Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
RJ Lens Turbo m43 adapters
  • 782 Replies sorted by
  • joetheprojoethepro

    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!

  • AzoAzo

    @racer5

    Pentax was my first film camera that I purchased back in the day when I worked at a camera store. The images look nice and sharp with the Pentax/RJ combo. Sounds like you got a good deal ;-)

  • racer5racer5

    @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:)

  • arumarum

    Got mine today it is a Pentax K to E-mount adapter and it is great. With the lenses that I have tested it, I notice almost no change in centre sharpness and the borders are definitely a bit worse off (makes sense considering the aps-c sensor), but I also got a bit extra light and I really appreciate the increase in width of the images. Mine does not have a tripod foot, which would have been nice, but I can't really complain. It is a sweet addition.

  • joetheprojoethepro

    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?

  • anti12anti12

    @joethepro Yes, same here with my Sigma 18mm lens. On all my other lenses including Nikon 35mm and 50mm the aperture ring on the adapter works perfectly smooth.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    @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!

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Just bought Pentax 50mm f1.4 and 28mm f2.8. Thanks for inspiration @racer5. Will see how they translate to video on my GH2. Will probably order this RJ Turbo.

  • joetheprojoethepro

    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?

  • racer5racer5

    @matt_gh2 Those images were taken with the RJ Turbo PK to m43, for clicked aperture ring lenses. The lenses you bought are great, let's hear how they work out once they arrive. With the RJ they will be brighter, wider, and to my eyes slightly sharper wide on the crop sensor, so recommend adding that to the mix. Slammed at the moment, but I'll see about shooting a clip or two with the RJPK next time I'm out, if you don't beat me to it first!

  • hilburgerhilburger

    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.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    @racer5 Thanks for advice - shooting test video this weekend, so will post.

  • virgilrvirgilr

    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!

  • joetheprojoethepro

    @virgilr Hm, Are you sure you have an "M" 50mm 1.8? I have the M 50mm 1.7 and love love love that lens. I think this is what you actually mean. Its such a great portrait lens on the 2x crop cameras. If I find any more great deals on Pentax lenses I may have to snag a lens turbo for them!

  • GravitateMediaGroupGravitateMediaGroup

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

  • RyLoRyLo

    I haven't heard about any specific issues with those two lenses, but they are designed for APS-C sized sensors. So depending on your camera, you may have issues. GH1, GH2, and GH3 all go outside that with the RJ Lens Turbo. So you'll probably have some pretty heavy vignetting with those lenses. GH4 is barely wider than APS-C, so it's probably okay. Maybe only slight vignetting. BMCC, and BMPCC should be safe.

    Here's my math. Just take crop factor (relative to Full Frame) and multiply it by 0.716 and you get the crop factor with the RJ (still relative to full frame). APS-C is 1.6x. The GH1 and GH2 actually end up with a crop factor slightly wider than Super 35, which, IMO, is awesome. However, that limits you to FF lenses.

    Someone correct me if there's a flaw in my reasoning.

  • kin869kin869

    @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.

  • inukhiphopinukhiphop

    @RyLo It's not a hard and fast rule, the image circle of some APS-C lenses (in my case designed for Nikon DX 1.5x) can cover full frame sensor (Tokina 11-16mm apparently covers at 15-16mm), so it's down to specific lenses. My DX Sigma 10-20mm Nikon mount vignettes noticeably (aka more than the normal vignetting for the lens) with the RJ on the GH2 until just about 12mm (also slightly dependent on focus distance), then it covers from there on.

  • TscheckoffTscheckoff

    @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).

  • GravitateMediaGroupGravitateMediaGroup

    @Rylo & @kin869 Thank you

    @Tscheckoff it is alright that I lose aperture control, I'll use a variND to try and compensate for that, but other than that no issues?

    I'm only asking because I've heard of issues with specific lenses on specific boosters (mostly metabones I think) where serious damage can be done if not careful. Maybe that is only with the BMD specific boosters being used on GH4...I just like to be safe than sorry.

  • TscheckoffTscheckoff

    @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.)

  • joetheprojoethepro

    Does the Lens Turbo perform differently with different lenses? After doing some tests Ive realized that it seems to have wreaked havoc on my Nikon 35mm AI 1.4 wide open. I could tell even before the tests. Everything but the center 10% is worse with the lens turbo. Even stopped down, it sort of smears the outer 50% of the image. Could I just have a bad copy?

  • AzoAzo

    @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

  • joetheprojoethepro

    @Azo The smearing is not dramatic, but it is noticable if you are looking for it. Its almost like the look of a lens that is ever so slightly out of focus with very harsh bokeh. I know that especially at f/1.0, much of the image will be out of focus, but even when I focus on some details at the outer 1/2 of the frame, the issue becomes apparent.

    Ill do some further tests eventually and post them here.

  • inukhiphopinukhiphop

    @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.

Add a Comment