Using a Zeiss Milvus full frame lens on the Fuji GFX 100s. Pros and cons?

[mg73]

I'm waiting for a GFX 100s to come in stock at BH photo.  I'm currently selling my Canon 5Ds and Canon lenses to put toward the purchase.  However, I have a Zeiss Milvus 50mm F2 ZE that I use with my Canon 5Ds.  I love this lens.  What are the pros and cons of buying an adapter and using this full-frame lens with the GFX 100s compared to using the fuji GF medium format lenses?  I do mostly landscape and fine art with some occasional portraits.  I'm also planning to do fine art studio still life with studio flash.

I have two questions just off the top of my head:

1:  Since the Canon 5ds sensor is physically smaller than the GFX 100s, I assume this lens would not cover the whole GFX sensor.  Does this mean I would not get the full benefit of the GFX sensor in terms of resolution and image quality?

2.  I assume the fuji lenses for this camera are made to match the resolution of this 102 MP sensor.  Is this Zeiss lens capable of handling that type of sensor resolution?

3.  What would the general differences be using this Zeiss prime with the GFX 100s, versus its equivalent focal length Fuji GF 63mm prime?

I do plan on buying at least one fuji lens regardless.   I'm leaning toward the Fuji GF 32-64mm or the GF 45-100mm.  I guess my question is whether it's worth keeping this Zeiss prime lens to use with the GFX 100s, or does it make more sense to sell it and use the money toward Fuji lenses that are made for this camera and sensor?

Appreciate any input.  Thanks, Mark

[samogitian]

I can't give you any direct input, but check this out...

https://apalmanac.com/gear/how-well-do-canon-ts-e-lenses-perform-on-a-fujifilm-gfx-100s-body-17226

I would say that you should try to find an adapter that you can return if it doesn't work out and try the lens on the body and see what you think.

I find 32-64mm to be a genuinely irritating lens because I don't like zooms, I want to use primes, but even though the Fuji primes are quite good, the in lens stabilization on the 32-64 helps enough that I keep it on the camera at least 50% of the time. I recommend you get that. I have not heard great things about the 45-100 and 32-64 is a more useful range, for me at least. It's the best zoom I ever had, no question. I had a 5DS MKII before I sold off my Canon gear for Leica M and L mount gear and now geez, I use the GFX100S all the time, it's that good. I also have bad memories of my 5DS and L glass being heavy but the Fuji doesn't seem as heavy, although granted while the lenses perform phenomenally and are at a great price point, they don't feel incredible the way the Leica lenses do. But who cares about that, it's time to get photographing!

[Rand47]

I'm waiting for a GFX 100s to come in stock at BH photo.  I'm currently selling my Canon 5Ds and Canon lenses to put toward the purchase.  However, I have a Zeiss Milvus 50mm F2 ZE that I use with my Canon 5Ds.  I love this lens.  What are the pros and cons of buying an adapter and using this full-frame lens with the GFX 100s compared to using the fuji GF medium format lenses?  I do mostly landscape and fine art with some occasional portraits.  I'm also planning to do fine art studio still life with studio flash.

I have two questions just off the top of my head:

1:  Since the Canon 5ds sensor is physically smaller than the GFX 100s, I assume this lens would not cover the whole GFX sensor.  Does this mean I would not get the full benefit of the GFX sensor in terms of resolution and image quality?

2.  I assume the fuji lenses for this camera are made to match the resolution of this 102 MP sensor.  Is this Zeiss lens capable of handling that type of sensor resolution?

3.  What would the general differences be using this Zeiss prime with the GFX 100s, versus its equivalent focal length Fuji GF 63mm prime?

I do plan on buying at least one fuji lens regardless.   I'm leaning toward the Fuji GF 32-64mm or the GF 45-100mm.  I guess my question is whether it's worth keeping this Zeiss prime lens to use with the GFX 100s, or does it make more sense to sell it and use the money toward Fuji lenses that are made for this camera and sensor?

Appreciate any input.  Thanks, Mark

I have a friend who is a very successful fine art landscape photographer who had Otis and Milvus lenses adapted to his GFX 100.  They work great.  His are Nikon version.  Some vignetting wide open, but the image quality is excellent.  I think it would be worth your time, and the expense of a decent quality adapter, to test your lens on the GFX before making the decision to sell or not.

The 32-64 does not have in-lens stabilization (as the post above states) but works well with the in-body stabilization of the GFX.  And, the 45-100 is on par in terms of image quality with the 32-64, and it does have OIS that works in conjunction with the IBIS of the body.  Check out Jim Kasson’s testing of both lenses.  He rates them both very highly.  I own both the 32-64 and 45-100 and the 45-100 has become my go-to lens for a lot of my work (primarily landscape).  I also own the 30, 45 and 80mm primes.  The primes are “better” of course, but not by a lot!  All the GF lenses are stellar and reason enough to own the GFX, IMO.

Rand

[samogitian]

I stand corrected, Rand is right. And the utility of the 45-100 is up to the user. For me it isn’t wide enough, but for someone else, it very well might be.