sharper edges and corners.

    And I have already paid for my Speedbooster when I paired it with my Nikkor 50mm f/1.2. So you could say my second hand $400 Nikkor with my $430 Speedbooster is in a way like a Nokton lens. A $800 dollar, f/0.9 lens that when stopped down will provide some of the sharpest shots out there or blow everything away into a dreamy background while providing a clear enough subject with a dreamy glow. So there goes the sunk cost factor for me. I could of bought a Nokton but that means I wouldn't have anything to mount on a D3s that I have already planned for in the future. For $400 I am getting one of the sharpest lenses that Nikon has ever produced that rivals the Sigma 35mm f/1.4A in center resolution when stopped down. I think that's a personal bargin if anything.


    I haven't mentioned how much flexibility a Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 could give me, especially in that I can screw a filter onto it and achieve a 7-14mm f/2.8, as the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 has a large, bulbous filter element. Or perhaps I could bring up how a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 if I need that extra stop for photography in the dark. It turns into a 8-11mm f/2.0 that gives you the extreme "wide" end" and with the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8A paired together, you have a 2mm focal length gap. All of these are within a similiar size as the Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 announced, perhaps a bit bigger.

    Or perhaps I could bring up a nice 85mm f/1.4 option from anyone: A 60mm f/1.0. The reach you could achieve with the insane background isolation for those who need it. Even more center sharpness than you would have normally.

    Need even more isolation and speed? A Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, turning into a dangerous 85-213mm f/2.0. I already posted the results of what happens when you take a Nikon 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 (A fairly soft lens) and then use it at 300mm f/8 (213mm f/5.6). Utter annihilation of the background into pure smooth creaminess. Now imagine what a 106.5-213mm f/2.0 (Think of it as a 105mm-210mm f/2.0 for ease of memory) will do. IBIS is your stabilization and you now have a "very big set of primes" mounted on the camera. A metaphorical big set of primes that costs less than 4/3s lenses with equal or superior optical performance.

    Less weight than that? Tokina 150-500 f/5.6. A constant f/4 from 106.5mm to 355mm. The current furthest reaching m43 lens only hits 300mm and speeds at f/5.6. You'll have to wait until 2015 to get an Olympus 300mm f/4 and I doubt it'll be as low in cost as the Tokina here. By no means is the Tokina lighter or smaller but it will give you the optical performance, the stop advantage and the zoom.

    Those are merely a few choices of lenses that currently have no analog on APS-C or 135 format in terms of f-stop, giving me the flexibility to work with higher shutter speeds combined with more depth of field. All while I gain stabilization on all of them. All of this on a camera that turns into a compact, large pants pocketable body with a functional zoom (14-42 PZ or EZ or 12-32) combined with an autofocus. Of that, those lenses and the Speedboosted ones could fit on an even smaller companion body like a GM1.


    Photography before autofocus has existed for over a century and autofocus has been around for only two decades. It doesn't matter if you've been taking photos for 5 years or 50 years when the fundamentals are still the same. This is still easier than using a FM2n to me with the E-M5's metering and real time view. People still use Leicas today and I think that some of their users would find it troubling that you would want to give them autofocus. (Not that I necessarily prefer the lack of autofocus nor would I agree with the removal of it but it doesn't prevent anyone from taking amazing photos.)

    I am not advocating for people to become gearheads here. I buy lenses to create a set of focal length ranges that I can bring along to take the photos I want. Speedboosting on m43 gives me the capability to do that.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Speeeeeeeedboooostah! !!!

    Seriously... glad you love the speed booster but I see no reason for this justification... just as there is no reason for another to justify their choice of FF camera.


    But what do I know.... my choice of system defies any logic. Lol


    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    The current m43 optical choices are particularly high priced for their performance and I find that it becomes very hard to buy them when I know that one day I will own the Nikon body that I have always wanted and then I will be lacking out on some of the finest optical options when I have it.

    The justification for my choices here is that I have the optics I want. They don't exist in any current lens so I will gain the lenses that are "nonexistent." This lets me push my photography in ways that I would have never considered in the past.
     
  4. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Okay..... I am truly happy for yah. Hmm... is that what you wanted to here? It's kinda hard to have a discussion over your strong preference with little direction. Or did you intend on entertaining other views? Or is there a question buried in there.

    My choices which differ from yours are better for me. Great day then... Two fellows happy with their choices.

    I will have to say... it seems you have put more effort in your OP. Step in the right direction.

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013

    So would it be the usual to intentionally question say the "Bokehlicious" topic by asking them "why in the world would you want such thin DoF, that's your strong personal preferences you're subjugating in the thread." This is, after all, the adapted lens forum. Am I not correct to assume there are other people similar to myself that actually prefer to have nice optical choices due to the flexibility of m43s as a system and perhaps this topic is for those people as well? Or must I stay under the boot of "you must buy m43 optics no matter what, you must remain at f/1.8 and no faster even if the situation calls for it and you must agree with the opinions of everyone else"?

    This is a "part 2" to the Sigma 18-35 and all the praise I can give it as a lens. The "part 1" was a very selective example of why it lets me do a lot of things and it is a completely different topic from this. Amin was one of the few people who understood what I was saying.
    I could use a Nikon 50mm f/1.2 on the E-M5 but I would need a 70mm lens to put on a 135 format camera to equal out the FoV to show the DoF. That'd involve using a 24-70 f/2.8 and that definitely dosen't let me play all the way down to f/2.4 when I have the 18-35 wide open.
     
  6. chonbhoy

    chonbhoy Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Apr 23, 2013
    Scottish Highlands
    I hear ya ! it's like using a cheat code for faster apertures and you get infinite lives :)
     
  7. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sure..... but one is a discussion over artistic intent and the other seems to be written as a counter to a debate that I have yet to figure.

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
  8. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    Let me refer you to these if you don't understand the first topic:

    This topic refers to how the Speedboosters are tools that allow for one to have lenses that don't exist and to use them in ways you really wouldn't with anything short of a high ISO monster like a D3s or D4 or Df.
     
  9. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    And the counter to the debate?

    I think people don't necessarily disagree with you but simply believe that lack of AF and size weight factor is more than they are willing to acvept.

    L et me also remind you that Amin stated that it seems to be a response to FF discussions commonly found in places like DP review.... but those discussions are not common here. It would be interesting to see you post in those threads to see responses from the other side so to speak

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
  10. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    I really tire of the harrassment-esque mocking like passive aggressive responses like this:

    When this is a clear cut case:

    I guess you want to have some kind of tango as well, which I really don't feel like getting involved in, given you keep coming back to this topic which is more of a praise for adapting lenses via Speedbooster topic.

    I accepted it for myself, so have other users, heck they have 300mm and 600mm lenses on their cameras and they enjoy taking photos of birds in flight.

    When you are trapped between one set of people that think you're wrong for mounting a larger, heavier lens on a camera when you feel price gouged by the options and another set of people that for some reason need to walk over to you with their D800E with 18-300VR mounted and go "hey do you realize you're using an inferior sensor" when you're taking a long exposure at night infront of an oceanscape, it tends to give you things to say. Especially when DPR isn't just "in" DPR and decides to come into your face in real life or anywhere else you don't want it.
     
  11. One of the strengths of mirrorless cameras is that they allow you to choose your poison, so to speak. You can go small, you can go big. You can go cheap or spend big. You can choose to use all of their features and performance or the bare minimum. None of them are wrong choices.

    Just one question: will we get to see some image samples for the Sigma 18-35mm + Speedbooster combination as part of these essays? Like proper samples, not brick wall samples? It seems that the imaging performance of this combination is at the very heart of your argument.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Seriously... I am trying to figure out the intent or direction of the discussion. It's not clear. What was the opposing post that prompted you to start this thread.

    I truly think that speed booster expands options which is a clearly a good thing. Just don't think its for everyone.....



    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
  13. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    Which is something I have been saying over and over again. The E-M5 lets me change from a very small (Relative to me) camera to a much larger and capable camera. This is one of my personal reasons as to why I did not go for the E-M1. The removable, smaller grip proves to be more useful to me than the PDAF.

    The local drought hasn't been very helpful for me, but have some quick examples:
    https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=52850&page=3&p=590841#post590841
    https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=52850&page=3&p=594853#post594853

    And tonight's fog really ruined a nice astrophotography opportunity for me.

    I find it ironic that you would say
    Since I am one of the people who advocates against that. There's a point to "well lets compare the DxO marks between this lens" that I will take no more from people.
     
  14. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Ahha... This is what I was looking for. So you feel trapped and wronged. I will say this over and over AND no one here will disagree.

    There is no wrong and right. Just preferences.....

    No one here would claim you have an inferior anything shooting micro 43. After all we made similar choices.


    I highly recommend you stop worrying about what others think and go out and shoot to your hearts content.

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    I see you need to use something borderlining ad hominem to discredit me as a person. There is nothing wrong in expressing well formed factual information unless you need to push your own personal opinions but then go "but those are merely my opinions, after I disprove anything you say. Why look at the burdern of social proof: other people agree with me."

    Just like that. "You're a person with personal problems (Thus less relevant), but I am taking the high ground here! See? Look at how you're pointlessly wasting your breath here by doing the wrong thing by feeling wronged. Look at you, you're not even taking photos and instead posting here on this forum!"

    Please, find another person to troll, I do not want to have these petty arguments with you when you go to the ends to try to bug me for some reason. I rather not participate in this tango when I made this topic for other people who would find the information here enlightening, pardon the pun.

    Also, really? Editing a short while after you post expecting I would reply with a quote of your post that would seem incomplete? I really tire of this especially when you seek to discredit me via forum tactics...
     
  16. PandaSPUR

    PandaSPUR Mu-43 Regular

    51
    Feb 6, 2014
    Uhh not sure whats with the prodding from usayit lol, but I appreciate the thread.

    It was an interesting read. And honestly if I had something larger than my GM1, I would be seriously tempted to go this route, especially since I could use the same adapter for my Sigma 50/1.4.
    But hah... imagine how that would look. It would really be just a lens with a screen on the back.

    Although... now I'm wondering why Sigma doesnt make a fast zoom for FF ): I'd grab one for my 5D... (Not interested in paying for the 24-70L x.x)
     
  17. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    That is not what I am getting at.. I am trying to figure out the source of discontnent. It seens to come out of left field considering the tone of the very first post.

    Yeh... I agree those that preach FF or nothing are mislead to a false panacea. Speed booster combo is certainly an option....

    I am posting on a phone and are posts are crossing so I simply append in hopes to keep up.

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
  18. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 Veteran

    406
    Aug 31, 2013
    Or you could actually talk about what you could do on your existing collection of lenses if you still have any D/SLR lenses that could be adapted over and what creative uses they could be put to.
    It comes out of the left field that you poke and prod at me looking for some flaw when I want to simply talk about Speedboosting and hear the reasons that other people Speedboost. I already gave mine out, I have two lenses that give me every reason to Speedboost them. It actually pains me to do it at some level because I want to own some of the m43 primes as I find the 14-42PZ a very nice lens, but a bit slow for some uses where I am seriously light limited and I would not mind giving up the zoom to get some shots at 1/60s instead of 1/15s. Unfortunately I consider obtaining photographic results important enough to sacrifice being able to bring the E-M5 along for some business trips.
     
  19. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    My most used adapted lens is the Tamron 90 macro in adaptall mount is often used with its 2x converter to give me 1 to 1 or 1 to 2 magnification plus a decent working distance while taking advantage of the extra DOF the smaller format offers. I also adapt several Pentax and Takumars too. A Speed booster certainly would open doors BUT as small as those lenses are the extra weight and size kinda a turnoff for me. The shallower DOF would be counter of what I want out of the 90 macro. In the end, a set of native primes is what seems to fit most of my needs.... for size weight and AF. I know we disagree on price so we won't need to rehashm

    As for the FFdiscussion, I like the way my lenses render. Adapting them seems to change that. It's more than just more speed and shallower DOF. It's the reason why the earlier versions of that systems camera was not completely ideal....

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos
     
  20. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Let say a speed booster for a smaller than 43 sized sensor was available for an even faster effective max aperture.... would you move to that system?

    Sent from mobile.... excuse my typos