Great shots, @racer5. I love my Pentax M 50mm 1.7. Wish there was a slim adapter for PK - Nikon so I could use it on my Nikon LensTurbo, but oh well. I may pick up a PK LensTurbo just for the reasons you listed, great lenses at decent prices!

@matt_gh2 @joethepro @Azo

Damn thanks guys, glad you like them. I'm really happy with the results this combo is delivering so far. Azo, I too started on Pentax; the K1000 was my first real camera, and I've held on to most of my original lenses for it. At one point I tested my K-mount fast 50s against each other and sold the two I liked least (was surprised that the SMC 1.4 beat out the Schneider Xenon).

Matt, I'm a fan of the Pentax SMC (super multi coated) primes most: just an 18, 50, and 85 is a hell of a set. And no footage with the RJ/PK yet, but planning to throw it on the BMPCC soon:)

Has anyone else experienced binding/stiffness of the aperture ring when trying to adjust the aperture of manual nikon lenses on the RJ? It appears that the bottom of lens body is rubbing against the adapter as the aperture ring changes, and maybe there are some tolerance issues at the contact point of the adapter and lens?

@racer5 Would love to see some video with those Pentax lenses on a GH1, if you have inclination to shoot a few quick clips. Great stills - curious how it looks for video on the GH1. Are you using the RJ Lens Turbo (or just a regular adapter), and if so did you get the Pentax K to m43 or the Pentax PKA to m43 (the one for lenses without aperture rings)? Now I need to look for Pentax SMC lenses!

The bottom center of my images with the Lens Turbo are super soft, more so than at the extreme corners of the image. Is everyone's adapter like this?

Anybody got experience with M42 lenses on the adapter which move very far backwards focussing to infinity and could hit the glass if the adapter? I have a Helios 44-M which moves out pretty far and plan to get a Yashinon 50 1.4 DX or a Auto Revuenon 55 1.4. I am afraid it could damage the glass if the M42-RJ or the EF-RJ with M42 adapter.

Ack! Don't let the pentax lens cat out of the bag!

I've shot Pentax for stills the last 6 years and have a pile of fantastic bargain K, M and Super Taks that I adore of note:

M 28mm 2.8 (black front ring version: same optics as the A series 28mm)

M 35mm 2.8

M 50mm 1.8

K 55mm 1.7 (one of my favorites)

M 135mm 2.5 (5 bucks at a garage sale!)

Super Tak 200mm 4.0 (15 bucks at a flea market)

I still use the 18-55mm WR for walk around and bad weather and an F series 70-200mm that I picked up for FREE from kijiji (love that lens), as well as an sp adaptall-2 90mm, and some other sundry m42 lenses that I just adore.

I intend on picking up the RJ Turbo for future video projects that I DP with a friend who has a GH2: we've used the standard K-m43 adapter with some of my lenses and love the results we're getting when shooting some short clips. Can't wait to get back some (I know not all!) framing space back with the RJ turbobooster!

does the ef sigma 18-35 and ef rokinon 16mm work fine with RJ ef-m43, or are there issues?

@GravitateMediaGroup @RyLo I can't speak for the Sigma 18-35, but the EF Rokinon 16mm and the Lens Turbo cover the GH2 just fine. The edges are a bit soft on larger apertures, but there's no (harsh) vignetting.

@GravitateMediaGroup:

Don´t forget: The Simga 18-35mm on EF cannot be controlled (aperture wise) on the PASSIVE EF-m43 RJ lens turbo - The Rokinon 16mm EF is working (as it´s equipped with a manual aperture control ring on the lens directly - The 18-35mm not). According the Sigma 18-35mm: Only the Nikon version is controllable (with the Nikon-m43 RJ lens turbo) - As the Nikon lenses have a mechanical aperture control pin - The EF lenses not (they are fully electronical controlled).

@GravitateMediaGroup:

Hmm. Ok. But you need an EF body to pre-control the aperture before shooting on the lens turbo.
Otherwise you´re stuck with the wide open F1.8 aperture. (Which is unusable in many situations.)
The Sigma should work flawlessly. Just old lenses are a problem sometimes.
(As there are too long pins at the back of the lens sometimes.)

@joethepro

Wow smearing 50% of the outer portion of the image! That is quite a bit and IMHO would render the Lens Turbo useless. My copy of the Lens Turbo is sharp into the corners, maybe you have a bad copy? Did you perform a test with charts to see exactly how bad it is? I would try that first to see exactly how bad it is.

Also I don't have any issues with binding of the aperture ring with my Samyang/Nikon lenses. As a matter of fact the Metabones is actually really tight on both sides of the mount "GH4/Nikon" way tighter then the Lens Turbo. Hope you get is sorted out...

Here is a drop box link for reference in regards to sharpness. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jbknoguj4ijttlx/AADnY6I71BPnthqaRElvHg7Ua?dl=0

@joethepro Have you used that lens on a full frame sensor/film? Many older lenses can be quite blurry at the borders and corners, my 50 1.4 Ais is quite soft from spherical aberration at 1.4 as I'm sure your 35 is. The 35mm also apparently exhibits lots of coma (what you seem to be describing as smearing) in the corners and is also blurrier in the corners until stopped down to f5.6 or f8. If you have been using your lens with a passive adapter on a mirco four thirds camera you wouldn't have been seeing the edges of the full fram image circle, just the best looking centre crop. Putting the RJ on the lens allows you to use more of that image circle, and so you will be introducing those parts of the full frame image circle closer to the edges and the shots will display more of the problems.