Fuji GFX 50S -real world experience

[Christopher]

Sorry I also don't get it. An adapter works or it doesn't.

As long as there is no technical fault ( wrong measurements ) I don't get what your IQ problem is. (Except that FF lenses might just be not good enough for the larger sensor.)


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[kers]

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

Moiré will be allways there on pixel level on the sensor matrix combined with a sharp lens...
The good thing is it will be on the 50MP level so in the detail.
The photo looks good since you did not need sharpening at all.

You need photoshop or whatever to fix it.
Or do more if you do not like the octagonal...

[kers]

Sorry I also don't get it. An adapter works or it doesn't.

As long as there is no technical fault ( wrong measurements ) I don't get what your IQ problem is. (Except that FF lenses might just be not good enough for the larger sensor.)

+1

it is just a tube, so the only thing that can happen is that it is not straight; then you have some defocussed areas.
or you cannot reach infinity. Since you are into macro that will not be an issue.
It does not change anything on the side of the optics used.

[Michael Erlewine]

All I know is that in my experience with many adapters over the years, is that some are made better than others, some twist, bend, warp, etc. and any anomaly affects the lens. In my case, the Otus lenses clearly are up to the task of the GFX. So, all I am saying is that I personally did not like the way the GFX (adapter, sensor, camera - whatever could be the reason) worked with alternative (non-Fuji) lenses. That is all I know or cared about: how did it work for me. Check it out for yourselves. It may be fine for you. And, as I pointed out earlier, some of it could be the nature of the raw GFX files for all I know. Or, it could well be a combination of factors. Some of you, please check it out and report what you find. I have reported, returned my GFX, and am moving on to other concerns, but am interested what others turn up.

[ddanois]

I had a complete kit of the Otus lenses (28, 55 & 85) and tried them all of the GFX. While the center resolution met expectations, the quality quickly degrades towards the edges. I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I invested in this kit was to shoot wide open, not stopped down to avoid vignetting.

Long story short, I sold my Otus kit as I don't plan to return to the 35mm format given the recent entries by Fuji and Hasselblad.

[Kevin Callahan]

I am quite interested in this discussion, since I have ordered the Fuji GFX and Fotodiox Nikon adapter.  I have the Zeiss Nikon mount 55mm Otus and 135 APO.  I use these lenses with a Novoflex adapter on my Sony A7RII with outstanding results, and hope they will work on the Fuji.  (I can't focus them as reliably or well on a D810, which has great dynamic range but what I consider to be woefully deficient manual focusing.) 

I agree fully that adapters matter. Hopefully Novoflex will make some for the Fuji.  At the same time, while I am hopeful I also don't assume that the Zeiss 55 and 135 will work to full quality on the Fuji, good adapter or not.  They certainly appear to have the resolution to do so, but weren't designed for the larger sensor.

So I am very interested to see whether they will work to full speed, and if not whether it is an artifact of the Fotodiox adapter or instead the lenses themselves when mounted to the larger sensor.  Any further thoughts would be welcome!

[hogloff]

Just off the top of my head, but the 35mm lenses were not designed to cover a larger sensor and typically degrade by in sharpness and vignetting towards the edges. This will just be more pronounced on the larger sensor area. You can crop away these extreme edges, but then you are just throwing away pixels because of the lens.

[Jim Kasson]

Moiré will be always there on pixel level on the sensor matrix combined with a sharp lens...

And even more with the small microlenses and thus the lower-than-100% fill factor.

Jim

[Jim Kasson]

Just off the top of my head, but the 35mm lenses were not designed to cover a larger sensor and typically degrade by in sharpness and vignetting towards the edges. This will just be more pronounced on the larger sensor area. You can crop away these extreme edges, but then you are just throwing away pixels because of the lens.

I love square photographs. The GFX cropped to 1:1 is a 38MP sensor. The diagonal of a 33x33mm and a 24x36mm sensor aren't that different. That is why I retain hope.

Jim

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Jim,

Imaging Resource now has Studio Scene shots. Looks pretty good to me and the 63 mm lens at f/8 looks very sharp to me. Moiré is all around in the expected places.

Best regards
Erik

And even more with the small microlenses and thus the lower-than-100% fill factor.

Jim

[cyron123]

Hello,
Does anybody has a comparision between the 63mm and zoom lens from Fuji? The zoom have to be not so good -this is physics -but how much?

[Paul2660]

I have the zoom and it is very good but can't compare to the 63mm as mine is back ordered.

Images compare well to those taken with other MF zooms like the ones from P1.

Paul Caldwell

[douglevy]

So I spent yesterday shooting with the GFX. FMy friends at Lensprotogo got one, and we did 3 shoots, a model in the studio, headshots and environmental portraits, and food, and shot both with my h5x/credo60 and the Fuji. My first impressions, thinking about, "Would this fit in my workflow, would I buy it, what would it replace?" etc."

Trying to think about it in the context of my work that I shoot the H5X for (lit environmental portrait, studio portraits and food):

- It's a fun camera, the AF and high ISO were nice (the iso 3200 files look really clean, comparable to my D5). I don't have a ton of experience with this sensor for comparison though, but it was about what I expected. I haven't really dug into post on the files yet, but first impressions are really good.
- The grip area felt constrictingly small for my right hand/thumb area. They tried to jam a lot in that area where your thumb rests, and though I'm sure I'd get used to it, there was a lot of unintentional button pushing. However, the ability to push the command dials in and change settings that way was really nice.
- The touch screen wasn't as responsive as I'd hoped, nowhere near the iphone, D5 or Credos in responsiveness or performance.
- I'd never shot EVF before yesterday, and while the performance of it was good, the user experience to me was weird. I'm sure I'd get used to it do a degree, but there was a surprising blackout in between shots. I'd take a photo, and the camera would basically pause while processing (with the EVF I expected the screen to be always on). We ended up turning off image review, because if you try and shoot quickly with your eye to the finder, the shot you just took will pop up. It was annoying there was no option to have review set to on for the LCD only. I.e. I shoot, take my eye away form the finder and see it on the back LCD, as you might on a OVF camera.
- The size and weight are fantastic, small and quiet, especially comparing it for food work, with the 90mm it's way, way lighter than the hassy and the 120mm.

Mike from Lenspro will have more on their blog soon.

-Doug

[mcbroomf]

Thickness accuracy of adapters is crucial when using them with IF lenses.  I've just started testing a Rokinon SP/XP 14mm/2.4 (manual focus for Canon EF) using 2 adapters on a Sony A7R2.  A Metabones IV which reaches infinity focus well before the stop, and a Sigma MC-11 which is almost spot on for infinity/stop.  When focusing on infinity in the center of the lens the corners of images using the Metabones are just awful, smeared and completely unusable, while the same test using the Sigma yields very usable results.

Is this the kind of issue you saw in your files Michael?  Do you know if the lens reached infinity focus before the stop or were you just testing at closer distances?

Regards

[Michael Erlewine]

Is this the kind of issue you saw in your files Michael?  Do you know if the lens reached infinity focus before the stop or were you just testing at closer distances?

Regards

I was not concerned with infinity, but only close-up. My problem was that I was not happy with the IQ I got from the lenses I use the most. It is a crap-shoot. Sometimes adapters and extensions work well; sometimes they don't. Perhaps our techsperts could explain why. I only know whether it is better than what I am used to or as good. If it is less good, then I can't use that lens/adapter combination on a camera. With the GFX, I was not satisfied with what I saw. But this is not to say you would not be. I am very fussy.

[Paul2660]

On the subject of the blackout, I can't understand why some cameras seem to have this.  On Mine the black out is no different than the X-T2, .5 of a second? Basically the time it takes to blink your eye.  I have the image preview off.  Using a fast card Lexar 1000x which is not the fastest.  For me what blackout there is is not a problem.  Not a studio shooter however.  But for landscape, attempting a pano with a long blackout, can be quite difficult. 

Edit:  the blackout is longer with the 120mm than the 32-64.  With the 120mm about 1 second or so it seems, which is slower than the 32-64. 

I also use the P1 backs, and the LCD to me is not an issue, in fact I have been impressed with it so far.  The screen is much faster on zooming than my P1 is (all my P1's over the years), and continues to be fast as you fill up the card. P1 tends to pixelate on zooms over time especially as the card starts to fill up.   The screen works like the iPhone screen for zooming, in that you can pinch it in to decrease zoom and pinch out for zoom.  However, if you have the camera setup for image review, 1.5 seconds, you can't use the LCD for zooming here, as you can with a P1 back.  This mean you constantly need to hit the play button to see the image.  A simple thing Fuji might fix with firmware in the future.

The grip will be better if the vertical grip is added, but that just adds more weight.  The Q button is in the way for me as I constantly hit it with my thumb, could have been better located.  The play button, also could have been put somewhere else, as you need to move the camera to see it unlike the X series.  I guess over time I will get used to the location.

To me the image playback zooms in over 100%, and this causes you to have to zoom back on each image to really get a true idea of focus.  Not sure if you can set the zoom to stop at a certain amount but I need to check on this.  But the amount of zoom you get when double tap the screen is too much and the image will look out of focus (at least to me).  Scrolling with a swipe is very quick also. 

When previewing an image, you tend to move your hand in front of the EVF, and thus the LCD will turn off, so when using the LCD, I will turn off the EVF as an option.

Personally love having an aperture ring on my lenses again. 

Paul Caldwell

[vjbelle]

I had a complete kit of the Otus lenses (28, 55 & 85) and tried them all of the GFX. While the center resolution met expectations, the quality quickly degrades towards the edges. I can't speak for everyone, but the reason I invested in this kit was to shoot wide open, not stopped down to avoid vignetting.

Long story short, I sold my Otus kit as I don't plan to return to the 35mm format given the recent entries by Fuji and Hasselblad.

This is exactly what I thought would happen.  As good as the Otis lenses are the image circle just doesn't seem large enough to keep fine detail out to the edges. 

Victor

[agencal]

GFX + 63mm


DSCF0039-1 by AHMED GENCAL, on Flickr


DSCF0016-1 by AHMED GENCAL, on Flickr

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

This is exactly what I thought would happen.  As good as the Otis lenses are the image circle just doesn't seem large enough to keep fine detail out to the edges.

I think that that may also have to do with the adapter one uses (and where in the image resolution is evaluated). Vignetting is of course something else to consider.

Cheers,
Bart

[vjbelle]

Bart..... I'm assuming that the adapter is flat (within .001mm) and that it allows the lens to reach infinity or beyond.  If its not flat it should be easy to spot with a trained eye as the image will have line of focus variation.  Not reaching infinity should be real easy to see.  I've always kept shifting to a minimum with my LF lenses as to stay within the sweet spot of the image circle.  Once beyond the image detail starts to suffer and its very difficult to get that back in post.  I want my images to be sharp edge to edge..... I'm only speaking for myself.

Victor