--> Skip to main content

Metabones Speed Booster: Lens Profiles

Recently I unearthed my (original version?) Metabones Speed Booster. For those not familiar, this adapter is a revolutionary idea that takes full frame lenses and reduces the magnification and image circle to match smaller sensor sizes. They also have the added benefit of increasing the effective aperture. In my case I'm taking Canon EF mount lenses and using them on my Sony e-mount mirrorless cameras.

So one amazing feature of digital photography is the ability of software to correct lens defects. In fact profiles either built in or custom made exist for many lenses that correct for geometric distortion (pincushion or barrel distortion), chromatic aberration and vignetting. I rely on those corrections now.

And it occurred to me, how do profiles work when using the "Speed Booster"? There's glass in there, clearly there's going to be some different defects than the primary lens on its own. Does the profile for the primary lens apply at all when using the "Speed Booster"? How do image editing programs deal with the EXIF data? The exif data while using the SB (I'm going to abbreviate from here on out, ok....) gets changed to match the effective focal length and aperture. For example, when I use my Sigma Art 50mm f1.4, the EXIF data reads 35mm f1.

Look at the straight line on the left: Not bad here applying "Generic Profile" in Capture One (using Canon Mount Sigma 50mm f1.4 wide open using Metabones Speed Booster = 35mm f1.4)

Look at the straight line on the left: Strong pincushion distortion when applying "Manufacturer Profile" in Capture One (using Canon Mount Sigma 50mm f1.4 wide open using Metabones Speed Booster = 35mm f1.4)

Look at the straight line on the left: Not bad here too using "Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art Profile" in Capture One (using Canon Mount Sigma 50mm f1.4 wide open using Metabones Speed Booster = 35mm f1.4)
This is just an initial test, I hope to do more. Clearly using the manufacturer profile (embedded in the lens) isn't working right. I can imagine that somehow the correction software is thrown off by a 50mm lens reporting that it's 35mm.

Normally I'd say unfortunately I don't have any Canon mount lenses that have strong distortion to test. But of course, I'm lucky to have a wonderful stable of lenses.

The only lenses I have with serious distortion are native Sony e-mount lenses. And they were designed knowing that such flaws can now be corrected in camera on the fly and in post. Where as Canon lenses can still be put on film cameras where that's not possible.

Without regard to distortion, I found that the optical performance was pretty good in the center, OK at the edges. And AF was OK. Not

I hope to test this a little further later. But feel like I learned a little bit at least here.

(full resolution samples are here: https://urbantexture.smugmug.com/Hidden/LensbustersSamples/Metabones-Speed-Booster-and-Capture-One-profiles/n-kZcfGk/)


Popular posts from this blog

Linhof Serial Year List - Salomon Says

Recently I've acquired a few Linhof cameras. I got a 5x7 view camera from Oakland Museum's White Elephant Sale. Later I stumbled upon a Color Kardan 90 Jahre Jubalaeum edition on Craigslist. And more recently, I found a "baby Technika" 2x3 (6x9) at Oakland's East Bay Depot for Creative Re-use. Not knowing much about Linhof large format cameras, I tried getting more info online, and came across a strange thread on the Large Format Photography Forum . Basically on this thread various Linhof owners ask a guy named Bob Salomon what year their Linhof was made. And the thread is over 100 pages long! Sifting through that thread is mindnumbing. Why Bob doesn't just publish the list of serial numbers is beyond me. Maybe it's just nice to feel needed. So I started compiling a spreadsheet of the serial numbers and the answer Bob gives. If you don't feel like spending a couple days reading this thread to get a hint as to the age of your Lin

Should I ditch my Sony a6500 for a A7r IV?

Recently, I bought a Sony a7r IV. The main reason was for stock photography. The high resolution along with improved focusing and biggish buffer would allow me to make better people (and other) stock photos for my various stock endeavors.  The Sony system has treated me well. I own two A7r II's for stock and other work, and two a6500's for event photography. The A7r II's aren't ideal for events for a couple reasons. The focus tracking is pretty good, but maybe not enough for fast paced people on stage. Another reason is that silent shooting is only available on single shot mode. And (admittedly a first world problem,) the files are much bigger than needed. Well, the last problem, too big files isn't an issue with the A7rIV if you use it in APS-c mode. The files are effectively the same size as the a6500: 24 mp. Focus with the IV is even faster and more effective than the very capable a6500. And with those smaller files, the IV has no problem with buffer overflow. So

Long Daylight Exposure Chart: Kentmere 100

Ultrafine/Kentmere 100 Reciprocity Test-Camera: Fuji G617, Film Ultrafine (E)Xtreme 100, ND-9+red @ f22 140 seconds If you are interested in long daylight exposures, you may have run in to the same problem I have. Say you have your camera all set up, the clouds are whisping by, and you want to get that long daylight blur thing going. You figure a 30 second exposure (approx.) would be ideal. Well how do I get there? I've got a bunch of filters: a 4 stop ND, a 9 stop ND, as well as a red, yellow, and orange filter. It's mid day and my meter reading says 1/125th @ f16. I start counting with my fingers: -1 stop = 1/60th, -2 stop = 1/30th, and so on. So then I get down to 4 seconds with my darkest ND filter. If I stack both my ND filters, I get down to 30 seconds where I wanted to be. But wait! That's without reciprocity corrections. Great if I had Acros for film. But I don't and it's being retired soon, so I wont have access to it at all. What I ended up makin