Skip true. Maunally focusing with EF lenses is great since it's all mechanical. Autofocus is great when you're doing talking heads and getting consistent rack focuses (if you're using Canon or Sony's AF system). I think both MF and AF have their place in use.
AF in photo mode is about 70% hit rate I would estimate. The photos that didn't hit focus were slightly back focused in my use. Definitely would recommend overshooting if you use this set up for photos. I do portraits so I would shoot more than I needed for safety.
Glad that you did this! I think the high price is basically for its glass, but the auto focus, I really wish the fringer could come up with a new one. However, this adapter seems like has the top quality of images
Hi Jeremy! It's interesting for me to compare speed booster Viltrox with other Canon EF (FF) lenses with stepping motor. I press like and wait a new test.
Also you can remove the foot off the metabones if you wan to make mounting your camera easier but remember, if you do that then make sure when you use a bigger lens that it is supported as you would put much undue strain on the camera lens mount
Good to know. In my use, it's better to leave it on since it gives the camera better balance overall since it moves the center of gravity forward to compensate for the additional length.
Yes he is really interested to see more from this but am getting it either way do not care about AF this booster unlocks the power of X-T3 the quality is great
I did not notice this years back when i watched this video but now I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
Hey great video man looking for this detailed review from very long time.... When shooting outside, did you see and flare or vignette or ghosting? As we can see in viltrox, because I'm not satisfied with viltrox!
Hi thanks for watching! I did not notice any additional flares, vignettes, or ghostings. In terms of glass quality, I would conclude that Metabones has the best optics compared to other speedboosters. If you do not need to rely on autofocus and want the best optical quality, I would definitely go for the Metabones.
Your math is incorrect. When using a speedbooster it essentially makes the sensor act as a bigger sensor hence the lens coverage and speedboosting. In this case, the Fuji with the speedbooster essentially is a 1.09 or 1.1 just to make things simple. Then you do the math for the crop factor. In this case a 24-70 2.8 turns into a 26.4-77 f/1.98 lens. Hopefully this helps in the future. Crop factor 1.5 x 0.71 = 1.09 Then multiply Full frame lens by the new crop factor Then after you get those numbers multiply the Aperture by 0.71 F/2.8 x 0.71 = 1.988 or rounded up f/2.0
Watch 1:04 again. I talk about the EQUIVALENT focal length and EQUIVALENT aperture on a full-frame sensor. I mentioned that the Speedbooster DOES give you an extra stop of light. We have the same numbers on the focal length. For the aperture, you are mistaking the AMOUNT OF THE LIGHT LET IN vs EQUIVALENT DEPTH OF FIELD. I was using those calculations to find out the equivalent depth of field on a full-frame sensor. Read the text at 2:07.
Dude, while in your settings, what do you put in for your lens focal length? I'd think Xmm x .71 correct? If I had a Super Takumar 50mm with this speed booster, I'd want to put 35mm in the menu? TY
Hi, Jeremy. This is a great video. By the way, I just get a Fuji X-H1 and I wonder if this speed booster works well on it. How is the continuous AF if I used a tele lens such as EF 70-200mm f/2.8 for shooting sports? Thank you.
I think the speedbooster messes up the Fujifilm color. I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
would you say that the image quality from the metabones is worth the extra cost over the cheaper alternatives? I’m not sure if i want to spend $649 for a focal reducer
Image quality is the excellent. It's the best that I've seen for focal reducers. However, is it worth $649? My advice is to shoot for your clients. 90% of your clients won't be able to tell the difference between the Metabones or the Viltrox or Kipon. If you want the absolute best, then go for the Metabones. However for $649, you could pick up a different brand of focal reducers and another EF lens at the same time. Just my 2 cents.
Hey this is really great quality of the metabones on the X-T3 looks great especially with the Canon L 50mm F1.2 looks so good. Do you just rely on AF only? Would love to see you shoot a portrait cinematic video with that 50 I think this speedbooster is great for those doing MF. Lastly would like to see you test HLG profile aswell its better than F-Log even more when recording external in 10bit 4.2.2
That would be a great test do! I actually haven't shot in HLG either but will give it a shot next time. I generally rely on AF since I'm normally "run-and-gun" shooting but I love the manual focusing with EF glass since it's al mechanical and not "by-wire" like a lot of newer glass. And unfortunately, I do not have an external recorder at the moment but hopefully I get one soon! I've seen some other reviews on TH-cam and the color look great! Thanks for watching!
@@terrylong7686 I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
Thanks you for the review, I have been waiting a little while for someone to try it, it appears to work better from longer focal lengths which was unexpected, i heard the canon 50mm f1.8 stm is good for video focus, the lens is cheap and might actually produce better results as the focus motor was designed for video, I am sure metabones can do something in via firmware updates because the way it looks now it does not seem to focus much better than the viltrox speedbooster when it comes to wider shots.
Out of the shadows. Yes I am going to try out some STM glass when I get a chance! I only have USM glass atm. I wish that Canon made EF STM or EF Nano USM 'L series' glass. I think they are going all in with the RF mount so I doubt we will see anymore new EF glass :/
Thanks a lot for doing this test - I guess it rules out Speedbooster for the X-T3 for me. I think the Fringer Pro may be a better option (no booster of course).
PromoMovies.com.au yes I agree. Until the firmware is updated, I would say the Fringer Pro with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 is better choice if you want that full frame look with good autofocus. Thanks for watching 🙏🏼
at least one can use it's mechanical manual focus to pull focus when shoot hand held video shooting? Just wondering - how does this work when using the prime lens and for photography?
Yes you can use mechanical manual focus when shooting video. In terms for photography, the autofocus will give you a green confirm box when it thinks it's in focus, but I when I looked at the photos after some of the pics were soft or focused on the wrong thing. IMO, if you do use the autofocus with this adapter then you definitely either want to check critical focus of important shots or make sure you take a bunch of photos and reengage the autofocus each time. You can use the manual focusing and use focus peaking or magnification to achieve critical focus. Hope that helps!
@@misterjermalee yes thank you - does it actually show peaking while shooting video? for me this kind of adapter/lens set up would be used for video mainly. any photos would be single point contrast and dont need continuous focus at all. (at least for me)
@@JayGrapherTh Yes it will show focus peaking during video. It's definitely the highest quality adapter out there if you're looking to adapt EF glass. And for photo as long as you double check photos for focus you should be good. I was shooting AF-S and would still get soft shots sometimes. I would say that the hit rate for focus ranges from about 50%-70%.
I think the 18-35 will give you a vignette when you are zoomed out wide. I used the 18-35 on my 1DX Mark it which is full frame and it work perfectly because in 4k video it would have a 1.3x crop so there wasn't any vignetting. But in full frame mode it would vignette. Hope that helps!
Thanks for the review! I tried the Viltrox EF-FX2 and was really unhappy with the optical quality (and AF was horrible with the lenses I testet that on). I don't really care about AF since I use manual focus cine lenses anyway, so my question is: would you say this speedbooster would work great for using EF mount manual focus cine lenses with the fuji (quality wise)?
dear Kasper! Is the Viltrox distort any of your footage? Or its just adapting the lens keeping its full potential? I cant choose between the Viltrox and between Fotodix or K&F adapter.
@@larionszilasi2964 So basically I put the Viltrox on my X-T3, and then I did a comparison between a cheap Meike 25 mm MicroPrime cine lens (native on fuji), and my expensive Canon EF 35 f/1.4 USM II lens (roughly the same FOV). With the Viltrox on my Canon glass, you could not tell the difference between the lenses. Of course the Meike is really good for the money, but the Canon is and should be far superior. So I just felt that I didn't want to cripple my Canon glass with a bad Speedbooster, and returned the Viltrox. The Viltrox kind of gives the lens a bit of an "vintage" look / distortion, but for that you can just buy cheaper Rokinon/Samyang or Meike/SLR Magic lenses.
@@larionszilasi2964 No problem! That's actually why I checked out this video, to see if the metabones could be interesting for me :) But my conclusion is leaning towards that I am a bit too perfectionistic to accept the optical degradation of Speedboosters. So I am actually thinking about either going for a Fringer Pro (no glass elements, no speedbooster), or maybe get another camera for my video work (with EF/RF mount) - or staying with my Fuji X-T3 for a while and maybe getting some other native cine lenses, such as the new Rokinon/Samyang VDSLR MK2 lenses. Hard choices!
G Jackson, PsyD 3:18 I put my settings up on the screen. It was +4 tracking and -5 speed which is what Metabones recommended. I tried other settings as well but there wasn't a huge difference.
Hey brother ! Thanks for the video. i've been waiting a long time for someone to review this speed booster. I too went from The 1DX MkII to Fuji. I really want to know if the lens stabilisation works on the metabone. It's in my opinion unusable on the viltrox, and main reason i want to switch to metabones. can you try to switch on the lens stab with the AF-S on the camera it would be really helpfull :) have a good day :D
Hey man! Soooo I ended up returning it :/ I did try it in AF-S for photography and the hit rate was about 50% useable shots and this was with eye detect ok as well. I actually ended up having to scrap some shots because they were too soft. When it did hit, the pictures were amazing! It ended up not being reliable enough for me to use it on an actual shoot. But maybe future firmware updates can save it.
I’m gonna apologize right off the bat because I skimmed the video looking to see if photo was reviewed or if it was just video use, and I think the review is video only. How was the performance with AF for photo? I do portraits, headshots, and editorial, so nothing fast... to be honest the only reason why I want it is for indoor shoots and the extra stop of light, but the AF can’t be clunky and I’m just wondering if your video experience was the same as photo, or if photo performed better, same, or worse?
Hi! I apologize for the late response. No worries about not watching the video, I totally get it since it was more video oriented. In the time that I was testing the camera in for photos with the Speedbooster, autofocus was a little bit better but performed similarly from starting from worst AF performance at the wider angle and getting better at the more telephoto angle. I found that when I took wide angle shots, I would get the green box for AF that focus was confirmed but when I would go into post, I would see that they were out of focus. I was shooting in AF-C with eye detect on. At the telephoto end, I would say that 90% of my shots were hits. The image quality is definitely amazing if you can get past the AF woes. AF isn't exactly terrible but I would recommend that you shoot more pics for coverage just in case. I hope that helps and let me know if you have any other questions!
That could potentially be a factor. However, there are A LOT of people that wear glasses when shooting video. My Canon never had an issue with nailing focus with my glasses on and if I was shooting a client that wore glasses, I can't just tell them to take their glasses odd because my camera can't autofocus correctly. Also, the Fuji system with an XF lens has no issues with focusing with me glasses on either...again if you watch the video, my face and eyes were being tracked even with the adapter (8:50). The issue was with how that information was transferred to the lens.
Yeah I just wanted to break it down further for those who wanted to see how the conversions worked. Also I wanted to demonstrate the difference in equivalent depth of field.
Hello Sir !! I am planning to buy Fujifilm XT-3 body for my cooking channel on TH-cam. I have two questions : 👉I mainly want to shoot close up videos of my recipes. Which lens should I buy to get sharp videos with fine detail and crisp images too ? 👉Is the XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 lens worth buying for my kind of work ? Your help will be appreciated. Love from India❤️
Hi thanks for watching my video! To answer your 2 questions: 1. To get proper close ups of food require the use of a macro lens which allow you to get very close in on the food. It all depends on how much detail you want to get of the food. The best maco lens from Fuji is the Fujinon 80mm F/2.8 OIS Macro lens which costs about $1199. A great alternative is the Lensbaby Velvet 85mm lens which is a full manual lens. However, this all depends on what your budget is. 2. The XF 18-55mm is actually a fantastic lens. I used that when I first got my XT-3 and it served me well. It actually has decent macro capabilities which will allow you get close-ups of food just not quite as close as a true macro prime lens as I talked about above. If you are starting out, I would definitely recommend using it and then add a macro lens to your kit later down the line if you feel the need. To conclude, get the XF 18-55mm to start out as it is a solid overall lens that will be give you many kinds of uses. I would invest the rest of your budget into proper lighting equipment and audio so as to raise production value in all facets of your video. Hope that helps!
Great but the formula is quite simple and you don’t need this website once you know it. You take your lens field of view then multiply by the crop factor (1.53) then by the speed booster coefficient (0.71) and you will get the Full Frame equivalent. For example, with your 24 mm you have: 24 x 1.53 x 0.71 = 26.07 mm The formula is the same for the aperture: For example, with a 2.8 lens aperture you will have: 2.8 x 1.53 x 0.71 = 3.04
James Sonfield yes something I forgot to mention is that I love the way EF lenses manual focus since it's mechanical and not "by-wire" like Fuji lenses and even the new RF glass.
I switched to manual focus and never looked back. Makes choosing a camera 100 times easier.
Skip true. Maunally focusing with EF lenses is great since it's all mechanical. Autofocus is great when you're doing talking heads and getting consistent rack focuses (if you're using Canon or Sony's AF system). I think both MF and AF have their place in use.
Would love to see the same review with Fuji XH2/XH2S;) Thanks for the great video 🙌
Fujifilm + speedbooster = Lumix autofocus
Hahaha that's pretty accurate
So, how is the autofocus when you shoot photos???
What about AF in photo mode?
For video it is not worth to put a biger and havier lens that does a worse job than an FX mount lens.
AF in photo mode is about 70% hit rate I would estimate. The photos that didn't hit focus were slightly back focused in my use. Definitely would recommend overshooting if you use this set up for photos. I do portraits so I would shoot more than I needed for safety.
Glad that you did this! I think the high price is basically for its glass, but the auto focus, I really wish the fringer could come up with a new one. However, this adapter seems like has the top quality of images
Qihua I agree! The actual materials and glass used are second to none. If they could sort out the AF then it would make the price worth it.
Hi Jeremy! It's interesting for me to compare speed booster Viltrox with other Canon EF (FF) lenses with stepping motor. I press like and wait a new test.
Finally a review on the metabone
FINALLY!
Also you can remove the foot off the metabones if you wan to make mounting your camera easier but remember, if you do that then make sure when you use a bigger lens that it is supported as you would put much undue strain on the camera lens mount
Good to know. In my use, it's better to leave it on since it gives the camera better balance overall since it moves the center of gravity forward to compensate for the additional length.
Can u try this test again now that firmware 4.0 is out! Thanks for doing this, you’re the only one that has the Metabones for Fuji lol
Yes he is really interested to see more from this but am getting it either way do not care about AF this booster unlocks the power of X-T3 the quality is great
broo I have the 50 1.2L and looking at going Fuji. It's my fav lens, this might actually help me keep it
Thanks for the vid man!
Zach Mayfield appreciate you!
I did not notice this years back when i watched this video but now I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
How is achieving Infinity Focus? Also, how do you think this would work in a photography application?
So clear dude! This what i want 👌 is this better than viltrox?
I think that the image quality is definitely the best out of all the other speed boosters out there!
Thank you! Great review! Please update with latest firmware. I'm in the same boat...
Hey great video man looking for this detailed review from very long time.... When shooting outside, did you see and flare or vignette or ghosting? As we can see in viltrox, because I'm not satisfied with viltrox!
Hi thanks for watching! I did not notice any additional flares, vignettes, or ghostings. In terms of glass quality, I would conclude that Metabones has the best optics compared to other speedboosters. If you do not need to rely on autofocus and want the best optical quality, I would definitely go for the Metabones.
Saving up for it do not care about AF the quality is really impressive
Your math is incorrect. When using a speedbooster it essentially makes the sensor act as a bigger sensor hence the lens coverage and speedboosting.
In this case, the Fuji with the speedbooster essentially is a 1.09 or 1.1 just to make things simple. Then you do the math for the crop factor. In this case a 24-70 2.8 turns into a 26.4-77 f/1.98 lens.
Hopefully this helps in the future.
Crop factor 1.5 x 0.71 = 1.09
Then multiply Full frame lens by the new crop factor
Then after you get those numbers multiply the Aperture by 0.71
F/2.8 x 0.71 = 1.988 or rounded up f/2.0
Watch 1:04 again.
I talk about the EQUIVALENT focal length and EQUIVALENT aperture on a full-frame sensor. I mentioned that the Speedbooster DOES give you an extra stop of light.
We have the same numbers on the focal length.
For the aperture, you are mistaking the AMOUNT OF THE LIGHT LET IN vs EQUIVALENT DEPTH OF FIELD. I was using those calculations to find out the equivalent depth of field on a full-frame sensor. Read the text at 2:07.
Dude, while in your settings, what do you put in for your lens focal length? I'd think Xmm x .71 correct? If I had a Super Takumar 50mm with this speed booster, I'd want to put 35mm in the menu? TY
The quality of this booster is worth the price great review can not wait for the new review :)
how can you mount fuji lens on the adapter?
Hi, Jeremy. This is a great video.
By the way, I just get a Fuji X-H1 and I wonder if this speed booster works well on it. How is the continuous AF if I used a tele lens such as EF 70-200mm f/2.8 for shooting sports? Thank you.
Just get the fuji 50-140 2.8 instead…trust me
$649 too much for something that doesn't work well in Auto or manual focus. I'll stick with the Fringer. Hopefully they make a Speedbooster
I agree! Although manual focus works great still. Autofocus is lacking for the asking price.
Honestly, I think its a fair price considering i haven't seen a single speed booster that looks nearly as good on the market.
@@TheKiwiJobes Viltrox has speedboosters that are fairly comparable in terms of image quality. The differences are quite minor.
I think the speedbooster messes up the Fujifilm color. I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
would you say that the image quality from the metabones is worth the extra cost over the cheaper alternatives? I’m not sure if i want to spend $649 for a focal reducer
Image quality is the excellent. It's the best that I've seen for focal reducers. However, is it worth $649? My advice is to shoot for your clients. 90% of your clients won't be able to tell the difference between the Metabones or the Viltrox or Kipon. If you want the absolute best, then go for the Metabones. However for $649, you could pick up a different brand of focal reducers and another EF lens at the same time. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for making this.
Thanks for watching!
Hey this is really great quality of the metabones on the X-T3 looks great especially with the Canon L 50mm F1.2 looks so good. Do you just rely on AF only? Would love to see you shoot a portrait cinematic video with that 50 I think this speedbooster is great for those doing MF. Lastly would like to see you test HLG profile aswell its better than F-Log even more when recording external in 10bit 4.2.2
That would be a great test do! I actually haven't shot in HLG either but will give it a shot next time. I generally rely on AF since I'm normally "run-and-gun" shooting but I love the manual focusing with EF glass since it's al mechanical and not "by-wire" like a lot of newer glass. And unfortunately, I do not have an external recorder at the moment but hopefully I get one soon! I've seen some other reviews on TH-cam and the color look great! Thanks for watching!
Will stay tuned for the next video happy shooting
@@terrylong7686 I see something wrong with the Adapter's glass. In the side by side comparison at different focal length look at his black shirt with Canon glass. I see some IR pollution (particularly when he is directly under the sun). Even the greens of the leaves on the lower left of the frame looses its green and adds magenta. Timestamp : 5:30 to 6:06
Thanks you for the review, I have been waiting a little while for someone to try it, it appears to work better from longer focal lengths which was unexpected, i heard the canon 50mm f1.8 stm is good for video focus, the lens is cheap and might actually produce better results as the focus motor was designed for video, I am sure metabones can do something in via firmware updates because the way it looks now it does not seem to focus much better than the viltrox speedbooster when it comes to wider shots.
Out of the shadows. Yes I am going to try out some STM glass when I get a chance! I only have USM glass atm. I wish that Canon made EF STM or EF Nano USM 'L series' glass. I think they are going all in with the RF mount so I doubt we will see anymore new EF glass :/
@@misterjermalee I have subscribed so will keep an eye out.
What about photo auto focus?
Thanks a lot for doing this test - I guess it rules out Speedbooster for the X-T3 for me. I think the Fringer Pro may be a better option (no booster of course).
PromoMovies.com.au yes I agree. Until the firmware is updated, I would say the Fringer Pro with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 is better choice if you want that full frame look with good autofocus. Thanks for watching 🙏🏼
The fringer is not a speedbooster
What about flares mate? Do you see any wierd chromatic aberrations or flares?
The IQ seemed pretty spot on. I did t notice an flares or aberrations out of the ordinary. This is compared to the lens when it was on my 1DX Mark ii.
at least one can use it's mechanical manual focus to pull focus when shoot hand held video shooting?
Just wondering - how does this work when using the prime lens and for photography?
Yes you can use mechanical manual focus when shooting video. In terms for photography, the autofocus will give you a green confirm box when it thinks it's in focus, but I when I looked at the photos after some of the pics were soft or focused on the wrong thing. IMO, if you do use the autofocus with this adapter then you definitely either want to check critical focus of important shots or make sure you take a bunch of photos and reengage the autofocus each time. You can use the manual focusing and use focus peaking or magnification to achieve critical focus. Hope that helps!
@@misterjermalee yes thank you - does it actually show peaking while shooting video?
for me this kind of adapter/lens set up would be used for video mainly.
any photos would be single point contrast and dont need continuous focus at all. (at least for me)
@@JayGrapherTh Yes it will show focus peaking during video. It's definitely the highest quality adapter out there if you're looking to adapt EF glass. And for photo as long as you double check photos for focus you should be good. I was shooting AF-S and would still get soft shots sometimes. I would say that the hit rate for focus ranges from about 50%-70%.
Hey man, would this work with the sigma 18-35? I know I could get a grinder but am curious if the sigma works with a speedbooster
I think the 18-35 will give you a vignette when you are zoomed out wide. I used the 18-35 on my 1DX Mark it which is full frame and it work perfectly because in 4k video it would have a 1.3x crop so there wasn't any vignetting. But in full frame mode it would vignette. Hope that helps!
@@misterjermalee For sure, thanks!
Thanks for the review! I tried the Viltrox EF-FX2 and was really unhappy with the optical quality (and AF was horrible with the lenses I testet that on). I don't really care about AF since I use manual focus cine lenses anyway, so my question is: would you say this speedbooster would work great for using EF mount manual focus cine lenses with the fuji (quality wise)?
dear Kasper! Is the Viltrox distort any of your footage? Or its just adapting the lens keeping its full potential? I cant choose between the Viltrox and between Fotodix or K&F adapter.
@@larionszilasi2964 So basically I put the Viltrox on my X-T3, and then I did a comparison between a cheap Meike 25 mm MicroPrime cine lens (native on fuji), and my expensive Canon EF 35 f/1.4 USM II lens (roughly the same FOV). With the Viltrox on my Canon glass, you could not tell the difference between the lenses. Of course the Meike is really good for the money, but the Canon is and should be far superior. So I just felt that I didn't want to cripple my Canon glass with a bad Speedbooster, and returned the Viltrox. The Viltrox kind of gives the lens a bit of an "vintage" look / distortion, but for that you can just buy cheaper Rokinon/Samyang or Meike/SLR Magic lenses.
@@kasperdalkarl ah thank you very much for your honest review on the Viltrox! Have you found any better alternative for adapting lenses?
@@larionszilasi2964 No problem! That's actually why I checked out this video, to see if the metabones could be interesting for me :) But my conclusion is leaning towards that I am a bit too perfectionistic to accept the optical degradation of Speedboosters.
So I am actually thinking about either going for a Fringer Pro (no glass elements, no speedbooster), or maybe get another camera for my video work (with EF/RF mount) - or staying with my Fuji X-T3 for a while and maybe getting some other native cine lenses, such as the new Rokinon/Samyang VDSLR MK2 lenses. Hard choices!
@@kasperdalkarl Yes :D Choosing the right lens is one of the hardest choices, Im totally with you in tihs!
Some of this might be due to the speed settings you have. The -5 speed might need to be changed to help out the performance
G Jackson, PsyD 3:18 I put my settings up on the screen. It was +4 tracking and -5 speed which is what Metabones recommended. I tried other settings as well but there wasn't a huge difference.
Hey man how did you go calibrating the lens for the speedbooster?
I followed the instructions on the website for the calibration. It didn't seem to to much even after I tried multiple calibrations.
Does this work on a Fujifilm xt30???
Manu Mohan yes it does 👍🏼
Hey brother ! Thanks for the video. i've been waiting a long time for someone to review this speed booster. I too went from The 1DX MkII to Fuji. I really want to know if the lens stabilisation works on the metabone. It's in my opinion unusable on the viltrox, and main reason i want to switch to metabones. can you try to switch on the lens stab with the AF-S on the camera it would be really helpfull :) have a good day :D
Hey man! Soooo I ended up returning it :/ I did try it in AF-S for photography and the hit rate was about 50% useable shots and this was with eye detect ok as well. I actually ended up having to scrap some shots because they were too soft. When it did hit, the pictures were amazing! It ended up not being reliable enough for me to use it on an actual shoot. But maybe future firmware updates can save it.
@@misterjermalee So have you tried it in video mode ?
@@misterjermalee My question wan not about autofocus but lens stabilisation, does it work ?
I’m gonna apologize right off the bat because I skimmed the video looking to see if photo was reviewed or if it was just video use, and I think the review is video only. How was the performance with AF for photo? I do portraits, headshots, and editorial, so nothing fast... to be honest the only reason why I want it is for indoor shoots and the extra stop of light, but the AF can’t be clunky and I’m just wondering if your video experience was the same as photo, or if photo performed better, same, or worse?
Hi! I apologize for the late response. No worries about not watching the video, I totally get it since it was more video oriented. In the time that I was testing the camera in for photos with the Speedbooster, autofocus was a little bit better but performed similarly from starting from worst AF performance at the wider angle and getting better at the more telephoto angle. I found that when I took wide angle shots, I would get the green box for AF that focus was confirmed but when I would go into post, I would see that they were out of focus. I was shooting in AF-C with eye detect on. At the telephoto end, I would say that 90% of my shots were hits. The image quality is definitely amazing if you can get past the AF woes. AF isn't exactly terrible but I would recommend that you shoot more pics for coverage just in case. I hope that helps and let me know if you have any other questions!
The main fault with this video though is that you're wearing glasses. It's prone to jumping focus with glasses on
That could potentially be a factor. However, there are A LOT of people that wear glasses when shooting video. My Canon never had an issue with nailing focus with my glasses on and if I was shooting a client that wore glasses, I can't just tell them to take their glasses odd because my camera can't autofocus correctly.
Also, the Fuji system with an XF lens has no issues with focusing with me glasses on either...again if you watch the video, my face and eyes were being tracked even with the adapter (8:50). The issue was with how that information was transferred to the lens.
You didn't have to do all the calculations. It allows you to input speed booster/focal reducers. Where it says modifiers...just FYI..
Yeah I just wanted to break it down further for those who wanted to see how the conversions worked. Also I wanted to demonstrate the difference in equivalent depth of field.
Hello Sir !!
I am planning to buy Fujifilm XT-3 body for my cooking channel on TH-cam.
I have two questions :
👉I mainly want to shoot close up videos of my recipes. Which lens should I buy to get sharp videos with fine detail and crisp images too ?
👉Is the XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 lens worth buying for my kind of work ?
Your help will be appreciated. Love from India❤️
Hi thanks for watching my video! To answer your 2 questions:
1. To get proper close ups of food require the use of a macro lens which allow you to get very close in on the food. It all depends on how much detail you want to get of the food. The best maco lens from Fuji is the Fujinon 80mm F/2.8 OIS Macro lens which costs about $1199. A great alternative is the Lensbaby Velvet 85mm lens which is a full manual lens. However, this all depends on what your budget is.
2. The XF 18-55mm is actually a fantastic lens. I used that when I first got my XT-3 and it served me well. It actually has decent macro capabilities which will allow you get close-ups of food just not quite as close as a true macro prime lens as I talked about above. If you are starting out, I would definitely recommend using it and then add a macro lens to your kit later down the line if you feel the need.
To conclude, get the XF 18-55mm to start out as it is a solid overall lens that will be give you many kinds of uses. I would invest the rest of your budget into proper lighting equipment and audio so as to raise production value in all facets of your video. Hope that helps!
@@misterjermalee Thanks a lot sir !! I will definitely follow your suggestions. I really appreciate your help so thanks again.
Does it work with the IS ?
Yes it works with IS and IBIS 👍🏼
Great but the formula is quite simple and you don’t need this website once you know it.
You take your lens field of view then multiply by the crop factor (1.53) then by the speed booster coefficient (0.71) and you will get the Full Frame equivalent.
For example, with your 24 mm you have: 24 x 1.53 x 0.71 = 26.07 mm
The formula is the same for the aperture:
For example, with a 2.8 lens aperture you will have: 2.8 x 1.53 x 0.71 = 3.04
This could be amazing if they sorted the af out, really appreciate the time you put into making this 👍
Yeah it would be amazing if there were able to figure out the AF! When it hits it looks amazing. Fingers crossed for updates🤞🏼 thanks for watching!
Jeremy Lee Although i had the metabones on my gh5 which has crap af and just used manual focus so this is still an option.
James Sonfield yes something I forgot to mention is that I love the way EF lenses manual focus since it's mechanical and not "by-wire" like Fuji lenses and even the new RF glass.
Looks like the cheaper Vilrox reducer in function..
I agree. The AF needs a lot of work.
Man the autofocus seems worst than on the viltrox one!
Kadehr right! I mean at the wide focal length is was pretty bad. I want to try different lenses. Hopefully I'll get better results 🤞🏼
Much worse 😥
Metabones sucks...
What do you recommend then?