(UPDATED) Metabones Speed Booster adapter will be made for OM lenses too!


Metabones created the buzz of the week when back on Monday they announced the new Speed Booster adapter. By narrow the image circle of FF or APS-C lenses they can increase the speed of a lens used on a MFT sensor. But they didn’t yet unveil what mounts will be supported. Our reader Knut (Thanks) was able to contact the Metabones manager and they confirmed to him that Metabones will do an OM to MFT Speed Booster adapter!

UPDATE_2: Here is the Metabones pdf file that explains how to do the math. An example, the 35mm f/2.0 OM lens on the Speed Booster becomes a 25mm f/1.4 lens.

And as you know there are a huge amount of OM lenses we can use! This is just the list of the prime lenses…Click on the link to check the price and auctions on eBay: 21mm f/2.0 and 21mm f/3.5 lens, 24mm f/2.0 and 24mm f/2.8 and 24mm f/3.5 shift lens, 28mm f/2.0 and 28mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/3.5 lens, 35mm f/2.0 and 35mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2.8 shift lens, 40mm f/2.0 lens, 50mm f/1.2 and 50mm f/1.4 and 50mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/2.0 macro and 50mm f/3.5 lens, 55mm f/3.5 macro lens, 85mm f/2.0 lens, 90mm f/2.0 macro lens, 100mm f/2.0 and 100mm f/2.8 lens, 135mm f/2.8 and 135mm f/3.5 lens, 180mm f/2.0 and 180mm f/2.8 lens, 200mm f/4.0 and 200mm f/5.0 lens, 250mm f/2.0 lens, 300mm f/4.5 lens, 350mm f/2.8 lens,, 400mm f/6.4 lens, 500mm f/8.0 lens, 600mm f/6.6 lens, 1000mm f/11 lens.


  • OMega

    Hi Admin, any news on fatherhood yet.

    Regarding this thread, the way I see it is a given lens will have it’s given focal length on our u43 body, so you 50mm will be a 50mm, 135 will be 135 ans so on. There has been much discussion on the previous thread about this product, with some claiming all sorts of results from it, though I consider that from the figures given were for the NEX item.

    • admin

      I became father on January 6th. His name is Elias :)

      • @admin
        Congratulations :)

      • NtT

        wow… congrats ;-)

      • OMega

        Congratulations Admin, I wish all three of you well with happy healthy futures, I must have missed the announcement along the way.

        • admin

          I didn’t announce it yet :)

          • i suppose he will inherit the the 43rumors site, so that future has been secured. congratulations Admin.

          • Bobafett

            From now on you shall be called Dadvader (or Dadmin?):)

            Congratulations and welcome to the club!

            • admin


      • Miroslav

        Great news! Congratulations!


      • vdaffyduck

        Hey, congratulations, hope you`ll have a wonderful time with your son.

      • MarcoSartoriPhoto

        As my little nephew! :) congrats Admin!!!

      • Jwhs2012

        congratulations , that is a wonderful way to start the new year

      • simon

        congratulations from me too. wish you all all the best :)

      • Marck

        Well, WOW, congratulations!!!!!

      • Farrukh

        Congrats on fatherhood admin!

      • Wow!!! Super Congratulations!!!

      • Milt

        Congratulations Admin,
        They tell you that children will change your life, but what they don’t say is that children change it for the better. All the best for mother, child, and you.

      • jazzcrab

        Hey, congrats and all my best wishes!

      • koteas

        Already any rumors (FT 3 or better) about the name of your sons first friend at school?

      • Congratulations, I hope all is well.
        Now life really begins.

      • xmort

        I am a little bit late to the party, but anyway – sending my big big congratulations:)

      • Samuel Sihombing

        Congratulations admin!

        • Stefan K


      • Congratulations and what a coincidence. My son was born May 26 last year and his name was also Elias.

      • Congratulations

      • labalbi

        Elias, from Bible, was a great man . God bless you son ! Make him grown up healthy and becomes a man with a good heart ! Congrats…

  • Hi as “Udo Sero” (twitter @udosero) said:
    Great marketing. This is just an ordinary wide angle converter. The aperture improvement happens with all wide converters.
    :-) is is true or not ???

    • Fost

      No with wide angle converters in front of the lens you do not get any F number increase as the image circle that the lens has when it hits the sensor is still the same.

  • clem

    I think your math is wrong :)

    35mm becomes 35×0.71 = 24.5mm (which will be equivalent in term of FoV to a 49mm)

    • admin

      0,71 is the conversion from FF ot APS-C. Not FF from MFT!

      • Vassilios

        In fact, no. From their white paper, 0.71 is the conversion factor for m43 too.

        • Werner

          Excatly. The developers said that there is for mft camera design no way to go far beyond a 0,71x focal reduction… so… guess there wont be a slightly better version, cause you wouldn´t be able to use the aps-c lenses anymore.

          though the 0,71x stays the same, the design of the mft adapter is completly different from the nex adapter and they said that the results in terms of image quality are even more pleasant with mft :)

      • KI

        If they use the same 0.71x focal length reducer (which is likely), a 50/1.4 will be equivalent to 71mm and with 1-step faster (in terms of light-consentration); Equivalent to 71mm/1. The DOF will also be narrower.

      • Miroslav

        Either way your math is wrong. For example:

        -if the same glass (x0.71) as in NEX adapter is used (and one EV stop gained):
        OM Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 lens will become a 25mm f/1.4 on a MFT camera

        -if a new converter (x0.5) for m4/3 adapter is used (and two EV stops gained):
        OM Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 lens will become a 17.5mm f/1 on a MFT camera

        BTW, Nikon E series had x1/16 adapter built in, and it gained 4 EV stops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_E_series . So, x0.5 converter is possible to produce!

        • hsalonen

          Only one thing wrong about his math – aperture.

          50mm/1.4 x0.71 => 35mm/1 => 70mm/2 equivalent (not 70mm/1)

          -if the same glass (x0.71) as in NEX adapter is used (and one EV stop gained):
          OM Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 lens will become a 25mm f/1.4 on a MFT camera (50mm/2 equivalent)

          -if a new converter (x0.5) for m4/3 adapter is used (and two EV stops gained):
          OM Zuiko 35mm f/2.0 lens will become a 17.5mm f/1 on a MFT camera (35mm/2.0 equivalent)

          • Don Pope

            When converting from m4/3 to FF equivalent you only multiply the aperture when figuring out DOF, not exposure.

      • Duarte Bruno
        • Miroslav

          Thanks. And the formulas to calculate FL and aperture are there as well, so definitely worth a separate post or an update to this one.

          • admin

            I updated it! :)

            • Miroslav

              10x ;)

          • fstop and depth of field section are particularly interesting to me.

        • admin


    • OMega

      Hi Clem, seems you have also fallen victim to the figures given being those for the NEX adapter. As yet Metabones do not have one for u43 only promising that one will be produced, so until that happens, who knows. But regarding Admins calculations they are probably correct as are mine though one of us has taken the multiplicity of u43 with an OM lens into account.

  • Admin, your calculations would be correct only if you assumed a 50% focal reduction – meaning that OM lenses would image at their native focal! That is 1:1.

    But is that correct? In fact an OM owner would feel little need to have a FF mirrorless.

    I think however that an adaptall mount to m4/3 would be even more interesting. I have been checking the old Tamron 17/3.5, which would be terrific with such a focal reducer. Or even the Zenitar 16mm.

    • OMega

      Hi Amalric, seems we have to wait and see what Metabones come up with, seeing that as yet there is little to be gained over existing native u43 lenses.

      • Why, Admin has corrected, so my note is no longer relevant. The reduction factor is still 71%, even with m4/3.

        As mentioned there are limits to what can be designed without giving up on IQ.

        • OMega

          I agree Admin has changed the header, however this was after my response to your message.

    • Duarte Bruno

      Are you talking about a adapting m43 lenses? It makes no sense because m43 lenses would then vignette as they are only guaranteed to cover m43 sensors.
      What I would like to see was a flexible front mount adapter. I would like to mount Konica lenses as well as OMs or some Adapt-all very long (and thus slow) teles.

      • That’s exactly what I meant: a flexible front mount adapter. The systems with bigger distance to flange being the best candidates, including M42.

    • I posted on Philip Blooms site that I thought an adaptall type system should be used.
      If the Speed booster was made shorter with a custom front mount (maybe thread to reduce thickness and fit inside), there could be thin adapters made for almost any brand lens. Maybe a plug in electronics module that fits in the side or under the contact pins (include the contact pins?) for use with specific brand lenses.
      It would thus be modular. The basic set for MF lenses and optioned up for specific brand with AF etc.
      Having said that, I thought no one had been able to make m43 accept other lenses electronically. If that is still true then M43 only requires an adapter with the reducing glass. (still with a multi fit front mount).

  • tomas

    hello …

    do you say that
    The OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 turns into a 25mm f/0.95 with SpeedBooster
    The OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.4 turns into a 100mm f/??? with normal OM->m4/3 adapter

    I am not sure about the aperture change when using the OM adapter…but does speedbooster “double down” or keep the focal lenght of original OM ?

    • jim

      The speed boost is 1 stop and the lens gets 50% ish wider.

      So an old 50mm F1.4 lens on a m43 camera normaly comes out as a 100mm F1.4 which is nice…

      But with this device the same F1.4 50mm lens will now come out as a 70mm F1 lens…. yep a 70mm F1 – a rather special combo!

      But if they had a 0.5x that boosts 2 stops than the same F1.4 50mm lens would come out as an F0.75 50mm lens… fastest lens on the panet for any large sensor/film camera!

      And of course would be nice to pop this on the back of a 50mm F0.95 noktorlux thing…. so you would have an F0.5 50mm lens…

      Now look at a D3s or D800…
      Ok so ISO 6400 on the OMD is like ISO 50,000 on the D800… but the fatsest lens you are gonna have on D800 is F0.95 (which will be without AF)… so in effect a 0.5x adaptor with 2 stops, would make the OMD only 1 stop worse than the best system on the planet… and the OMD would then hand you 3 stops of IS with this setup… making a potential 2 Stops advantage shooting in the dark hand held over the best low light system avalible for any money today!!!!

      BRING IT ON!!!!!

      • homer

        no way man…ISO 6400 on the OMD is maybe ISO 16000 on the D800…Things have changed

    • nobody

      A 50mm f1.4 lens, which adapted to a m4/3 camera (with a simple adapter) behaves like a 100mm f2.8 lens on an FX camera, will become a 35mm f1 lens (with the speed booster), that behaves like a 70mm f2 lens on an FX camera.

      • tomas

        thanks…that looks pretty impresive…if it would work like that for every mount than then the price of native lenses could be under pressure

  • These adapters are almost useless for MFT at this price level unless a native 0,5× magnification adapter lens is used.

    0,71× magnification doesn’t worth this huge price at all, better use native MFT lenses!

    • jim

      might accept such a high price if it also shifted the elements to give AF with any lens…. but alas it does nothing of the sort! But if it did then that would definatly be interesting!

  • jim

    DO NOT GET THE OM version… wast of money and time…

    Get the EOS version and use thin adaptor rings (cheep as chips on ebay) to convert the EOS to OM/MINOLTA/NIKON… that way for one adaptor you can use all lens types – if you get the OM adaptor you will not be able to mount or reduce the rear element distance enough to use EOS/NIKON etc lenses….

    EOS uses the smallest rear element to sensor distance of all the mirrored cameras… (well all the main ones)…

    They make a 0.5x (that is very good) and i’m in no matter the price!
    This 0.7x is somthing I would still love to have but at $600 its not tempting me. It should be the price of a T.C. even the 2x Oly 43 TC is only about $480!

    • Kristian

      I thought the same thing but as the speed booster width is shorter than that of the normal adapter (by 6.2mm for eos to m43 and 4.2mm for eos to NEX, page 10 of the white paper) wouldn’t special (with slightly smaller width) adapters be needed to adapt other mounts on the EOS speed booster to achive proper focus?

      • Anonymous

        If it focuses an EOS lens to infinity then all that will be needed is an EOS to OM adaptor baynet ring… ~£10 ebay china…. even if the lens makes a diffrent reg distance it will still be the same distance diffrence no matter the lens used… i.e. if its 4mm shorter than normal it will be 4mm for EOS and 4mm for OM too!

      • jim

        No – I think… the same distance shif will apply for any lens – e.g. if it reduces EOS distance be 2mm then it will be the same for OM (reduced by 2mm) – so the same adaptor should still work perfictly!

        Does this bad boy AF by shifting the TC element? – If so then $600 is a bit more understandable! and would make this a bit more AWSOME than Chuck Norris!

  • Maley

    Your math is not correct. Either it is a 0,71 factor then you would get a ~25mm f1.4 from the 35mm. Or its is a 0,5 factor then you would get a 17,5mm f1.0 from the 35mm. If the factor is 0,71 the lens gains 1 stop and if it is 0,5 factor it gains 2 stops.

  • andrea severino

    Frankly these Metabones products rumors are starting to create only a lot of confusion and false expectations… Besides that the actual quality achieved and that the autofocus is yet to be proven, the focal multiplier stated is only valid for FF to APS-C (this is from their product description). All other stated focal multipliers are just wishful thinking and not so much thinking actually so… better to wait what actually gets announced at this point.

    But certainly, if designed correctly, it does make sense to have a FF lens adapted to MFT with some autofocus ability and reduced Focal Length. A lot of UWA lenses available for full frame market could fill a nice gap not yet covered by native MFT lenses.

  • Also, if it handles the OM mount there are a vast number of other manufacturers lenses which will also be available, such as the often superb Vivitar Series 1 in OM mount, for just one example :-)

  • Miroslav

    And now Fost with big********.com e-mail comes up in the fields above. I am posting as a member. Other bugs are that “Tree View” and “Flat View” give reduced number of posts than the actual number. The comments need to be fixed.

  • Miroslav

    And now jim with Hotmail address shows up :(

  • Macx

    The Speedbooster is a x0.71 converter so the correct calculations are:

    35/2 becomes a 25/1.4 (or equivalent to a 50/2.8)
    50/1.4 becomes a 35/1 (or equivalent to a 70/2)
    85/2 becomes 60/1.4 (or equivalent to a 120/2.8)

    Only if they or others make a x0.5 converter will it make the converted lenses have a similar angle of view and physical aperture on a m43 as the unconverted lens have on a 135.

    • jim

      Yeh 50mm F1.4 comes out as 70mm F2 – only for DOF as far as shutter speeds go its anig win for m43!

  • Reading through the online manual pages on the Metabones site it is clear that the features will vary between the different versions of the adapter which will be offered, as the current version is rather specific about the features offered and the steps involved in particular circumstances. This it is not just an optical adapter but rather has considerable interaction with the various electronic features of the camera / lens combos for which it is designed. Obviously one designed for manual lenses such as the OM mount would be much different from the currently offered adapter.

  • API75

    Ouch! Just sold my OM 50/1.2!

  • Fost

    So, in theory, a Canon FD Dream lens, hacked to EOS mount could go on this?

    What does f0.95 become? :)

    • Werner

      the adapter cannot go beyond input f1.2 and output f0.9…

      • Anonymous

        Awww stops at F0.9… I was wishing for a F0.75! well still makes an F1.4 to an F1… nice!

    • Werner

      How to calculate the f-number, also known as the f-ratio:

      As the name implies the f-ratio is the ratio between the focal length and the diameter of the entry pupil or aperture. In other words: f-ratio = focal length / aperture.

      A converter like the Speedbooster or a teleconverter changes the focal length of a lens, but it can’t change the size of the entry pupil or aperture. In the case of the Speedbooster it looks like this: New f-ratio = (focal length * 0.71) / aperture. Or: New f-ratio = Old f-ratio / 0.71.

      A f-ratio of 0.95 becomes 0.665

      • Macx

        I’m sorry. For some reason the reply-form changed my name into the poster above me. It was me who wrote about f-ratio calculations, not Werner.

        But Werner is right. They state that the maximum f-ratio is 1.2. I don’t quite get that though. Surely the maximum f-ratio depends on the focal length?

        • Werner

          such a relief :D

      • Werner

        How I hate someone having the same name as me…

        besides… you´re right theoratically, but… output limit of f0.9 is what the developers said… dunno

        • Mistral75

          Below f/1.26 the mount diameter is too small and the entrance pupil is reduced “from the back” by the x0.71 converter.

  • Theoretically, Metabone’s MFT version should have x”0.5″ lens and so, OM 50mm will be 50mm as is, not x0.71.
    But by the cost reason, I suspect that Metabones re-uses x0.71 of APS-C compensation lens for MFT version :-<

    • Miroslav

      The ideal solution would be to produce different converter group for different mounts, x0.5 for OM, EF, FX and other FF; and x0.71 for EF-S, DX and other APS-C. I suppose that someone else will do that if Metabones doesn’t. The genie is out of the bottle anyway, so it’s only a question of time before other manufacturers produce their versions.

      • I don’t think current AF lenses are usefull via mount adapter to use with MFT.
        Is there so strong needs to use EF lens for MFT???????
        the target should be JUST FF old lens. OM, of course. but NO 1 must be Canon FD/new FD lenses.
        Nikon F is OK, because Nikon uses F-mount for long time from MF lens are.
        then Pentax K and M42.
        So should be 0.5 product.

        As you see in the previous post, over 50% share of mirrorless is m4/3 mount (in Japan), Sony is 20%, FUjI ? there is fuji?

        Again, I’d say: Foll metabones. Why he makes for NEX? why not (yet) for MFT? insane.

        • Miroslav

          “I don’t think current AF lenses are usefull via mount adapter to use with MFT.”

          NEX version has electronic control of aperture, IS and AF; lens sends EXIF data to body. Why shouldn’t that be in m4/3 version as well?

          “Is there so strong needs to use EF lens for MFT???????”

          EF mount has a relatively short flange distance, so you can adapt lenses from other mounts to it. Buy wide converter with EF mount and afterwards mechanical adapter for others. No electronic communication with lens then, of course.

          “So should be 0.5 product.”

          Not from Metabones. On http://www.diglloyd.com/blog/2013/20130114_6-Metabones-Speed-Booster-Caldwell.html the designer says: “We designed an entirely separate optical system for micro 4/3. However, the magnification is the same as the NEX version: 0.7x. In order to get a significantly smaller magnification while maintaining excellent image quality we would have had to get much closer to the image plane with our optics. Unfortunately, the m4/3 cameras don’t allow this.”

          The big question is whether Metabones will allow m4/3 users to put APS-C lenses on the adapter. Those are interesting as well, especially the zooms.

  • Vassilios

    Guys… please.

    Magnification will be 0.71 for the m43 version too. Period.

    “We designed an entirely separate optical system for micro 4/3. However, the magnification is the same as the NEX version: 0.7x. In order to get a significantly smaller magnification while maintaining excellent image quality we would have had to get much closer to the image plane with our optics. Unfortunately, the m4/3 cameras don’t allow this.”



    Case closed.

    • admin


    • There seem to be a lot of comments from people who did not read the article links.
      But then, why should they change now.

  • hsalonen

    About the MFT adapter. It will be 0.71 and suitable for converting your APS-C lenses. I don’t know the manufacturer, but I do have MSc in Multimedia and I read the whole whitepaper.

    The would have to stack two adapters to get to 0.5x. So 0.71x 0.71x ~= 0.5x.

    There is not enough space between the lens and the camera to fit two adapters. So 0.5x would have to be a completely new design.

    Besides, there were plenty of photos and example in the whitepaper detailing APS-C to MFT-comparison – so they have that already sorted out -> why would they not release something they already implemented? Do you really think they can afford to redesign everything?

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    Am I the only one a bit sceptic about this converter? I don’t think it uses alien technology, and I’m surprised someone could not do it before. Anyway, I’m curious to see the first tests on m43 bodies, but I won’t hold my breath.

    • GoodOldDave

      I’m with MarcoSartoriPhoto. Why has this not been done before? And if this can be done with adapters, why aren’t they make whole lenses with the same specifications as the adapted lenses? There MUST be some sacrifice somewhere. My quess is loss of IQ. Gains in some areas usually means losses in others…

      • ArtP

        Why hasn’t it been done before? My guess, cost and critical mass.
        There is finally a sufficient base to justify developing and manufacturing them… and even so, they aren’t cheap. Had they come out sooner, you might have been looking at over $1000 each due to a smaller market. Maybe in another two years they’ll be half what they’re charging now… maybe not.

      • bart

        It has been done before, and is still being done quite a bit for astro-photography, for reasons echoing much of what this adapter claims to do:
        – wider field of view
        – faster focal ratio (relative aperture)
        – increasing linear resolution
        – reducing field curvature

        The price? depends a bit on how well it has been made, but it will cause a larger part of the image circle produced by the lens to be used for the picture, so you’ll get more ‘edge nastiness’ at the very least.

        Oh, and doing it well also is somewhat expensive money-wise, not unlike how good teleconverters tend to not come cheap.

    • hsalonen

      Why hasn’t it been done before?

      Please read the whitepaper.

      Then read some Wikipedia:

      There needs to be space between the camera and the lens for the adapter. Mirrorless adapters have extra space, so it is just a clever trick to put some optics in that space.

  • Farrukh


  • Mike1

    Do you really want to put an unproven optic at the back of your lens? How about the distortion and other optic quality to be affected? I rather like to have these answers first.

  • zozio32

    Finally I think i got my ideal set up: my Pentax LX with it’s SMC lenses, and an OMO-D with the right speed booster, + one or 2 autos focus m43 lenses.

    I really hope they made a pentax K bayonet version

  • Jerry_R

    Here is examnple math (in terms of focal and DoF, not exposure):

    FF 24mm f/1.4 ~ APS-C 26mm f/1.5 ~ u43 34mm f/2.0
    FF 35mm f/1.4 ~ APS-C 37mm f/1.5 ~ u43 50mm f/2.0
    FF 50mm f/1.4 ~ APS-C 53mm f/1.5 ~ u43 71mm f/2.0
    FF 90mm f/1.4 ~ APS-C 96mm f/1.5 ~ u43 128mm f/2.0

    • james70094

      Jerry_R, thank you for stating “(in terms of focal and DoF, not exposure):”. I find it frustrating that people can’t grasp the idea that apertures do more than just DoF.

  • JF

    I’m not very exited by this patch-up job. The combination of the adapter + OM lens will be very expensive for a probably average result: not so sharp, chromatic aberrations, average contrast, no AF, for the cost of a high quality native lens……..
    I’m still waiting for a native 8 or 9 mm f2.8 weathersealed tack sharp prime…

    • Anonymous

      Go look at the (excellent) images posted on Phillip Bloom’s site, and get back to us with how you feel.

      • JF

        Yeah there are some good images at Phillip Bloom’s site. However, they are taken with Canon EF L lenses which are already designed for DSLR (not SLR) and are modern tack sharp lenses…In addition, it’s a conversion from FF to APS-C sensor which should produce less resolution losses than FF to m43 sensor (there is still a fraction of the image circle that is not used with m43 sensor unless there is a 0.5 x focal reducer).
        My expereince with canon FD less on m43 is not that good:
        – canon FD 50 mm f1.4: very soft until f2.8, very sharp from f5.6. Olympus 45mm f1.8 is stellar compared to it and can be used from f1.8
        – canon FD 50 f3.5 macro: sharp from f4 but nothing exeptional, it’s a good lens from the price
        – canon FD 85 mm: disappointed, until f4 a lot of strange chromatic aberrations and soft, however it has his own character…hard to manually focuse, I sold it…
        So, I don’t see the point to spend 600 or 700 euros in the adapter + lens for an average result when you can buy a high quality native lens…Putting a FF lens on a m43 camera will not make a good combo and you loose the size advantage. Maybe for APS-C lens it can be usefull. I can see it with sigma 10-22 f3.5, that would make a 7-15 f2.5 UWA lens but for 1000 euros, it should better give tack sharp results…

  • bobthewrecker

    Any news about it supporting Canon FD?

    • OldAlaskan

      Well, assuming the 4/3 version matches the APS version, one could buy a Nikon 300mm f/4.5 for $150, add the $600 adapter and for $750 have the full frame equivalent of 420mm f/3.2 (exposure) f/6.4 (dof). That’s pretty good don’t you think?

  • Jankoff

    Sorry, could not read everything above and it may be a stupid question, but: will this adapter work with lenses with a FT bayonet such as Sigma 30mm 1.4 and Sigma 24mm 1.8? Because otherwise these two lenses are APS-C – and the second one is even FF, to my knowledge at least.

  • Johan

    When you say that 50 mm lens becomes a 35 mm lens you mean on FF, where the adapter wont work anyway. On mft a 50 mm with adapter becomes a 70 mm eqv.

  • W. C.

    I read somewhere that Kodak has patents on a 0.5x convertor. As such, it would be very difficult for anyone to legally produce one without contravening the patents. Perhaps someone could contact Metabones and verify this.

  • Bob B.

    So…a given FF lens on a FF camera will exhibit the exact same Image Frame (perspective), and DOF on a crop-sensor mirrorless camera when coupled with the Metabones adapter, but the adapter allows you to shoot at a lower ISO on the crop-sensor mirrorless with this lens to get the same exposure value?
    I wonder how much the glass lens in the adapter effects the optical quality of the given lens….there has to be some affect, no?

  • Rufus

    Have you informations about a Canon FD/MFt Speedbooster adapter?

    • interested in that one too, or one for the hexanons

  • Eric S

    What’s about the telecentricity? Digital sensors don’t like incident light far from the normal direction. Focal reductor will increase beams deviation from normal. So, the 24 mm f/1.0 will act as a f/1.5 or something similar??? With huge vignetting? Old lenses like OM, especially wide angle, were not design for digital sensors. I don’t think adding a device that amplify the defects is a good idea.

    • Michael Devitt

      I think it improves the telecentricity even there are rumors that some SHG Zuiko f2 zooms use a reducer.

      • bart

        There are a number of odd things about those lenses that make them huge and heavy, but the ‘its actually a 70-200/2.8 with a 0.5x reducer’ and similar rumors are plainly wrong, which anyone with sufficient knowledge about optics can tell from the formulas used for those lenses.

  • Urban Domeij

    So many of the questions have already been answered.

    The most sensible Speed Booster to get would be for Canon EF, as this can then be adapted to virtually any SLR lens with a simple cheap adapter. It would work with EF lenses, and for µ4/3 it could probably also take EF-S lenses, provided they won’t collide with optical elements. Then with simple adapter rings, M42, Nikon, Contax and other lenses could be adapted, although the latter would only work in manual mode.

    I doubt they will ever make one for the Canon breech lock mount, as that mount provides very little space behind and I also doubt that there are many enough on the market to be of interest to the mirrorless community.

    So far, it seems as they will make it for EF and EF-S lenses to µ4/3, and I think I will get one of those.

  • cloudscapes

    Just confirmed with them that they will be doing a Minolta MD version too!

    “I hear you guys may be doing a speed booster adapter for the OM series as well. With that, any chance of other legacy non-AF mounts, such as Minolta MD?”

    “YES, already on our product road map, just wait”

    EXTREMELY interesting! If they’re doing OM and MD, I’d guess FD as well, and maybe Pentax. In theory, you’d “only” need to design a non-AF adapter/booster and just change the mount hardware, adjusting for distance of course.

  • Congratulations
    Hooray – Well Done
    I hope the three of you are all well
    all the best
    Jonathan Slack

  • T.

    best thing with this adapter is the posibility to use tilt shift lenses including the 0.71 faktor!

  • name problem

    bytheway- there is always a email adress and name from somenone else already written in the reply box…
    hope you can fix that-dont want my name and adress shared to a random internet guy ;-)

    • admin

      yep working on that…

  • Interesting… But without AF useless for me…

    • new generation photographer :-)

  • nikku

    Unfortunately, unless they make it a 0.5X adapter, I’m not really interested. Especially when I can get native lenses like the 12/2 and 17/1.8 for about the same price as the adapter. Now Olympus (or Panasonic) needs to release a 10/2.8 or something similar. Don’t get me wrong, f/1.0 is cool and all, but not really necessary with good ISO 3200 and image stabilization. Those two things alone make f/1.8 sufficient for pretty much any lighting situation.

  • Ulli, it is interesting to notice, besides the device itself, that these ‘new photogs’ are ‘Spray and Pray’ types who will never understand the charm of MF, made of good glass and metal.

    These types cannot really see and touch anymore, they just live in a virtual world where their whims must be instantly obeyed by manufacturers, without their giving a damn if other people might want a device they are too narrow minded to even begin to understand.

    ‘To give pearls to pigs’ is the saying here.

    • Amalric, “Spray and pray” ? hahahaha
      but yes i guess you are right.

      • There is a good summing up: the Speed booster/Focal reducer makes a m4/3 camera into an APS mirrorless. The latter is made into a FF camera.

        This is made possible by good optics and good resolution of the sensor. Are there losses in resolution along the way? Comparison samples so far seem to prove that the conversion could be almost lossless.

        So this device bridges the gap between FF 135mm and mirrorless systems. Good optical design and tight tolerances are essential, and that’s what you pay for.

        • I think the main attractions are the increase in speed and the maintenance of the original DOF. While I am not a razor DOF person the idea of a good quality lens with sharp DOF has some limited appeal.
          The idea of a faster lens always appeals. Older MF lenses can be used at what would have been 2 stops down from wide open and be in a fast sharp sweet spot, nice.

  • interesting observations about similar dof at aps-c vs 24×36:

  • noty allowed to paste the link here?
    its at the eoshd site about the speedbooster

    • admin

      ??? Of course you can link! I often link to EosHD!

      • i tried posting the link 3 or 4 times bit it did notshow up…i only got the message that i tried to post duplicate messages.

  • camaman

    I just had another confirmation from the Metabones support.
    I asked what FOV will the standard 50mm f1.8 have on m43 body using the m43 Speed Booster.
    To that they wrote:

    50mm 1.8 to M43 normally become 100mm 1.8
    with speed booster will become around 75mm 1.2”

    So I guess that “should” be that. it is one stop more aperture and a 1.5 crop.

    I guess we’ll now officially soon enough.

  • camaman

    LOL they are gonna milk us dry with all the different versions!!
    Thy should have offered the exchangeable top ring to adapt different legacy lenses more affordable.

    For example a m43 Speed Booster with metabones mount + metabones adapter rings to Nikon, Canon, OM, MD etc, for say $100.

    But they run a business… :-/

    • “But they run a business… :-/”
      Even a blind photographic company can see that they have the wrong approach to a very good subject. The techo here is to close to the subject and does not like ideas from others.
      I always told Finance to get lost, I ran the organisation, but there is nothing worse than a techie that won’t see change in their ideas, or won’t put it up for sale till its perfect with the “new ideas I am thinking about”.

  • Tom

    Can somebody who knows these thing beyond the white papers explain if the so much desired 0,5x speed booster can be done from engineering point of view or not? I’m far from being a lens engineer, but NEX system has even shorter flange distance than M3/4 and we saw that this trick can be done with much smaller sensors than 3/4. I can not believe that we are so unfortunate that M4/3 has exactly that flange distance where the needed magnification can’t be done and everywhere else it is possible. If not, then it is only a matter of time till someone will offer the stuff for us.

    • I think Mr. Caldwell explained clearly why it was not possible for him to do this; extreme reduced f/values would require one of the reducer elements to increase drastically in size and give compatibility problems.

  • I am NOT going to spend $6-700 on an adapter that is usable only on canon lenses and another $6-700 on one for nikon lenses and another $6-700 on an adapter for Sony lenses and so on.

    I don’t believe that the M43 electronics have ever been mated with other brand AF lenses in a manner that gives useful functionality. (I can be corrected without offence, but just f stop to exif does not count)

    What I want is an adaptall type front connector with a focal reducer that fits 4/3 and m43 and no electronics.

    Being brave, a fully modular electronics included adapter. Even if lenses have to be mounted upside down for contact compatibility simplification. Plug in electronics converters can be very small, the contact array is the problem, we don’t want any fizzing and SMOKE in the adapter as a contact array is disturbed by an incompatible lens.

    We all know that electronics run on smoke. Proven, over and over again, once the smoke gets out of any component the circuit will not work again, maybe other parts as well. So contacts are very important.

  • Andrea

    well… if they made this convergent lens/adapter for OM lenses they would become:

    – 9-18 Zuiko to 6.3/12.6 f2.8-4.0 (this one makes it a 500g weight with the adapter)
    – 12-60 Zuiko to 8.4/42 f2.0-2.8
    – 14-54 Zuiko to 10/38 f2.0-2.5

    the first one is certainly unique as equivalent 12.5-25mm focal …

    • Nice thought, but these are most definitely not OM lenses, a different system. Try 4/3. The Chinese adapter makers get them confused and call Fourthirds OM.
      Again, nice thought but they both use the same sensor. So the reducer lens in an mmf2 type adapter would give an image that would not cover the sensor. I believe some 4/3 lenses do cover a larger area the 4/3 but still a lot of money for not much improvement and having to crop the image.

  • The APS version of the Focal Reducer should be out by March and the m4/3 version by June. Then, by the end of the year the new 4/3 – m4/3 adapter with the Pro OM-D.

    There will be plenty of choice for everybody. No one is required to buy everything! It just shows the flexibility of mirrorless systems. It’s not ‘one size fits all’, rather the opposite.

    I am happy if old lenses can be put to good use, but some will never stray outside proprietary systems.

    • One brand lens one adapter! You cannot be happy with that. There is a great possibility here and its going by the board because the company has a fixed idea and will not budge. The adapter as presented will not sell unless the purchaser has a drawer full of canon AF lenses. That is not very likely. If they have, they are pros and do not need or will not use this adapter.
      So the rest of us with many great lenses (mostly, nay, all, manual focus) from many manufacturers are what is left.
      At $6-700 per adapter? Flying pigs.
      We both agree, the need is for a changeable front end to fit multi lenses. Don’t let that go.

  • Bad news. A number of Olympus OM (manual focus SLR) lenses had two spikes from the back, and those get in the way, causing an interference with the optics of Speed Booster, when an OM to EF adapter is used on the EF to NEX Speed Booster.

    We tried OM, but unfortunately we didn’t succeed. Our apologies for the let down but thank you for your understanding.

    • there is still the option of removing the “spikes” ?

  • Ronan

    As usual we have all the penis’s out in full force measuring up against each other! Pretty pointless if its a LIMP DICK isn’t it?? Size doesnt matter if the bird can’t feel a f*cking thing guys!! Wake up morons.

    • It has been mentioned that a passive adapter would be far less expensive. However it must be kept in mind that since there is an optical part, these are high precision devices, with a fraction of millimeter tolerances.

      That explains the price, and the need for different versions. If the lens was even slightly decentered in respect of the mount, the adapter would be useless.

      Also the lens must have v. good transmission if you want to have the same resolution of the original at the receiving end. The theory doesn’t prevent such a device, but it’s the execution which must be tricky for small, high density sensors.

      • I admire your patience with questionable personalities ;-)

      • Agreed. But don’t forget that a focal multiplier needs to be more accurate. We all know that the major brands made x2 and x1.6 converters at very high prices. We also know that the independents, Vivitar, Tamron and such made them at far lower prices and though they were in some instances put down in the past, today are acknowledged as fine high quality equipment.
        The first cab off the rank in business usually gets overtaken and very often even forgotten, because they could not see beyond their original idea or expand on it, or charged to much.
        A simple adapter does not have to be expensive by virtue of quality when compared with a x2 magnifier. Its natural properties ensure this is so compared with a magnifier.

        • Why am I being moderated? how can one have a real time conversation or even an argument when things are subject to moderation. And Admin you need to sleep when you can with anew bub, so how long will moderation take?

    • Your language is not required here. If you need to use bad language to get a message across then try some education or go elsewhere. Some where you know the readers are of a similar mind and not possibly young and impressionable .

  • My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and find many of your post’s to be just what I’m looking for. Would you offer guest writers to write content in your case? I wouldn’t mind composing a post or elaborating on a few of the subjects you write about here. Again, awesome blog!|

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.