Fotodiox will launch a new Vizelex adapter soon. Higher quality and 0.5x reduction for MFT!


The Vizelex Light Cannon isn’t a good quality adapter. And the Fotodiox company acknowledged that and is preparing a new version. SpilledInk just sent me that message:

“Here are some non-pixel peeping test shots of the cheap and disappointing Fotodiox Vizelex Light Cannon (Lens Turbo clone). The reaction has been so poor that Fotodiox has promised a version 2 in a few months free to anyone that bought the original light cannon. They are even offering a 0.5x reduction version which would give our Micro 4/3 cameras full frame field of view. Hopefully the quality improves: Thanks. I hope your readers might find this test useful.” 

More news at The current adapter sells for $149 at Amazon (Click here).

  • It was said 0.5x reduction was impossible due to insufficient space for the optical element, but if it is, then it would be great! Interesting months ahead, indeed.

    • I remember that too yes, as claimed by James Caldwell. Maybe its possible if one is willing to compromise on the optical performance in certain areas? I would really be interested how it works out in practise, because dof characteristics ala 24×36 in a mft system would be a dream coming true for me.

      • Xeno

        Couldn’t agree more. I was quite disappointed to read that 0.5x was impossible. Lets hope the quality is good because I for one am willing to pay premium for a good quality 0.5x Canon FD to µ43 adapter.

      • Maybe they’ll use different optical formula, or more elements. Who knows? I’ll remain skeptical until I see the images it gives.

        • MacGyver

          I think they will use a glass element to reduce or increase the distance that the lens keep from the sensor, it is not impossible

      • Michael Devitt

        Definitely interesting times for MFT if true. We should start buying strong ND filters to shoot wide open with this 0.5x adapter ;). This product should have name Light-Sucker for its ability to suck light in :).

  • geohsia

    I have a OM Zuiko 50/1.2 that is dying to make its way back onto an Olympus camera! Hoping for great results!

    • OMega

      This is OMega,
      This mail system is again having issues preventing signing in.
      I have the 1.4 which I use to very good effect as a portrait lens with my E-M5.

    • coaguloso

      i have the OM 55mm f1.2 which is not very sharp, but with this adapter that wouldn´t be mucho of an issue i hope. Is there an adapter for the Om to nikon G o should we wait to see the OM to m43 focal reducer?

  • sig

    I will like to have a speed booster 0.71x with electronic contact and working IBIS, so i can use the new APSC sigma 18-35mm f1.8 zoom lens on m43!

    Turn it into a equiv 25.2-63mm f1.2 constant zoom lens!

    • AMVR

      Sig, I don`t think you understood fully what this post is getting at, this news could mean FF equivalence in m4/3 bodies, just let that sink in for a moment…why would you want ANOTHER 0.71x adapter ? There are tons now, and this promises 0.5x !!!

      Also, Amalric is right on the spot, this tech could be integrated into slr magic ultra/wides, something we will probably never see from other less venturous companies, be it sigma,voightlander and much less Oly or Pany. This finally negates much of the negative trolling that m4/3 gets because of the 2x crop factor. For adapted lenses I don’t need 100% sharpness corner to corner, I can do with 90% but if they can achieve 100% bring it on!!! Just think about it, if they ALMOST nailed it for $149, that means a proper 0.71x adapter should fall between this and the original speedbooster price! this means a good 0.5x adapter should be near or less the original price of the speedbooster. I have no problem paying 300-350 for such a miracle.

      • sig

        If they can promise quality output ofcos i’ll welcome 0.5x and shall get it right away.

        But I don’t put much hope in it (given the current 0.71x is far from perfect).

        But even the 0.5x turns out good, m43 sensor is still much smaller than full-frame, thus performance will not be the same. therefore there will forever be trolls faulting m43 format.

      • BdV

        Well, the corners were already not that great on the metabones 0.71 – I would not yet get too excited about a (lower quality?) 0.5 version.

      • OMega

        For AMVR,

        “something we will probably never see from other less venturous companies, be it sigma,voightlander and much less Oly or Pany.”

        It has already been well reported that a small number of Olympus lenses already use this type of design in existing lenses. Please forgive me for not stating which models as I cannot remember but I’m sure there are other readers out there who will.

        • AMVR

          As in ¨wide prime with built-in 0.5x crop multiplier + 1 or more stop + sharper picture¨ ? if so, please direct me to such a lens, I haven’t seen it personally. All I’ve seen are expensive f2.0 or darker wide primes, I’ve yet to see a native 10mm f1.4 from Oly, and as I said, I doubt we’ll ever see it.

          Incorporating this tech into native lenses would yield far more interesting lenses than what is offered currently, I personally don’t see any big company venturing in such a thing, if anything because of the IQ penalty and the way they would rip us off to justify this optical ¨magic¨. So yeah, I stand by my words (or amalric’s, rather), this could only come from a small adventurous company, such as SLR magic (they’ve done impressive affordable things in the past) or some other.

        • the ZD 14-35 f/2.0 & the ZD 35-100 f/2.0 for FT mount, both huge lenses, similar in size to 24×36 2.8 versions. Never confirmed, but there is a group of believers who think a focal reducer was included.

          • OMega

            Thank you for that Ulli.

          • BdV

            Has this not already been included in many classical lens designs?

            • I dont know about other designs but with those ZD zooms it was popular thinking that a focal reducer was included because they are so big and have wide apertures.

  • I wonder if this preludes to fast native ultrawides, and cheaper ones. Perhaps SLRMagic might grab the concept.

    This increases the strategic value of the format, since the 2X crop factor can be negated, when needed.

  • MarcoSartoriPhoto

    I’ve always been a little bit sceptical about these “speed busters”, because I think it’s not that easy to add glass to glass without losing anything. You can do it (see wide angle converter for Fuji x100(s) for example) but it’s expensive.
    Anyway, if it will work I’m more than happy for those who own some old legacy lens.
    In the meanwhile I’m still sceptical and waiting for photos from early adopters to prove I’m wrong. (I’d be happy to be wrong!)

    • “I think it’s not that easy to add glass to glass without losing anything.”

      It’s impossible to make a focal reducer (or tele converter) that will give good results with all lenses ever made, even those from one system. It will work OK with some, worse with others. The perfect scenario would to make a different adapter for each lens…

      • dont be so sure
        I just dont think theyve got their glass choices to optimum yet
        and they wont ever do unless some expertise becomes involved

        the potential is condensing an image is certain to be better than the original
        the foundation is that these can be provided at a seemingly acceptable cost

        the problems are, that cost is in addition to original kit
        and what homogenised AF performance be like compared with original

    • Mr.Chainsaw

      Thats quantum mechanics baby.
      Light has this strange behavior. Like when you have two perfect polarization filters one rotated 90°. There will be no light passing through. But if you add now a third one rotated 45° to the first (and -45°) to the second, you suddenly have light transmitting. Though you added another filter!

      • MarcoSartoriPhoto

        Mr Chainsaw, thanks for the reply! I’m not an expert in quantum mechanic, I simply take photos now and then :) So, based on my experience, if I add an Oly/Pana wide converter to an Oly/Pana lens, the IQ delivered by the lens is worst. If I had Fuji wide converter to x100 lens, IQ is the same (or at least not noticeable until über-pixel-examine).

        I’m not saying that it’s impossible to make, I’m saying that I imagine it’s expensive. Readers here ask for the best quality at the lowest price possible, if not for free.
        I don’t believe in Companies milking customers (read expensive hoods), but I don’t believe in cheap solutions either.

        • Mr.Chainsaw

          Um.. QM doesn’t tell us anything about pricing :D

        • Mr.Chainsaw

          Oh i forgot to mention, it makes a difference if the converter is in front of the lense or in front of the mount.

          • maybe because a teleconverter degrades the resolving power and max f stop, alot of people think a focal reducer does the same, because it adds extra glass.

            • a lot depends on the quality of the original glass
              remember a m43rds lens needs to be twice as good as FF to have the same resolving power
              Adding the focal reducer will certainly help, particularly with MTF50
              but lets face it a lens that is soft, will improve but remain so

  • chronocommando

    hmm that means the first attempt was nothing.
    The second can only be better.
    A reduction of 0.5 lets see how bad this will be …

  • Fost

    So. is 0.5x potentially a 2 stop increase?

  • i was reading some focal reducer stuff on, about someone using a 0.5x unit for telescopes.The outer areas were extremely blurry, but he had the impression that when using slow or longer lenses, the quality was much more uniform across the whole image.

  • Incidentally I have just read that the figures for E-commerce in China are now 591 million, 44% of the population.

    It’s not only a matter of focal reducer, but think if Chinese Kodak can sell cheap m4/3 cameras to even a fraction of it!

    In China they must also have a lot of Russian and East German m42 lenses which have fine optics at ridiculous prices. Those to me are the first candidates for a focal reducer, because they never went below 20 mm.

    If SLR gear studied some well adapted lens/focal reducer combo they might do indeed some v. good business. Despite the legends to the contrary the Chinese have very fine photo accessories for a song. Prices for building up a studio have become simply ridiculous.

    If m4/3 becomes fashionable there you can rest content that m4/3 will become The mainstream format for many many years everywhere else.

  • Tom

    If Fotodiox actually can make a decent 0.5x/2stop adapter (not expecting metabones quality, but hopefully pretty close), for m43 and Minolta/Sony Alpha lenses, I will buy one in a second.

    ..and if they manage to make a 0.7x/1 stop adapter that rivals metabones in quality, I may buy that one too…

    That said, I’m not extremely hopeful based on their previous “booster”, and the fact I can’t even get their simple m43->Minolta/Sony Alpha lens adapter to focus to infinity for any zoom lense on the wide end, fully open….

  • Bryan

    I’m still hoping for an M42 version.

  • coaguloso

    i want the OM version

  • AMVR

    Think on the bright side, even if their attempt sucks (maybe it won`t, who knows) this development may pressure Metabones (or one of the other booster companies) into making a proper 0.5x adapter, whatever way you look at it there’s a good outcome for us, so I’m not eager to disapprove this endeavor just yet (like some have). Any attempt by 3rd party companies at consolidating m4/3`s position on the ILC market is a good thing in my book, this includes Nissin Flashes, SLRM lenses, fotodiox adapters and Kodak cameras, so i really don’t understand why every time some small company tries to enhance this format in any way it gets so much negative feedback on this site. A successful system is never built solely on OEM products.

    • Exactly so. Western consumers behave like spoiled kids who are afraid of playing in the streets.

      M4/3 has a terrific potential and the Chinese third parties are beginning to tap it. Even if early focal reducers are so-so, they will improve at each generation, without breaking the bank.

      Keep in mind that a lot of OEM stuff is made in China, so that m4/3 technology is spreading there. With a potential of 591 million E-commerce users, the Sky is the limit.

      • BdV

        But still, if it was made in Japan or Germany… ;-)

        • Yes, and if your sister were a virgin…

  • Dwainedibbly

    So if it is a 0.5x magnification factor, does that mean it also makes the lens 2 stops faster (instead of one stop faster as with the 0.71x version)?

  • Anthony

    Part of me wants to believe that Fotodiox has learnt from it’s mistakes with the original Light Canon and wouldn’t release another sub-par product. As much as I would LOVE a .5x reducer for my GH3 (and be willing to pay a lot more than the original Light Canon) I sent Metabones an email a while back asking for a .5x reducer and they conformed that it was not possible while maintaining a quality level on par with .7x reducer.

    Dwaine, yes you your lenses would be 2 stops faster with the .5x reducer. What compromises do we need to make though?

    Sounds too good.

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,, 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:
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: Addthis cookies:
Disqus cookies:
Vimeo cookies:
Youtube cookies:

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.