Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              9       10       end
  

Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s
  
 
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


I got my Fuji GFX a couple of weeks ago and I have finally got time to test it a bit. So, far I have tested it with 6 Zeiss lenses for the ZF mount -- the Milvus 135 f/2 APO; the Milvus 85 f/1.4; the Otus 55 f/1.4; the Classic 35 f/1.4; the Otus 28 f/1.4; and the Mills 21 f/2.8; and six medium format lenses -- a Hasselblad HCD 24 f/4.8; a Hasselblad CFE IF 40 f/4; a Mamiya 645 MF 55 f/2.8N; a Hasselblad HC 100 f/2.2; a Mamiya 645 MF 120 f/4 Macro A; a Hasselblad CF 180 f/4; and a Hasselblad HC 300 f/4.5.

I have the a Fotodiox Nikon F adapter, a Fotodiox Mamiya 645 adapter, a Fuji Hasselblad H adapter, and a Hasselblad H to V mount adapter.

Let me start with the FF 35mm lenses. The mini MF sensor is notably bigger than a FF 35mm sensor but no so much bigger that FF 35mm lenses automatically won't work. The FF 35mm image circle is 43.2mm, whereas the mini MF sensor requires a 55mm image circle to cover the whole sensor, but different crops require different image circles and one of the nice things about the Fuji GFX is that you can set up the camera to show different crops in the view finder--more on that later. Anyway, here is the image circle that is required for the various crops:

1 to 1 (i.e., square) - this format requires just a 46.5 image circle which is only a bit larger than FF 35mm. Many FF 35mm will be able to cover this format.
16 X 9 (common for video and some like it for landscapes) - this format requires a 50.3mm image circle. Now we are getting quite a bit bigger, but some FF 35mm will cover this format.
7 X 6 (a format the Pentax used for MF) - this almost square format requires a 50.5mm image circle; and requires just at tiny bit bigger than 16 X 9, some FF 35mm lenses will cover this format as well.
5 X 4 (classic format which many including me like for portraits if you want to print 8 x 10s this is your format) - this format requires a 52.7mm image circle. This will be more challenging yet for FF 35mm lenses to cover.
3 X 2 (classic format that is the format of FF 35mm) this format also requires a 52.7 image circle, but as many people will want to use this for landscapes at least some of the time it will at times require good coverage right to the corners.
4 X 3 (classic format this is the native format of the GFX) this format requires a 55mm image circle (or 54.8mm to be precise). This image circle will be difficult for almost all FF 35mm lenses.

Keep in mind usage of the lens will matter. The image circle of a lens is usually smallest at infinity, and that compounded by landscape shooter often wanting excellent performance all the way to the corners makes it much more difficult for a FF 35mm lens to work as a landscape lens. In contrast for portraits many people don't care much at all about the corner performance, so as along as a lens doesn't have to severe of vignetting then a FF 35mm can work pretty well for portraits. Macro or close focus shooting will also be much easier than landscapes, but better performance at the edges and maybe the corners may make it more demanding than portraits. With all this in mind let me describe the FF 35mm lenses I have tested.

Zeiss Milvus 135 f/2 APO - This lens is a lot like a 100mm f/1.5 lens on FF 35mm for crops of 4 by 3 or squarer on the GFX; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 110mm f/1.6 FF 35mm lens; it a lot like a 175mm f/2.6 lens for 645 film. This lens does remarkably well on the Fuji GFX. The only flaw I can see is when shooting landscapes in the full 4 X 3 the corners are a bit weak, they aren't terrible just not as good as the rest of the image. It is a relatively small area in the corners that is effected and even a 3 X 2 crop completely eliminates that area. See the picture below for some close focus shots of flowers. The first shot of the lilly is full 4 X 3 format and no vignetting correction at all. With the darker corners in this shot none is need. The second shot is also full 4 X 3 format and with the brighter corners I did use vignetting correction here, but it cleaned up nicely and it was just the tips of the corners. The third shot is 3 X 2 and needed nor correction at all.

Zeiss Milvus 85 f/1.4 - This lens is a lot like a 60mm f/1.0 FF 35mm lens for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 70 f/1.2 FF 35mm lens; it is a lot like a 110mm f/1.8 lens for 645 film. This lens does fine for 1 X 1 portraits; 6 X 7 portraits and even 4 X 5 portraits if you can put up with fairly heavy vignetting. I haven't tested it fully for landscapes yet, but I am not that optimistic. Maybe 16 X 9 will work, but I am pretty sure that 3 X 2 will not.

Zeiss Otus 55 f/1.4 APO - This lens is a lot like a 40mm f/1.0 FF 35mm lens for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 45 f/1.2 FF 35mm lens; it is a lot like a 70mm f/1.8 lens for 645 film. This lens does fine for 1 X 1 portraits; 6 X 7 portraits; and even 4 X 5 portraits but the vignetting is pretty heave for 4 X 5 portraits even heavier than the Milvus 85 f/1.4. I haven't tested it for landscapes yet, but I doubt it will work well.

Zeiss Classic 35 f/1.4 - This lens is a lot like a 25mm f/1.0 FF 35mm lens for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 28 f/1.2 FF 35mm lens; it is a lot like a 45mm f/1.8 lens for 645 film. This lens is pretty good for 1 X 1 and 6 X 7 portraits, but has too much vignetting for my tastes even for 4 X 5 portraits. I don't hold out really any hope for landscapes with this lens.

Zeiss Otus 28 f/1.4 APO - This lens is a lot like a 20mm f/1.0 FF 35mm lens for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 23 f/1.2 FF 35mm lens; it is a lot like a 35mm f/1.8 lens for 645 film. Unfortunately this lens is not even suitable for 1 X 1 portraits. It has heavy dark vignetting anywhere beyond the 43mm image circle of FF 35mm, in fact at f/1.4 it doesn't really seem to even cover this image circle. It is a beautiful lens, but it just won't work on the Fuji.

Zeiss Milvus 21 f/2.8 -This lens is a lot like a 15mm f/2.0 FF 35mm lens for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer; for crops of 3 X 2 or skinnier it is a lot like a 17 f/2.3 FF 35mm lens; it is a lot like a 28mm f/3.6 lens for 645 film. Surprisingly this lens works noticeably better than the Otus 28mm. It would work for 1 X 1 portraits, but not much else for my tastes. It does make for intriguing focal lengths, but unless you want to shoot square it probably won't be useful.

I will report on the MF lenses, which all work fine without problems later. Some including the 24 and 40 which are very wide and pretty wide perform very very well. I will add some shots with them soon, but I want to compare them to the Loxia 21 and the Otus 28 on the Sony A7rII and I haven't done those comparisons yet.

















Jun 23, 2017 at 04:12 AM
Edward Castro
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Very, very nice pictures you took. Really impressed.


Jun 23, 2017 at 04:26 AM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Thank you for sharing your tests Steve !!! Awesome shots ...


Jun 23, 2017 at 09:48 AM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


+1


Jun 23, 2017 at 12:32 PM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Waiting to hear your impression of Hasselblad lenses, especially in comparison to Fuji's own lenses. I just got the H adapter as well but only tried 150/3.2 HC so far and I am very impressed.


Jun 23, 2017 at 02:19 PM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


For anyone who needs any extra help on this focal length equivalency thing, reminder that I've got a calculator you can use for quick reference.

Steve, can you talk more about how well these lenses perform in the areas they *do* cover? Can you corroborate Lloyd Chambers' findings that non-native lenses suffer major degradation on this sensor? And when are you shipping it over to me so I can test it with the 180/2 APO-Summicron

Obviously the limited coverage means you wouldn't make any of these your *primary* lenses for the camera, but if there aren't optical performance problems I think it's a high enough density sensor that using it cropped with your existing FF35 lenses is still a reasonable secondary option.



Jun 23, 2017 at 02:29 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


suteetat wrote:
Waiting to hear your impression of Hasselblad lenses, especially in comparison to Fuji's own lenses. I just got the H adapter as well but only tried 150/3.2 HC so far and I am very impressed.


I was just preparing my first presentation of the Hassy HCD 24 f/4.8. I think it is a really good option. I have linked files below to a landscape test shot. Nothing all that beautiful, but lots of foliage to pick up micro contrast performance. This shot is at f/5.6 (and you do get EXIF data with the Fuji H adapter). The first shot below is the whole scene, followed by a 100% crops of the centre, zone B, the left edge, and the lower left corner. I think the lens does remarkably well.

I will report more on the HC 100 f/2.2, which so far seems to be a wonderful lens and the HC 300 f/4.5, which I haven't even shot yet.

I do want to report that the shot below is taken using the leaf shutter. Despite what Jim Kasson reports I can shoot my HCD 24 and HC 100 (and presumably my HC 300) with the leaf shutter. There is actually a nifty button on the converter which brings up the menu for adapted lenses and lets you select either the body or the lens for the shutter (you can also select the custom profile that you create for the lens as well). I don't know if it was a coincidence and I did something else, but before finding and pressing this button the camera was crashing when I used magnification with the HC lenses, but now everything works fine.

I also have the Hassy CFE IF 40 f/4, which I need to test more. It covers the image circle well, but I want to really test out its landscape performance which I haven't done yet. And I have the Hassy CF 180 f/4, which looks to be a great lens. It works well for portraits and covers the image circle easily, but again I haven't tested it for landscapes. I do have the Hassy H to V mount adapter that I am hoping will let me use the leaf shutter with these lenses in conjunction with the Fuji H adapter, but so far I haven't been able to get it to work. It works fine as a dumb adapter, but when I press the button on the Fuji H adapter the option to select the lens shutter is greyed out. The Hassy adapter is a very tight fit into the Fuji adapter, however, so I am not sure the contacts are connecting well. I still have hope, but it is probably a stretch to hope to use the leaf shutter with V mount lenses. Fuji in no way suggested that this would be possible.




























Jun 23, 2017 at 03:17 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Lee Saxon wrote:
For anyone who needs any extra help on this focal length equivalency thing, reminder that I've got a calculator you can use for quick reference.

Steve, can you talk more about how well these lenses perform in the areas they *do* cover? Can you corroborate Lloyd Chambers' findings that non-native lenses suffer major degradation on this sensor? And when are you shipping it over to me so I can test it with the 180/2 APO-Summicron

Obviously the limited coverage means you wouldn't make any of these your *primary* lenses for the camera, but if there aren't optical performance problems I
...Show more

Let me fully endorse Lee's calculator. It is cool and works really well. Thanks for setting that up Lee. All of these Zeiss ZF lenses seem to have exactly the same performance in the areas of the sensor they cover as they do on Sony cameras. I don't see major degradation with non-native lenses, except where they don't cover the sensor and in some lenses once you get far enough past the 43mm image circle for which they were designed. I have examined the Milvus 135 f/2 APO the closest. It is a great example. It has near flawless performance to at least a 52mm image circle. It is one lens that could be considered for primary use on the Fuji, IMO. If you use it, however, the far corners on 4 X 3 format are not quite as good and the very tips of the corners start to look bad in some shots. My take, however, is that this lens on the Fuji GFX is a lot like the ZE/ZF 25 f/2 on FF 35mm. The very far corners aren't quite there but everything else is excellent.

I would love to test it with you 180 f/2 APO cron. Maybe we can find a time and place to meet up to do that. That lovely lens deserves a camera like this and a 130 f/1.5 equivalent would be super cool.



Jun 23, 2017 at 03:25 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here are the same shots at f/8. As you can see it gets a bit better at f/8 and in my view is excellent.



























Jun 23, 2017 at 05:27 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


And here is the same set of shots at f/11. You see a little bit of diffraction, but only a little.



























Jun 23, 2017 at 05:40 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Lee Saxon wrote:
For anyone who needs any extra help on this focal length equivalency thing, reminder that I've got a calculator you can use for quick reference.

Steve, can you talk more about how well these lenses perform in the areas they *do* cover? Can you corroborate Lloyd Chambers' findings that non-native lenses suffer major degradation on this sensor? And when are you shipping it over to me so I can test it with the 180/2 APO-Summicron

Obviously the limited coverage means you wouldn't make any of these your *primary* lenses for the camera, but if there aren't optical performance problems I
...Show more

I have not read Lloyde Chamber's finding but so far, I think Leica M lenses probably suffered the most. 50/2 Apo does have significant field curvature when mount of GFX so I would not use it for landscape but for portrait work, I don't think it is a big problem. Otus 85/1.4 and 135/2 apo works perfectly well even at landscape distance. You can get very sharp corner for sure. Vignette is very slight and is easily corrected. Nikon 70-200/2.8e FL and 105/1.4e also work find but with a bit more vignette and to keep 4:3 ratio, I would need to crop just a tiny bit but at landscape distance, I did not notice any smearing. My only complain for Nikon lens is that with E lens, you cannot change aperture and are stuck at wide open.




Jun 23, 2017 at 11:25 PM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


I just tried Nikon 14-24/2.8G with GFX and to my surprise, it is actually not bad.
I can use it at 20-24mm range with no vignette. At 20mm, it gives horizontal width similar to around 17mm on FF sensor with 14-24mm. IQ wise, it is very good.
In comparison to Fuji 23/4, 14-24/2.8 at 23mm, both at F8, I would say that center sharpness is very close with an edge for the Fuji. However, The Fuji is quite a bit better performer at the edge but 14-24/2.8 is not terrible by all mean. Actually I am quite excited about this as next month, I will have a trip that hopefully will give me a chance to take some pictures of the Milky Way and I have been trying to find a lens that I can use with GFX that is faster than F4. Alternatively Sigma Art 20/1.4 is doable but will require some cropping to get rid off vignette in the corner and on the top part of the frame.



Jun 25, 2017 at 11:30 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


suteetat wrote:
I just tried Nikon 14-24/2.8G with GFX and to my surprise, it is actually not bad.
I can use it at 20-24mm range with no vignette. At 20mm, it gives horizontal width similar to around 17mm on FF sensor with 14-24mm. IQ wise, it is very good.
In comparison to Fuji 23/4, 14-24/2.8 at 23mm, both at F8, I would say that center sharpness is very close with an edge for the Fuji. However, The Fuji is quite a bit better performer at the edge but 14-24/2.8 is not terrible by all mean. Actually I am quite excited about this as next
...Show more

Thanks for the report. That is a lens that will surely interest some. At 20mm for crop 3 X 2 and skinnier it is a lot like a 16 f/2.3 on FF 35mm and a lot like a 15 f/2 for crops of 4 x 3 or squarer. So, this is a quite viable ultra wide angle on the Fuji. The Sigma Art 20 f/1.4 would be an insane 15 f/1.0 for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer and a lot like a 16 f/1.2 for crop of 3 X 2 or skinnier, so even if you crop a bit this ought to be an interesting lens.

I really think the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 and the Canon 17 f/4L TSE provide very nice ultra wide angle coverage for the GFX.



Jun 26, 2017 at 12:32 AM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Steve Spencer wrote:
Thanks for the report. That is a lens that will surely interest some. At 20mm for crop 3 X 2 and skinnier it is a lot like a 16 f/2.3 on FF 35mm and a lot like a 15 f/2 for crops of 4 x 3 or squarer. So, this is a quite viable ultra wide angle on the Fuji. The Sigma Art 20 f/1.4 would be an insane 15 f/1.0 for crops of 4 X 3 or squarer and a lot like a 16 f/1.2 for crop of 3 X 2 or skinnier, so even if you crop
...Show more

Forgot to mention, someone else told me that Sigma Art 12-24/4 will also work. Vignette and black border disappears somewhere between 16-17mm so it should be even wider than Nikon 14-24/2.8 but I was more interested in F2.8 lens for next month's trip. I tried the new Nikon 8-15mm Fish Eye just for fun but unfortunately, even at 15mm, there is significant black border all around the frame and probably would need to crop down to 30+ MP for FF shot. Might as well stick with A7r ii or D810 for that




Jun 26, 2017 at 12:35 PM
suteetat
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here is a quick jpg from 23/[email protected], straight from camera. I imported into PS only for resize only on velvia film simulation.


pool 23 by Suteetat S, on Flickr

Here is 14-24/[email protected] somewhere around 19.5, just a bit of vignette creeping in, f8. I changed the lens while GFX was on tripod so position should be roughly the same.

pool 19.5 by Suteetat S, on Flickr

Both manual focus using magnifier to the same building on the horizon so pretty much at infinity for both.














Jun 26, 2017 at 01:03 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Ok, here are some more tests at portrait distances. Basically I shot a white wall hand held and I used magnification to focus on the electrical outlet in these shots. For the six Zeiss MF lenses, I added a third of a stop of exposure in light room (the camera seemed to underexpose just a bit) and then I enabled the profile for the lens in lightroom and turned up vignetting correction all the way and shadows to 50%. I then cropped the image to 1 X 1, 16X9, 4X5, 3X2, and saved the full shot at 4 X 3. I downsized using my usually routine each time. So here are the results with the Milvus 135 f/2 APO, starting with the 1 X 1 crop, then the 16 X 9 crop, then the 4 X 5 crop, then the 3 X 2 crop, then the full 4 X 3 shot.



























Jun 27, 2017 at 04:36 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here are the same crop with the Milvus 85 f/1.4



























Jun 27, 2017 at 04:37 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here are the same crops with the Otus 55 f/1.4.



























Jun 27, 2017 at 04:41 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here are the results with the Zeiss Classic ZF.2 35 f/1.4.



























Jun 27, 2017 at 04:43 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX - 50s


Here are the crops for the Otus 28 f/1.4. Get ready; these are ugly.



























Jun 27, 2017 at 04:45 AM
1
       2       3              9       10       end






FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              9       10       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password