Personal View site logo
RJ Lens Turbo m43 adapters
  • 782 Replies sorted by
  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev My bad, focal reducer cross over.

  • Comparison test help all, and even if the test show that one is better than the other for whatever reason, both manufacturers are trying to provide what we want... it's always good to have options.

  • That we need is to make good comparison tests and help them improve. Instead of you go bashing every manufacturer.

    yeah...that's the spirit. People think making things is easy. It ain't ! Feedback is what it's all about....from a man with a few patents !

  • @JuMo

    It is not topic about Metabones adapters, period.

  • Coming from the man himself. Personally, I'm glad I went with Metabones, I love it - I've never had an issue with my Speedbooster and the quality is top notch. It's on my camera 95% of the time now. My only regret is that I bought it just before the BMPCC Speedbooster was announced. I will probably own both eventually, I just would have bought them the other way around. Oh well, what can you do?

    @brainc1959 Any plans for BMPCC Speedboosters in different mounts?

  • In general, the optical design plays at least as large a role as lens coatings in the formation of central hotspots. Diagnosing the cause and then correcting the hotspot is often a far more difficult task than correcting aberrations.

  • There's 3 levels of glass companies are using for these adapters. The first Fotodiox was the bottom level, all these other ones are level 2 and the Metabones is level 3.

    It is just your own fantasy and fairy tale. No such things as "glass levels" ever existed. You can talk about tolerances, coatings and techniques, but not "glass levels".

    All that you see here is better designer for Metabones adapter who know exact specs for coatings he wanted.

    That we need is to make good comparison tests and help them improve. Instead of you go bashing every manufacturer.

    RJ already made good progress, and they are working hard. I am sure that Metabones quality adapters will be available soon.

    It just sucks seeing guys wasting money on inferior products especially when they are getting raped in taxes and import fees. Luckily we really don;'t have that in the US but other countries it seems horribly high.

    And this is just not appropriate comment, especially your fantasies about taxes and fees. Any member can PM me and ask about real fees situation, instead of baseless stuff here.

    To conclude. Let people express their own opinions, instead of having yours spilled other each and every topic.

  • It is the glass. Remember we had this talk before. There's 3 levels of glass companies are using for these adapters. The first Fotodiox was the bottom level, all these other ones are level 2 and the Metabones is level 3. That's what helps to push the price up. Well that along with the Metabones name. I'm sure you'll get upset with me and others will say I'm wrong but time and time again we are seeing the same problem with these cheaper versions. This is a fact. And people keep making other excuses.

    Trust me, I would rather spend $200 rather than $400+ for one of these if it worked good but they don't. Every knock off I've seen so far has had that blur spot/flare in it.

    And playing my own devils advocate and going by your view, maybe it is coating but I do believe the same logic applies. Bottom level, middle level, top level. I do believe Apfos (did I get his name right) had the same problem with his anamorphic adapter.

    It just sucks seeing guys wasting money on inferior products especially when they are getting raped in taxes and import fees. Luckily we really don;'t have that in the US but other countries it seems horribly high.

  • I keep telling everyone these cheap adapters will not work well. It's the glass used. Period. There's no way around it. I know you all want a cheap solution but this is one area to stop wasting money.

    They made good progress from first adapters.

    I also think it is not glass, but glass coatings and also proper non light reflective coatings inside adapter.

    In needs proper research and not bashing.

  • Blue dot. I keep telling everyone these cheap adapters will not work well. It's the glass used. Period. There's no way around it. I know you all want a cheap solution but this is one area to stop wasting money.

  • @Psyco Same thing here.. W/o adapter there is not Blue flare, just normal flare from the lens. With both adapter RJ and Mitakon Blue Iris flare showing when pointed to direct light source..

  • Update:

    Ok, got a reply and (as Vitaliy sad) the lens elements are adjustable. The problem is, I can screw in and out both lenses (front and rear) individually! I don't know if thats intended? I can also screw them together and then move as a unit.

    Adjusting focus will have to wait till tomorrow (I need more light) - I will give an update about sharpness.

    One thing: If I close down the aperture to its minimum and point the lens at an angle to a light source, I get a horrible blue dot in the centre of the frame. It is nearly circular and has about 10 edges - looks like some reflection of the iris. @jobless can you test this with your adapter please (stop down and point the lens just missing your computer monitor, best visible if something dark is in the background).

    RJ-lensTurbo_Fmin.jpg
    1280 x 720 - 113K
  • As early adopters of the BMCC found out, the tolerances of the 11-16mm Tokina can be quite large. So, it can be both your lens and the adapter. The 11-16 has very fine optics, but quite weak mechanics, that's why some folks spend a lot of money to have them re-housed.

    But hopefully Vitaliy's suggestion will solve the problem. Remember that flange distance is most critical at the wide end, so try to adjust at 11mm first.

    BTW, even my Metabones SB needed some adjustment for known good lenses. It's good to know that the RJ offers this too.

  • I will contact RJ as I don't know if I got a (really) bad copy or if the adapter doesn't work with such a wide lens. (I'm just a bit pissed, as this is the second speed booster clone that doesn't work as advertised.)

    Check the adapter, optical block is on the threads and can be adjusted. It seems that it had been misaligned.

  • Got my RJ lens turbo today and I'm very dissapointed - it doesn't work with the Tokina 11-16.

    Mechanically its ok, just as mentioned before there is grease below the aperture ring which will end up on your fingers. Its quite a bit shorter than the Fotodiox Pro adapter.

    Optically I can't say much, because I can't get focus at 11mm. I can foucs at 16mm and when zooming out the focus plane shifts and at about 14mm infinity foucs is below the minimum foucus distance of the Tokina.

    I will contact RJ as I don't know if I got a (really) bad copy or if the adapter doesn't work with such a wide lens. (I'm just a bit pissed, as this is the second speed booster clone that doesn't work as advertised.)

  • @gameb that's right, but for me the center is more important then the edges :( I'm actually quite interested how the announced Kipon will work out, yet I'm really wanting a MFT solution for EF quite soon. And Mitakon and this one are pretty cheap, so what :)

  • Just bought the m42 version via paypal, hope everything is alright ;)

    I will write a review when it's here.

  • And Mitakon is less sharp on the borders.

  • Thanks for the insight @jobless! But that shows me that the Mitakon might be more for me; even though it seems that it has a lower contrast (I think this could be because of the light changes, but I noticed it's always a tad less contrasty in those images)

  • From China to UK.

  • Don't remember exactly, more or less 12-14 days..

  • @jobless "Came reasonable fast (considering Christmas)", how many days and from where? Cheers

  • RJ Lens Turbo PV deal Mini review:

    -Purchased via PV Deal

    -Came reasonable fast (considering Christmas)

    -Shipment was marked as Lens hood, so no Duty charges was applied (UK)

    -Built quality is good apart from Lens grease below the aperture ring ( see picture)

    -Mounting my Sigma 24mm f1.8 was difficult at first attempt, I needed to push hard. After that was easier with all lenses including Sig 24mm

    -IQ in my opinion is that RJ has less sharper image in the centre than Mitakon Lens Turbo, but border to border sharpness is better with RJ

    All photos taken in Aperture mode @wideOpen and @5.6 than resized for upload to PV. Sorry for fast moving sun..

    Lenses used:

    -Sigma 24mm f1.8

    -Sigma 28mm F1.8

    -Nikon pancake 50mm 1.8

    -Tamron SP Adaptal2 90mm f2.5

    You can download photos from here: https://plus.google.com/photos/116783404937625885548/albums/5964343745254279873?authkey=CIvnopf37be2IQ

    Or here:

    http://we.tl/9PaUNoTbx7

    1_Sig24mm@1.8.jpg
    1920 x 1280 - 253K
    1_Sig24mm@1.8+Mitakon.jpg
    1920 x 1280 - 226K
    1_Sig24mm@1.8+RJ.jpg
    1920 x 1280 - 216K
  • @gameb

    First post in topic.