Ted,
Could you do
1. A rez chart (even lights) static and moving on both? and
2. A clear sky (wall, or any other even lit surface)?
3. A color chart.
That is pretty much the "standard" for this type of tests (imo).
In any other circumstances (like the above test) the results could be subjective; to lights used, light distribution in the frame, framing, focusing aso.

Shooting solid sky is much better then a plain wall, IMO, much brighter and a real test for vignetting issues.

I'll shoot some outside stuff next, including sky. Probably won't shoot a rez chart as I don't normally shoot charts for a living. Yes it's all subjective with different lighting and such. We shoot a lot of corporate talking head stuff, with one camera on a tripod, and the other handheld. My main interest is if we can edit between the 2 cameras using the 2 different adapters with out a bunch of monkeying around in post.

Ted,

Look at the 2 exact setting, I assume you shoot on the M2 first then use the same setting for the Letus? since light loss on the Letus is less than the light loss on the M2, the frame captured by the Letus becomes over exposed? I think you should do auto setting on your camera then write down different numbers, that would help us to compare, thanks.

Quyen

Seems that the LETUS covers more area from the 35 lens image than the M2. And the light loss is less.

tests..
 

I cant wait to see the full test results!!!

Me either. I feel the pictures Ted posted are awesome, but Ted, could you please try to make the camcorder's position the same. I feel the M2 had more close up than the Letus, and please mooooooooorrrrrre pictures + footageeeeees.

Eniola,

The camcorder position is same in both. While the LETUS covers the full 35mm picture area, The M2 covers a bit less. That is the difference you see in the test shots.

What needs to be the same is the distance from the film plane to the subject. In this case that distance should be the same in both adapters. So, using the same 35mm lens, measure the distance from the end of the lens to the subject.

On the m2, you can also adjust the motor position up or down. This might allow a greater FOV.

The reason to shoot a res chart is to achieve a sort of baseline for comparison.

I also recommend shooting with an SLR to establish what the correct FOV is for the 35mm lens. I used this method to match the FOV of my adapter to that of the SLR. This avoided light falloff and other of the usual complaint issues.

Ya a res chart would be great as well as a variety of shots. That is really the only "fair" way to compare these.

I think on the forum somewhere you can find a link to a res chart...i think.

yah, and some donuts...
and coffee!!

no seriously thanks for your work, can't wait to see.
Daniel

Sorry for the delay in getting more images posted, I've been in Mexico scouting locations for our upcoming feature "Bikini Vampire Babes Gone Wild!" Should be lots of fun...
Anyway here's a link for some rez chart images. I'm not really happy with any of the adapter images, and will try to improve upon them as time allows. In the mean time any one else have rez chart images we could look at??

http://www.digital-west.com/adapter

http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/gs400?full=1
http://www.fortvir.net/gallery/album05/guskers35?full=1

These are two of my own. Actually after looking at those, I'm feeling better about my results. The D100 setup I'm assuming is just a digital still right?

The letus is not looking very good there....distortion and a pretty "dirty" frame.

Now if we could convince Ben or Steve to do the same with the Beatties.....

Interesting. Thanks for posting that.

Yes, some barrel distortion with the Letus, but pincushion distortion with the M3...

That should be very interesting.