FotoDiox Excell+1 Nikon or Canon FD ‘Boosted’ Adapter

With either the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema or Micro Four Thirds cameras, you can always benefit from faster aperture lenses and wider field of views. Here's the latest lens adapter release from FotoDiox. The new Fotodiox Excell +1 adapter is similar to other Focal Reducer (Boosted) adapters that will give you a wider field of view and a faster aperture with Nikon or Canon FD Lenses. Right now it's only available for Micro Four Thirds mount which include the new GH4 or BlackMagic Pocket Cinema camera.

According to the Fotodiox deal, if you order between now and July 22nd to get your own Excell + 1 Lens Adapter and FREE Light Cannon Creative Adapter (available only while supplies last). Find out more information following the link (click here).

Fotodiox Nikon to MFT M43 GH4 BMPCC Lens AdapterFotodiox Turbo Lens booster Speed Focal reducer Excell 1
find-price-button FotoDiox Excell +1 Micro Four Thirds Lens Adapter Nikon / Canon FD

41 thoughts on “FotoDiox Excell+1 Nikon or Canon FD ‘Boosted’ Adapter

  1. Rev

    There new video, "A Closer Look: Fotodiox Excell +1 Focal Reducer & the Metabones Speed Booster", is nothing more than a well-crafted attempt at manipulating people into thinking that the Excell+1 is anything, other than a cheaply made SpeedBooster knockoff. Hats off to you Bohus.

    Bohus comments:
    -“not a competitor [to the SpeedBooster] and never built to be that"
    -“do a lot of the same things [as a SpeedBooster], but at a much more manageable price”

    Customer reply:
    the features listed are EXACTLY what the SpeedBooster does, and that is EXACTLY what consumers bought it for.

    They are further attempting to mislead consumers by separating the Excell+1 from the SpeedBooster by stating that the “Excell+1 spec is f/2.0, f/2.8 or above”, whereas the SpeedBooster can operate at a wider f-stop. I want to point something out to you that most consumers already know: the Excell+1’s inability to operate at wider f-stops is nothing more than a serious build quality and optical issue. Nothing more… Otherwise, the adapter wouldn’t have been built to operate at these apertures.

    We don’t spend money on quality lenses, only to have our image quality degraded by putting a bad lens in between our lens and our sensors.

    The tests Fotodiox and Bohus showed comparing the two adapters that are “not competitors” (LOL) proved to us, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the adapter is nothing more than a cheaply made device that no one in their right mind should stick on their high resolution camera and expect a good image out of it. The adapter will seriously degrade the image coming from a camera. Period. Bohus stated that your “Excell+1 spec” is f/2.0, f/2.8 or above, yet in that video comparison, even at f/8 and higher, the image on the left was dingy’er, blurry’er, and had color distortion/purple fringing. Anyone who knows lenses will tell you that this is indicative of bad optics.

    Below is a link to an image showing that their own video PROVES the Excell+1 adapter is garbage. Consumers spend a lot of money on quality lenses and cameras with good sensors, and they shouldn’t GIVE this adapter away because it makes photos and videos look terrible.


    Downloadable HQ image:

    The simple fact that I am using their own video to prove to you that the product is garbage is further proof that Fotodiox and Bohus are not to be trusted with manufacturing and/or selling optics to consumers. Period.

  2. Roger Palmer

    Another test, epl-5, 55mm nikkor-SC 1.2,
    Cannot focus at all at fast apertures,1.2 Nikkor,
    Was more useful, but stupid soft wide open. Can I find a use for it, probably...but then I put a 1.8 45mm, on the EM_5. Night shots, and figure, WHY?
    Adapter with fsat old glass makes sense, but this degrades the image except on a few old lenses it may have narrow utility on a backup camera as a focal reducer, sure, but it sure did not walk the full walk.

    Narrow utility, is poor advertising I guess.
    It has one plus, makes me want something better.

  3. OldCorpse

    Bohus of Fotodiox made some new videos to address the recent controversy over the Excell +1:

    Bohus puts down the controversy to a misunderstanding over the use scenario and spec that Fotodiox advertises versus people's expectations.

    After running a comparison with MetaBones SpeedBooster, Bohus now says that the Excell +1 does not attempt to have the same function as the MB SB, it is in a different market.

    The Excell +1 is meant to be only used at a smaller aperture 2.8 and up. It is meant to be a focal reducer, not a speedbooster in the sense of making the lens faster.

    I have to say that seems like a story that was engineered after the fact as an excuse, because previously Fotodiox certainly didn't shy away from the increased speed, and indeed it makes not much sense, because as it is the Excell +1 does in fact make the lens brighter.

    But be that as it may, I am not going to question their motivation or explanation. I'll accept it at face value, cause I'm nice that way 🙂

    Now accepting this at face value, it becomes an interesting question. First, for anyone wondering how it is that FD can manage to put out a competing product to MB SB at 1/4 the price - you can stop wondering... they are NOT competing. The FD cost 1/4 the price for a reason. You are not buying a Lexus at 25% the price. You are buying a pedicab in shape of a Lexus for 25% of the price - fair enough. The question then becomes: is the Excell +1 pedicab worth the 25% price? Only you, the user can answer that question.

    I suppose that depends on what you want to use it for. For me personally, having a usable adapter at the widest aperture is fundamental to the purpose of why I wanted it in the first place. I feel that Bohus and Fotodiox did a poor job of informing the consumer about the fact that Excell +1 was meant as a focal reducer exclusively, nothing else... and as I said, it feels a bit post facto explanation/excuse, but whatever, I'll accept it. I still think - and Bohus apparently agrees - that they could have done a better job setting expectations and explaining what the purpose of the Excell was - it was to get exercise and strong legs from running the pedicab, not getting fat and lazy from driving a Lexus... even if they look the same, they have totally different functions.

    The other question I now have is how does the $160 pedicab Excell +1 stack up not against the Metabones Lexus, but how does it stack up against f.ex. the Mitakon Lens Turbo for around $130 or so, or various Chinese no-name knockoffs for $99 or less. That's a more fair test than the MB SB.

    The final question is if Fotodiox are now positioning the Excell +1 as simply a focal reducer usable from 2.8 and smaller apertures, how big is that market, at $160? Hmm. My suspicion was that people wanted a Lexus for 25% of the price, not a pedicab in the shape of a Lexus, but now that they know they are looking at a pedicab, how big is the fitness fan market versus the fat driver market, and how does this pedicab compare to other pedicabs? Inquiring minds want to know.

  4. Roger Palmer

    Fotodiox just pulled it off of Amazon. That was sane, fix it guys. The people who got your product, let them test the next one for free.
    I still have it, best test on an EPL-5 on a 2.8 fixed focal 135mm tele it was not too bad, in very low light, I got a half a stop more light, its an old Vivitar, the lens is a bit soft to begin with, fast lens good light its got issues, fringing, color shifts on the edges, Its not something you could use all day. The ring issue, well. I can hack it to work in low light on a backup camera, for some shots since I work on the edges of night,and after dark, is what it is. Will get Metabones for my primary dusk shooter. Ha ha, back up camera, with adapter afraid of daylight. Reminds me of a novel, by Harry Crews, "The Knockout Artist" about a boxer who knocked himself out in the ring for money, and came back for more...

  5. Roger Palmer

    I reported to BxH that it did not fit an EM-5, probably the EM-1 as well, they got to Fotodiox and Fotodiox got to me, told me, "we cannot test our adapters on every camera" I told them some honest things, they can send a free test adapter to people who shoot and blog about specific cameras, there are a lot of decent photographers who are honestly focused on a specific camera line. I told them that in my tests on an EPL-5, (I have a few of the Pen line and a LOT of old glass) that the aperture ring was impossible to keep at a setting while adjusting aperture on a lens adapted to it, its reset with finger nails each time. It looks worse in focus in decent light, because you see the softness and fringing, it looks better in edge of doom low light, since you get some noise even when limiting ASA to manageable levels, and the softness is canceled by the noise. What a statement, it looks better when the softness is hidden in the noise. It seems to get me a half stop or a bit more of light just on the edge of not being able to hand hold. On the EM-5 I had hoped the useful 5 axis IS and its excellent low light shooting, I could use the Excell as a trick lens on something I need a bit more speed out of, but no. I will keep it for a lesser camera and a certain lens, for one narrow use. Told them I would not buy from them again. Keeping it and testing it more,I feel an unholy desire to become darkly poetic, and perhaps DIY it, for laughs. Bleeding edge is often a dull knife.

  6. Roger Palmer

    Excell+1 WILL NOT FIT AN OLY EM-5 due to poor design of the bevel on the edge of the adapter, being different than that on the light canon, it prevents it from fitting under eye finder.

    I just received the excell+1 and a free 'light canon' in the mail, tested some tripod shots in lower light, hoping to test it on my Olympus EM-5, and then later hand held in low light, to see if the softness was acceptable. The light canons back plate fit the EM-5 because the bevel was more pronounced and the eye finder/IS housing on the top of the camera was cleared. Of course the results were less than acceptable, (that was an understatement),mounted to a 55mm micro nikkor 2.8, a very sharp lens. I then shot some with the 55mm and a m43 adapter, and got outstanding results. I attempted to put the micro nikkor 55mm on the Excell+1 and the adapter fit the nikkor 55 BUT I then find that IT WILL NOT FIT ON AN OLY EM-5! The bevel is different on the Excell+1 back plate and it will not allow it to go on the lens mount of the EM-5, it is held off at a slight angle. How can this kind of mistake exist! I put it on an EPL-5, and it fit, performance was soft, but the point of the lens was to test it with 5 axis IS and hand hold some video shots. How do you explain this bohus! Cannot fit a key camera with excellent IS, often used to shoot in low light!

  7. OldCorpse

    As promised I'm back with a brief review of the Fotodiox Pro Nik(G)-MFT EXCELL +1. I received it Monday and have been testing it the past two days.

    I made a quick little youtube video:

    Overall, my copy was not as horrible as the other poster's as far as focusing goes. Using the Rokinon 85 at f/1.4 wide open, the Sigma 28 at f/1.8 wide open and the Nikon G 50 at f/1.8 wide open, it focused fine - at least in the center. There was some overall softness of the image compared to the passive adapter, but I think that the optical element accounts for that - in the passive adapter there is no additional glass. Also, the best focus was still center, with some slight softness increase toward the edges of the frame.

    A bigger problem was the introduction of a pretty substantial color cast, which is not good, especially shooting exteriors in bright sun (I didn't include exterior tests in that youtube video).

    The worst practical problem however, from my point of view, was how the aperture ring keeps drifting quite on its own. This is a serious problem. Basically, you have to keep checking, every few seconds, whether your aperture has changed - every time you pan or move the camera, or even touch the focus ring the vibrations make the ring shift. I had to repeat several tests because of this drift. Maybe I got a bad copy. In any case, this is just not practical if I want to use it on a shoot - you can't afford to have your attention constantly diverted to checking the aperture ring.

    The build however is quite good. It goes on the GH3 really well, and is snug even on larger lenses (at one point I used the Nikon 18-200 zoom just to try it). I give them definitely props for that.

    Ironically, I have been using their passive adapter, I bought on Amazon for like $26 - Fotodiox Nik(G)-m4/3, and it has served me well. I also used it in the tests as comparison for the EXCELL +1.

    Unfortunately, I don't have the Metabones SB, so I can't compare to that.

    In the end, I am going to return the EXCELL +1. It is just not practical for use, especially with the aperture ring as poorly thought out as it is - I would have also preferred more gradations in the aperture instead of just the 6 positions.

    Bottom line: With the caveat that I don't have the MT SB to compare to, I didn't find the EXCELL +1 to be as much of a disaster as the other video by Yuri shows. Perhaps I had a better copy - that would not be unusual for Fotodiox, because my passive Fotodiox adapter is really very good, but other reviewers on Amazon find it hit or miss... in other words, big sample variation from Fotodiox. Still, this seems like a beta product, and Fotodiox should do some more work on this... if they still retain the trust of their customers. In particular, I find it somewhat disturbing that Fotodiox just got a MT SB to compare to... I mean, if you are a manufacturer of a product, the first thing you do is get ahold of the competition's product to see how you compare and if you can improve... it speaks poorly of them that they never seem to have done that (at least according to Bohus). So, one man's humble opinion, take it for what it's worth.

  8. MartinD

    @rev ...I had my GH2 set at "aspect ratio: 16x9". I'm guessing that's why some of the photos looked narrow or cropped. 16/9 = 1.78 ...the photo 906px/509px = 1.78

  9. MartinD

    @rev ...that dog photo does look like it was cropped, but I sure don't remember cropping a thing.

  10. MartinD

    @Rev third post, I did some very quick photos in the backyard video. I wanted to see how much wider of an image the Excel +1 generated ...nothing more. Made a few mistakes and they were just simple quick photos. I did a few videos (a day or two later) and only posted one. Upon further review, I wouldn't recommend the adapter.
    Also, in my first post nothing was cropped ...I did scale the images down. I did have the aperture wide open ...which was a mistake. I should have used a smaller aperture, so more of the image would have been in focus. When I shot some video me was soft, not sharp. I was also having problems with what looked like a bright spot in the center of the video. The sun was to the right and behind the camera, so there was no intense light issues. Also, there were no smudges on the lens or Excel +1 adapter. The lens worked fine with the other adapter that I was using bright spot.
    The aperture ring ...wasn't happy with it either.
    I doubt that I will spend any more time with the Excel +1.

  11. Rev

    @MartinD, I have no idea why you'd be praising the adapter in your earlier post... Your first image using the adapter looks horrible. No, it's not you that's the problem, It's the adapter. In the second image of the dog, I assume you had to crop off the sides to hide the terrible things going on with the image in those areas, and for the center to be that sharp, you were above f/11 I'm sure, which is almost worthless to anyone buying an adapter for what's it supposed to add over a standard adapter.

    New reviews of the adapter:

    It's total garbage. I returned mine as soon as it arrived. Shame on Fotodiox and @Bohus

  12. Ed

    Hey, I got a regular Fotodiox adapter some years ago, and it worked fine and didn't cost a lot. People have been relying on their basic adapters for years - I can't speak about this fancy new adapter (I don't have one) but their basic stuff has a good reputation as far as I know -

  13. MartinD

    Shot short sample video footage. I used an mtf adapter when I wasn't using the Fotodiox Excel +1. The lens was a Nikon 28mm f/2.8-22. The DSLR was a GH2.

    I was not shooting into the sun. The sun was going down over my right shoulder. I noticed a bright spot in the middle of the video when shooting with the Excel +1. I checked the glass on the lens and Excel +1 adapter. There were no smudges on either end of the lens or side of the adapter. I did have the lens aperture at its smallest opening. The light was not intense at all. I usually don't shoot with the aperture at either its largest or smallest setting ...with any lens, but I did today. The image looked out of focus and the f/22 setting might be the reason ...I was out of the sweet spot. I didn't like the image at f/16 without the adapter, but it was a bit sharper. I'll will try again within the next day or so and watch for new reviews.

    The Excel +1 aperture setting has to be set at its smallest opening. If not and the lens aperture is adjusted, then creeping will occur on the adapter's aperture ring. I may tape the ring down, so it won't move and just use the aperture adjustment on the lens. Could be a problem, if a users lens has no aperture ring. I wouldn't want to rely on just the adapter's aperture ring. As said in another video ...there's only about 1/2 inch adjustment ...very hard to adjust precisely. Also the creeping is an issue, if the adapter's aperture ring is not set to smallest opening. I agree with the fellow in the other video ...more friction is needed on the adapter's aperture ring & a wider range/length of movement for minor/precise adjustment.

  14. Rev

    Fotodiox fails again. Every test hitting the web right now has proved that this adapter is an optical mess. Blurry, inconsistent images, unusable wide open, and is an utter waste of money and time.

    This is a “3 strikes your out” scenario for me with Fotodiox… Again, they tricked customers into thinking this "Excell+1" is a "new" product and that it's been "beta tested", which it is completely and utterly false. There is no way anyone who knows how to use a camera actually tested these out.

    Bohus puts his name and reputation out there as the face of Fotodiox, and if I was him, I’d be completely ashamed of myself and of Fotodiox right now. This is the exact same scenario for many a while back when the previous adapter turned out to be unusable as well… Instead of getting rid of bad product, they are trying to cleverly re-sell the adapter as a “stylistic lens: Light Canon”… Do they really think that the indie filmmaking and photography market is that stupid? I think not.

    Skip out on this Fotodiox debacle, save yourself a bunch of hassle, pony up the dough for the Metabones Speedbooster, and leave Fotodiox to their shame.

  15. MartinD

    @bohus I received my Excel +1 in the mail.

    It was dark/overcast today, due to cloud cover ...but I went out into the backyard to tinker a bit before dinner.

    The adapter fastened to the old 135mm Nikon prime lens and GH2 body extremely well complaints ...nice build quality. I wish my mtf adapter was as smooth.

    I wanted to see how much wider an image the Excel +1 would produce against my mtf adapter. I used an old 135mm Nikon prime lens. I shot the backside of my garage and tried to keep the vertical downspout, from my gutter, at the center of the image. All exposure settings were kept the same. I may have moved the tripod slightly when changing out adapters, but I tried to center the downspout in the image again. Anyhow, you can see how the Excel +1 delivers a wider and 'brighter' image here. This isn't my best work ...I was in a rush, but it showed me what I wanted to know. The Excel +1 dealt with the crop factor issue with the GH2's micro 4/3 sensor and produced a wider image ...with increased stop. I'm looking forward to using my wide angle lenses to see how dramatic of an increase those wide views will be versus the 135mm perspective.

    I took a photo or two of one of my hunting dogs ...that was the closest victim I could find. I was still using the old Nikon 135mm lens, but hand-held this time. I noticed no quality problems with the image, due to the Excel +1. I scaled the image down and saved the photo for web display via Photoshop, so that degraded it a bit well as my hands shaking during the original snapshot of dog

    So far, so good. I'm happy with my purchase. The only complaint that I have and I doubt there was any way around it ...was that the aperture adjustment creeped a bit. It only moved/creeped when I had the lens stopped completely down and had the adapter's aperture opened up all the way. I just moved the adapter's aperture to its smallest opening wasn't an issue anymore.

    I'm very happy with the purchase of the Excel +1. Can't wait to shoot some video ...just didn't have the time today.

    Looking forward to other comparison reviews with the Metabone adapter. There's definitely a price difference between the two adapters. I want to see the difference in image quality, crop factor and increased stop (brightness). Always interested in learning new tricks and limitations with new equipment.

    Thanks Fotodiox! That was a very nice purchase price! ...very affordable ...with this economy I need all of the deals I can get.

  16. getem

    Judging by this video you need to stop down this Excel+1


    Descent if you need an adapter that can widen your lens, but not being able to use such a great lens like Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 wide open defeats the purpose, at least for me.

    Metabones Speedbooster cost more, but it works and at the end of the day that's the most important thing......

    Personally I would not buy this product from Fotodiox

  17. OldCorpse

    Well, Bohus, I have ordered the Excell, and it should be here soon. I'll do a careful review and come back to this thread to give my report. I think you guys are aware of the fact that your reputation is on the line - anybody can fail and as long as they own up to the mistake, all is well. But if you come up with version II and it's still a massive fail, well, then, Fotodiox and Bohus are going to earn a richly deserved reputation. I'll be very fair - I don't expect Metabones level of performance for 1/4 of the price, but I do expect that the gear at least meets the minimum requirement for which it was designed... an out of focus optical element as in the first Light Cannon, is unacceptable. We'll see!

  18. bohus

    Hey everybody...

    Just a few more words on this. I've got a SpeedBooster coming to Fotodiox on Monday, and we'll share the results we get shooting with the MetaBones and the Excell. Also we should start seeing some independent reviews hit the web in a few days.

    @BMCC - yes, Fotodiox had tried to launch a similar product called the Light Cannon a while back. Basically we were let down by an outside supplier. We admitted to the error, refunded everyone's money, and have been very generous hooking up those people with Excell adapters. It was a disappointment on all sides, but Fotodiox stepped up to do the right thing.

    A couple of our customers discovered this interesting "soft focus vignette" effect that's kind of fun. So we're giving it away for free with the Excell. It's a free fun thing for experimenting with, that's all. There's nothing sinister or underhanded going on here. We cop to our mistake, made up for it, and if you want to play around with this free thing, you can.

    As for addressing my character, I've been around long enough that people know who I am. I'm a filmmaker first (for more than 20 years), and I get to design products for a variety of clients. And thanks for posting that NAB video interview. It's gotten me a couple of production jobs, and a role in a film this fall. /humble_brag 🙂

    Seriously - happy to answer all the questions I can as simply and honestly as I can. Hope that everyone has a great weekend.

  19. BMCC

    The history of this product launch couldn't be more hilarious. You'll notice that "for a limited time," they're throwing in something that they now call a "soft focus" adapter. In reality, that was their first stab at making this exact same product, but the consumer outcry was so severe (and compelling) that they quickly removed it from the market, realizing they couldn't get away with it. Unwilling to just take the loss and move along, they re-named it a "soft focus" adapter -- which really means that its lenses used for focal reduction are so awful, they cause edge blurriness and vignetting (which is not actually what a soft focus adapter does).

    So yeah: not sure you wanna trust this overseas operation and their eager domestic-ish spokesman Bohus, as seen here in this classic jaw-dropper: httpss://

  20. martinD

    @bohus nice follow up video concerning the Excell +1. Hopefully, this is the correct link here or use link below.


  21. bohus

    @Pao - the free Light Cannon is included for free with all the Excell +1 shipments going out. Sorry the website doesn't mention it, but yes Excells and LCs are being packed as a bundle together as we speak.

    @Adrian - yes the GH3 and GH4 are an excellent fit for the Excell +1. That's actually why we think the product will be a big hit with filmmakers. I'm on a GH4 shoot this weekend, and am bringing along an Excell to try out. I'll put pictures up on FB.

    @Joseph - yes the adapter's aperture ring controls a little rod inside the adapter that in turn opens and closes the lens' actual aperture. There's no additional iris inside the adapter itself.

    @Sandovich - I can't say I noticed any blue dot when pointing at a light source, but I'll have the boys test this out. It's been so diffuse and weird in Chicago lately, that it's hard to find any light source to shoot with. 🙂

    As for the MetaBones comparison question, we actually don't have a MetaBones adapter at Fotodiox right now. We do want to pick one up and do some tests of our own, but we're hoping for some journalists and bloggers out there to release their independent findings so that you can get the good word from someone other than me.

  22. OldCorpse

    Neither GH3 nor GH4 are listed as compatible, only GH1 and GH2. A bit odd to make this fit legacy cameras no longer produced while avoiding the current, because more people are going to be looking to use the GH3 and especially GH4 going forward. If you have the GH3 or GH4 it looks like the Metabones is the only option.

    The other thing is that there are a whole bunch of other adapters sold on eBay from China etc. in about the same price range as the Fotodiox (which I also think is made in China, no?), so I wonder if this is just a rebranding and more or less the same quality.

    It would be interesting to compare this to the other boosters. The price is certainly tempting, but if it doesn't fit the GH3 and GH4, or is markedly inferior to the Metabones, then the utility of this adapter falls very sharply for many people.

    Looking forward to people testing this... hint, hint, Emm 🙂

  23. Pao

    How do we get the FREE Light Cannon Creative Adapter?
    There's no mention of it on the link even after adding it to the cart.

  24. martinD

    Hey Emm,

    thanks for posting ...nice price. I made the leap. The shipping was only $4 + some change. Can't wait to try the Excell +1 out on my GH2. Even looking forward to the Light Cannon as well, if they haven't run out. Always fun to try out new gizmos.


  25. Sandovitch

    So, how about that blue spot..?

    Thought this would be an active forum where questions would be answered. Guess not...

  26. Joseph Moore

    So, just to be clear, the aperture control on the adapter controls the real lens aperture, not an ancillary aperture in the adapter, correct? In effect, it will "declick" all of my Canon FD's aperture?

  27. i think an EF to M43 should have been the first model, even if it's a passive mount - as long as optically it stacks up. a lot of shooters using a focal reducer want to use the lens wide open anyway, so aperture control is not as vital. still waiting for a good EF adapter...

  28. jake

    so, the question that bohus and fotodiox keeps does this stack up against the metabones?? please answer, i would rather pay $139 that $429, give me a reason

  29. paolo

    They look nice.
    But I have to wonder with that price say compared to a metabones how much difference is there in optical quality?

    I would love to know cause if these are as good then it's and brainer and they will sell tons of them.

  30. bohus

    Paul, there are some breech mount FD lenses that have the aperture ring on the lens barrel, but you need our adapter's aperture ring to actually control it.

    Plus one added benefit is that our ring isn't clicked at all, so lenses attached to your camera via the Excell +1 can act like a de-clicked lens.

    That's what we were thinking. 😉

  31. Chris Knight

    (Needless to say I considered buying similar for my current shoot, likely will for next shoot...Although I don't have a lot of wide-angle FD glass, I do have some interesting glass that I adapt for my a7R and GH4.)

  32. Chris Knight

    I was thinking a couple days, I wonder if someone could make a MFT->MFT booster adapter. Namely it would increase the field of view AND correct the flange distance added by the adapter.

    Then I could use my myriad lenses that I've already adapted (such as A-mount Samyangs.)

    Bonus would be having electrical through, although I'm 99% all MFT lenses would be weird (vignetting, surely, but probably have difficulty with AF.)

  33. bohus

    Hey everyone - Bohus here from the video. Normally we don't like to comment on products that are still under development, but the EF adapter suuuuuure seems like an obvious choice, doesn't it? 😉

    if you look at the chart that we mention in the video, you can see that we've been looking at a lot of sensor sizes to support with this, and we want to see a whole product line come out of this. We just need these first couple models to do well, and then we'll come back with a whole family of the little buggers.

  34. The aperture control feature seems silly for non-EF lenses like the FD mount. I don't think there's a single FD mount lens in the universe without an aperture ring -- what were they thinking?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *