Micro Four Thirds Focal Reducer Shootout

Started Feb 20, 2014 | Discussions thread
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 33,629
Re: An honest test - it shows competitors are not too bad

MatsP wrote:

MatsP wrote:

Yes the test showed that the original design is the best - but it also showed that at least two of the competitors aren't quite as bad as you could suspect. So if this was a marketing attempt- which some of the posters in this thread seem to believe - it may have the opposite effect. It seems that at least some of the competitors are good enough to be considered, regarding the lower price. So I really think this was an honest test. Thanks to the Op for that.

If people look at my tests and conclude that one of the non-Metabones products offers good value for the money, and purchase accordingly, then I'm perfectly OK with that. I'd call that an informed buying decision, which is something I strongly encourage.

-- hide signature --

Brian Caldwell

And maybe the buyer of a cheap variety after having played with it for a while finds that this is a real good idea and wants the real thing!

Well if the Metabones is superior when tested. I have no problem with that but it gets up my nose to insinuate that the other Chinese focal reducers are rip-offs or clones.  As far as I can determine the other Chinese varieties are completely different designs as at least Metabones and Zhongyi publish their lens design layout.  Brian of course can confirm this.

If there is a difference in performance shown then so be it, but it is more probably associated with the difference in design rather than the easy cheap shot: "low, cheap, rip off, clone quality".  As far as I know the Metabones product is made in China as well.  I might be corrected in this assumption.

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow