Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience  (Read 35841 times)

Maverick02

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #60 on: March 08, 2017, 03:58:52 pm »

Hi Kevin,

Is this "large MP solution coming from Sony", is it in a MF or DSLR form? Have been on the fence about the Fuji, Michaels input has pushed me off it for now, plus my need is really for more MP's, preferably in DSLR form.
Logged

vjbelle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 636
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #61 on: March 08, 2017, 04:02:52 pm »

Michael..... I think your post is a must read for anyone who is considering this camera.  A couple of things stood out - your frustration with the size of the 120 and its ability to sense that the world is turning.  At that focal length 'nothing' can move.  I was also surprised and concerned by your findings regarding bandwith for the raw files.  I shot with the Leaf CMOS version of that chip and never had those issues but that was Leaf and this is Fuji. 

Thanks much for the very worthwhile reading post.....

Victor
« Last Edit: March 08, 2017, 04:08:30 pm by vjbelle »
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #62 on: March 08, 2017, 04:11:25 pm »

Michael..... I think your post is a must read for anyone who is considering this camera.  A couple of things stood out - your frustration with the size of the 120 and its ability to sense that the world is turning.  At that focal length 'nothing' can move.  I was also surprised and concerned by your findings regarding bandwith for the raw files.  I shot with the Leaf CMOS version of that chip and never had those issues but that was Leaf and this is Fuji. 

Thanks much for the very worthwhile reading post.....

Victor

I still want to know why the raw files (carefully set) were not more flexible. It was more like I would expect from a JPG file, but it was the size and name for raw. That is a real puzzle and I don't need puzzles like that...just now.
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

Christopher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1499
    • http://www.hauser-photoart.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #63 on: March 08, 2017, 04:39:25 pm »

I don't want to be harsh, but I'm also not surprised Michael. I expected the whole thing and I have to say I really didn't get your interest in these low end medium format systems. As it looks like your happy with your Nikon. I for one would never want to go back to the d810, the colours are just awful. Don't get me wrong it's a good system, I just would never want to go back from my phase.

I will have the GFX next week or so and will have more to say, but I expect to keep it until Sony finally gets their act together. However, we all know something is coming, but with Sony you never know when.

The talk about a new high end sony sensor has been spooking around for over a year, as has a d820..... these systems really aren't that expensive and switching is done quickly. Till then I believe the GFX will serve nicely for rough environments, where my XF better stays in the bag. 


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
Logged
Christopher Hauser
[email=chris@hauser-p

marc aurel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #64 on: March 08, 2017, 05:26:13 pm »

I still want to know why the raw files (carefully set) were not more flexible. It was more like I would expect from a JPG file, but it was the size and name for raw. That is a real puzzle and I don't need puzzles like that...just now.

Hi Michael,

I tried some pushing with GFX raws. And I found them to be impressive.
Fuji GFX, 63mm f2.8 prime at f5.6, handheld at 1/55th of a second, ISO 100, RAW file. Attached are 100% crops of the image converted with iridient developer, first one original, second woth exposure pushed 5 stops. Posted it over at GetDpi a few days ago.

What kind of flexibility did you expect that you did not find in the GFX files? Do you have images to share that show that the files are not "flexible" (in comparison with you D 810)? I am just curious to understand.

Best regards -
Marc

« Last Edit: March 08, 2017, 05:29:36 pm by marc aurel »
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #65 on: March 08, 2017, 05:40:06 pm »

Hi Michael,

I tried some pushing with GFX raws. And I found them to be impressive.
Fuji GFX, 63mm f2.8 prime at f5.6, handheld at 1/55th of a second, ISO 100, RAW file. Attached are 100% crops of the image converted with iridient developer, first one original, second woth exposure pushed 5 stops. Posted it over at GetDpi a few days ago.

What kind of flexibility did you expect that you did not find in the GFX files? Do you have images to share that show that the files are not "flexible" (in comparison with you D 810)? I am just curious to understand.

Best regards -
Marc

As mentioned in my post, I hoped to find something as flexible as the raw files from the Nikon D810 that I am used to. I took shots of the same scene with the D810 and when I adjusted the black-point slider, it had a very wide bandwidth. However, with the GFX it was very, very short, like I would expect from something like a JPG with less flexibility. I didn't find that and I have 100 or so files, but you have my basic comments. Perhaps by the nature of raw GFX are not flexible.  I am not an expert on this camera, but just giving my take on the experience with the GFX, as many of us here do. I am sure that many will be examining these and I look forward to hearing what others find. At the moment I am not going to take the time to go further into it. Obviously the GFX is a powerful system at a reasonable price point. It just did not meet my needs, which I admit are very specialized.
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #66 on: March 08, 2017, 06:27:31 pm »

I see plenty of push for my use.  That is of course very individual in nature and need.   

Found the 120mm to be very sharp but the hyperlocal range  is very tricky and I still need to work on that for a while.  For sure mine is capable of hand held work, but mounting it to a tripod is helpful.  As size, coming from P1, I found it small, compared to anything in the BL Schneider range.  The OIS works very well for me hand held. 

One issue, Fuji and their Focus by wire on this system is very different and will possibly give new users fits. 

The zoom to 100% playback mode is way way past a true 100% view, so your first thought is how did I get this so out of focus.  You need to zoom back quite a bit.  Also the screen works like the iPhone in that you can pinch to zoom in or out.  Nice feature.  Zooming across an image is very fast. 

Live View is very similar to how it works on the X-T2.  I can't find a way to pinch to zoom in Live View which would be very nice, as the zoom at first goes way past where you want it.  The peaking on the camera is very good however and that helps.  The 32-64 is very sharp, but as it's focus by wire only, no manual clutch it will take getting used to. 

Weight, not an issue for me, coming from the D810 14-24 or K1 and 15-30 both weight more and have more mass.  Or the XF and a lens. 

My only real concern is that Fuji did not consider a need for true manual focus, and kept the lenses in the FBWire design. 

Looks like all 6 of the first lenses are manual focus clutch-less, IMO a bit oversight especially considering the price. 

The 120mm IMO is a bit priced on the high side, and it has the same issue as many Fuji OIS lenses, with a moving element which makes noise as you pick up the lens.

Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #67 on: March 08, 2017, 07:31:22 pm »

And lastly, and perhaps most important for me was that (at least I found) in post-processing the raw files (using ACR) did not have the bandwidth I am used to in the Nikon D810. In particular the blacks, which on the Nikon D810 seem to stretch out forever, on the GFX were there and blown in a flash. What is this? It is almost like their files are not true raw. Perhaps they are some pre-processed form of raw, and I will await the techsperts to tell me what is happening there. As for me, I REALLY didn’t like it. If there is one thing that sealed the deal for returning the system, that was it. I need raw files with at least as much bandwidth as the Nikon raw files.

I am not surprised. Even the DR of the H6D-100c isn't significantly superior to that of the D810 from my casual usage first evalutation. It is very very good compared to pretty much anything else (probably at the same level of the IQ3-100), but the D810 was groundbreaking when it was released 2.5 years ago.

There are other advantages in terms of image quality though that probably also apply to the GFX, such as pixel sharpness, resolution, probably colors,... but the (inconvenient?) truth is that a D810 + Otus stitched image can do anything the high res backs do when stitching applies... and then more as resolution goes up. Now the next thing for me is to start stitching with the Blad. i hope to have the chance to do that in 2 weeks from now.

Now, it is true that 100mp in one shot is convenient!





Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: March 08, 2017, 07:47:35 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #68 on: March 08, 2017, 09:04:07 pm »

I don’t think I made it clear enough that the Fuji camera is an impressive piece of work. It does almost everything I need, plus some things I didn’t even think to want that I like. I ordered, bought one, and waited. This was after I cancelled my order (of seven months) for the Hasselblad X1D, which had its own problems, like no way to properly do alternative lenses, at least at this time.

Where the GFX did not perform well enough for me was with lenses. The two I ordered, the 63mm and the 120mm Macro, were not what I am used to, plain and simple. I believe I pointed those problems out. What needs to be understood is that I am used to lenses like the Otus series (55mm, 85mm, and 28mm), the 135mm Zeiss (really an Otus), the Nikkor Noct, the El Nikkor APO 105, the Printing Nikkors, the CRT Nikkor, the AM-ED LF Nikkors, the Voigtlander 125mm APO-Lanthar, plus Rodenstock, Schneider, and other key lenses, and many more.

My hope was that these lenses would work well with the Fotodiox adapter (which is not all I could want), and they did work, but just not QUITE well enough to carry on what I am used to with the Nikon D810 for what I need. I also tried the GFX on the Cambo Actus with some of the LF lenses and that was better, actually. That is a much better use for the GFX for those type of lenses that fit bellows use.

I found many, many things to like in the GFX. I just need more megapixels (believe it or not) and a camera that can use my lens collection without too much loss in IQ. I could not get it. That’s it. No one is more sorry about this than I am.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2017, 09:18:53 pm by Michael Erlewine »
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

cyron123

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #69 on: March 09, 2017, 01:33:41 am »

Hello Michael,
Can you say more about your Actus LF lenses experience? What lenses have you use? Shift Tilt? How much ICC on the Raw is needed and what software have you use.
Thank you.
Logged

elundqvist_photo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
    • Portfolio
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #70 on: March 09, 2017, 03:31:24 am »

Hello Michael,
Can you say more about your Actus LF lenses experience? What lenses have you use? Shift Tilt? How much ICC on the Raw is needed and what software have you use.
Thank you.

+1
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #71 on: March 09, 2017, 05:27:34 am »

Hello Michael,
Can you say more about your Actus LF lenses experience? What lenses have you use? Shift Tilt? How much ICC on the Raw is needed and what software have you use.
Thank you.

Having a fair number of fine lenses, in my experience the best bargains today on really fine lenses are those LF lenses in Copal #0 mount or lenses like the Nikkor AM-ED lenses (120mm and 210mm), where in "AM", "A" stands for apochromatic and "M" stands for macro. Many of the enlarger lenses also are fine, plus the various industrial lenses (for scanners, etc.) amount to a treasure trove of great lenses, if you take the time to pick through them. The Nikkon Printing Nikkors, like the 150mm, are impeccably corrected and work well in the studio or, with care (and hoods), in the field. I have three of them.

As for the GFX, while mounting my standard Nikon F-Mount lenses like the Otus, Leica R lenses (converted), and so on, the GFX did not work out to my satisfaction as too much IQ was lost in the adapter exchange, this is not true for the GFX on a bellows.

The GFX works on the Novoflex BALPRO T/S, the Cambo Actus, and the Rollei X-Act 2 technical cameras, which I have. I had ordered from Capture Integration their first unit off the line from Cambo that features the GFX mount, but had not received it yet. By using the GFX>Nikon-F adapter from Fotodiox, I tested it and the GFX works fine. The larger GFX mount will work even better, of course. If I were wealthy, I would perhaps keep the GFX just for use with the technical cameras. As it was, I had to sell a lot of lenses, good lenses that I never use, just to get the GFX.

The GFX worked fine on the Cambo Actus, but so does the Nikon D810 and other cameras like the Sony A7Rii, for which I also have an Actus adapter. And the Pentax K1 has an adapter available for the Actus, as well. I sold my K1 for similar reasons as the GFX.

The small, light, portable Cambo Actus does not have all of the movements that my Rollei X-Act 2 does, but the Rollei weighs around 14 lbs. I am too old to enjoy carrying that thing around. The Actus has all of the movements I need to use and I have just ordered a 300mm rail (and accompanying bellows) for the Cambo Actus, which will allow me to better use some of the more extreme industrial lenses like the Nikkor Macros (four special lenses for long bellows).

You have to keep in mind that I am primarily a close-up photographer and since I live in a cold climate (Michigan), half the year it is too cold to go outside with a camera and lenses; at least, I don’t. During that time I work in my tiny studio.

Bottom line, the best lens bargains today IMO are the LF lenses and the various exotic industrials, provided that you are not using them for landscape photography. Some don’t reach infinity. My single most-used lens is the El Nikkor 105mm APO lens. Note the “APO,” which is the one to get, not the standard non-APO El Nikkor 105mm.

I am branching out into landscape photography these days, so lenses like the Zeiss Otus 28mm lens are perfect for that IMO. I find that I have to pay top dollar for great lenses, but you only need like one or two of them to last a lifetime and they hold their value.

As for software, I use Adobe Bridge as a finder and ACR in Photoshop for post-processing. I know Lightroom inside and out, but it is too slow for my taste and its catalogs in my experience have been known to suddenly get unusable, losing the keywords, etc. on hundreds of thousands of images. Ouch!

Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4067
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #72 on: March 09, 2017, 07:47:25 am »

Hi Michael,

You mention too much IQ was lost with the Fotodiox adapter, can you elaborate on that?  Did the adapter feel well made and did you have any issues with the Nikon or Zeiss lenses on the mount?

Thanks
Paul Caldwell
Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #73 on: March 09, 2017, 08:23:37 am »

Hi Michael,

You mention too much IQ was lost with the Fotodiox adapter, can you elaborate on that?  Did the adapter feel well made and did you have any issues with the Nikon or Zeiss lenses on the mount?

Thanks
Paul Caldwell

I have never been that happy with the Fotodiox quality. I use it because they care enough to provide what I need, but I always look for a better-quality adapter once I find one that I need. In this case, the Fotodiox GFX>Nikon adapter is not too bad. It is made for "G" lenses, but if used properly can take the F-Mount Nikon lenses. A problem I often have with Fotodiox is getting it to properly lock or click into place. As you know, it is possible to attempt to mount a Nikon adapter and for it not be the correct one of the three prongs to seat. So it turns in, but never clicks, exposing your lenses to just falling out. In the case of this Fotodiox lens adapter, as always, I have trouble making sure that it mounts securely.

And, in addition, making it more difficult, there is a small ring of white circles, of which in order to mount F-Mount lenses, only the first white dot (filled in) has to be placed across from a mark or it will NOT show aperture change as you move the aperture ring on your lens. This ring of white dots is near the mount and is free moving (no clicks), so it interferes with trying to mount the lens – makes it difficult and more dangerous.  That is one point.

As for the lens IQ, we have to keep in mind that lenses like the Zeiss Otus series are very, very carefully put together lenses. So, when we just mount them on a strange adapter, it is apparent that this interferes with the IQ of the lens. And that interference either is OK or it is not. With the GFX, I did not "like" what it did to my lenses, which work better (of course) on their native Nikon mount. It did not take me long to decide that what I gained with the GFX was less than what I lost in IQ from the adapter.


The bottom line is that we really can’t mess much with great lenses which are designed to work perfectly as they are. Because I use these lenses for close-up work, and they often are not designed for close-up, I have tried (of course) little extensions (like shims) to get closer. For the most part, this does not help at all. I have found that Nikon’s shortest extension, the K-1 Ring, with about 5.8mm extension works “well enough” to actually use.


So, I am in a quandary. The lenses I use are not happy unless on their native mount, but I would like to have more megapixels. So, I have to wait for Nikon to get around to offering more megapixels. As I have mentioned before, one workaround is to use a technical camera, where the lenses are meant to be used on a moving bellows. And, I do this a lot.


So, for me it is either wait for Nikon or perhaps Sony to offer greater megapixels. I might be happy with the Hasselblad X1D, but I gave up my place in line and have no way to get one except wait who knows how long.... which I just did for seven months! And that camera does not really allow external lenses, so there I am, caught between the devil and the deep-blue sea. With new gear, it is always like this.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 08:29:39 am by Michael Erlewine »
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

algrove

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #74 on: March 09, 2017, 08:30:23 am »

I wonder how the GFX would perform on the Cambo WRS 1600 with excellent Roddy lenses? Anyone know or have comments? Actually is there a way to adapt the GFX to that frame?
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #75 on: March 09, 2017, 08:34:18 am »

I wonder how the GFX would perform on the Cambo WRS 1600 with excellent Roddy lenses? Anyone know or have comments? Actually is there a way to adapt the GFX to that frame?

I take it you know that they have added the GFX mount to the Cambo Actus, by adding a riser on the front standard and changing the rear standard completely, so that now the camera plate is easily interchangable. It is helpful to know that with the wider GFX mount they did NOT have to change the bellows size.
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

algrove

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #76 on: March 09, 2017, 08:52:23 am »

Interesting reading.

One thought I can comment on is that the 50MP Sony sensor does not have the DR of the IQ3100. I sold my 645Z to get the 3100 and it is in a league all its own. Those comments I cannot agree with at all.

I have been in drenching downpours with my 3100 and decided to get the GFX as a foul wether backup as I very much liked the 50MP sensor on the 645Z which was very flexible using LR. Now I have become thoroughly satisfied with C1 and will try all avenues not to go back to the "pay for the rest of your life" Adobe formula.

I have received my GFX and zoom. Having switched to the XT2 recently I find the menu setup similar, but not without GFX specific setting needs. I am sure I will be changing settings for a while until better satisfied with my output. I am no expert and have spent at least one hour customizing the menu for my needs. I do not shoot inside and at close range as I am a landscape photographer with which this camera will fit in just fine assuming IQ is as good or better than the 645Z files. That said I very much like the challenge of street photography with my XT2's.

I have barely used the GFX so far as I only received it yesterday so no specific image comments yet as I am still deciding which RAW converter I will use.

Take a look at recent XF+3100 images below from Grand Canyon Monsoon and Yosemite Winter. All of the Tundra series was taken using the Sony 50MP sensor in the 645Z.

http://www.louisfoubare.com

Logged

chrismuc

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 219
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #77 on: March 09, 2017, 09:28:29 am »

As for the lens IQ, we have to keep in mind that lenses like the Zeiss Otus series are very, very carefully put together lenses. So, when we just mount them on a strange adapter, it is apparent that this interferes with the IQ of the lens. And that interference either is OK or it is not. With the GFX, I did not "like" what it did to my lenses, which work better (of course) on their native Nikon mount. It did not take me long to decide that what I gained with the GFX was less than what I lost in IQ from the adapter.

Sorry I have no idea what you are talking about.
A 'bad' adapter might be too loose, the two mounts not parallel, slightly too short or too long or the inside not very matt black and light absorbing.
Now what was the problem with the Nikon-Fuji Fotodiox adapter that you did not get 'the IQ' of the Otus lenses, that you expected.
Please upload raw file to see the effects.

Same with the talking about the 63mm Fuji lens. Please proof with raw files why the lens did not satisfy you.

Thx.
Logged

Michael Erlewine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1027
    • MacroStop.com
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #78 on: March 09, 2017, 11:09:07 am »

Sorry I have no idea what you are talking about.
A 'bad' adapter might be too loose, the two mounts not parallel, slightly too short or too long or the inside not very matt black and light absorbing.
Now what was the problem with the Nikon-Fuji Fotodiox adapter that you did not get 'the IQ' of the Otus lenses, that you expected.
Please upload raw file to see the effects.

Same with the talking about the 63mm Fuji lens. Please proof with raw files why the lens did not satisfy you.

Thx.

I have done my best to describe about the adapter, etc. I can't help it if you don't know what I am talking about. Any time that we vary a mount via an adapter, there are consequences. That's my point and all i have to say here.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 11:17:19 am by Michael Erlewine »
Logged
MichaelErlewine.smugmug.com. Founder MacroStop.com, MichaelErlewine.com, YouTube.com/user/merlewine

cyron123

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 234
Re: Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience
« Reply #79 on: March 09, 2017, 12:54:56 pm »

Hello,
here is a RAW conversion made with the new Lightroom. 100% like the same area some threads before...
No sharpening. ISO100, 120mm Lens, same mosaic like Raw Therapee
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7   Go Up