Home · Register · 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 | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              11      
12
       13              104       105       end
  

Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX

  
 
nehemiahphoto
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #1 · p.12 #1 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Has anyone tried adapting the Contax 35-70 or contax 100-300?


Nov 16, 2017 at 07:54 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #2 · p.12 #2 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


nehemiahphoto wrote:
Has anyone tried adapting the Contax 35-70 or contax 100-300?

No, I haven't seen them tested. I think there is good reason to hope they will work, but we won't know until they are tested.



Nov 16, 2017 at 08:06 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #3 · p.12 #3 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


As a way of summary I thought I would provide two lists of FF 35mm lenses that I have mostly seen tested (except where noted). One list will be a premium list emphasizing speed and the second list will be value oriented representing lenses that I think provide a lot of bang for the buck.

Premium List

Zeiss C/Y 35 f/1.4; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equivalent in terms of field of view and depth of field of a 25 f/1.0 lens (covers sensor but towards corners performance weakens)
Canon EF 50 f/1.2L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 35 f/0.88
Nikon 58 f/1.2; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 40 f/0.88
Canon EF (or FD) 85 f/1.2L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 60 f/0.88
Nikon 105 f/1.4; 4 X 3 FF or squarer 35mm equiv. 80 f/1.0 (note there is not yet an adapter that controls the aperture of this lens)
Sigma Art 135 f/1.8; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 100 f/1.3
Canon EF (or FD) 200 f/1.8L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 145 f/1.3 (note I have only seen a couple samples but I do believe this lens works well)
Olympus OM 250 f/2 ED IF; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 180 f/1.5 (note I haven't actually seen this lens tested, but lenses this long almost always work and I have seen a couple sample of the Oly OM 180 f/2 and 350 f/2.8 that do work).
Canon EF (or FD) 300 f/2.8L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 220 f/2.0
Canon EF (or FD) 400 f/2.8L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. 300 f/2.0

Here is a more value oriented list of what I consider lenses with great bang for the buck

Olympus OM 50 f/2 Macro; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 35 f/1.5. Covers the sensor well and has a nice short minimum focus distance. Great performer that costs less than $500
Minolta MC 58mm f/1.2; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 40 f/0.88. Covers the sensor pretty well but is better for 4 X 5 crops and has a beautiful look. Costs less than $500.
Canon FD 85 f/1.2L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 60 f/0.88. Covers the sensor well and it is a great performer. Obviously very shallow depth of field. Costs less than $1,000.
Olympus OM 100 f/2; 4X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 75 F/1.5. Covers the sensor well and it is an excellent performer. Has some ED glass that holds down some of the aberrations and has a very short minim focus distance of .7m. Costs less than $1,000.
Minolta MD 135 f/2; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 100 f/1.5. Covers the sensor well and it is an excellent performer. Costs less than $1,000. I have this one and love it.
Mamiya 200 f/2.8 APO; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 145 f/2.0. As a medium format 645 lens it obviously covers the sensor well. It is a great performer. It has a bit longer MFD than would be preferable (2.5m) and it is pretty big but otherwise a great option. Costs less than $1,000.
Canon FD 300 f/2.8L; 4 X 3 or squarer FF 35mm equiv. of 220 f/2.0. Covers the sensor very well and is an excellent performer. Costs less than $1,000.



Nov 17, 2017 at 08:29 AM
Desmond79
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #4 · p.12 #4 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Just wondering if anyone has used any of the Mamiya Rz glass with adapter on the gfx? I have a 110 and a 250. was wondering if anyone has used this combination. This would help to to decide on starting with the fuji zoom or just picking up the 63mm now to start?


Nov 17, 2017 at 01:09 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #5 · p.12 #5 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Desmond79 wrote:
Just wondering if anyone has used any of the Mamiya Rz glass with adapter on the gfx? I have a 110 and a 250. was wondering if anyone has used this combination. This would help to to decide on starting with the fuji zoom or just picking up the 63mm now to start?


I have the 65 f/4 L-A and the 140 f/4.5 L-A Macro, but as you know they have no helicoid. I am planning to use them with the Cambo Actus GFX, but I just got it and I haven't set it up yet. I think you would need some sort of bellows system to focus your RZ glass.



Nov 17, 2017 at 01:57 PM
nehemiahphoto
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #6 · p.12 #6 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Steve Spencer wrote:
No, I haven't seen them tested. I think there is good reason to hope they will work, but we won't know until they are tested.


I suspect so as well. A 28-55 and 80-240 with those builds, size and renderings would be awesome.

Also, have people tried RF glass? I know the vignetting even on FF, but...

Edited on Nov 17, 2017 at 04:33 PM · View previous versions



Nov 17, 2017 at 02:51 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #7 · p.12 #7 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


nehemiahphoto wrote:
I suspect so as well. A 28-55 and 80-240 with at those build, size and renderings would be awesome.

Also, have people tried RF glass? I know the vignetting even on FF, but...


I am less sure the 35-70 will be interesting to folks as the Fuji 32-64 seems to be quite good and a similar range. The Zeiss C/Y lens is much lens expensive, however. I think the 100-300 is much more likely to be interesting to folks. By the way, as above if you use the GFX with the 4 X 3 crop or squarer, as I almost always do, then the 35-70 is more of a 25-50 lens and the 100-300 is more like a 75-220, a small difference but it makes them seem more conventional.

As far as rangefinder lenses, in general they are not a good match. I do show examples with the Leica M 50AA and the M 90AA on the previous page. Both have their issues and I doubt I will be using them. much if at all.



Nov 17, 2017 at 04:21 PM
nehemiahphoto
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #8 · p.12 #8 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Steve Spencer wrote:
I am less sure the 35-70 will be interesting to folks as the Fuji 32-64 seems to be quite good and a similar range. The Zeiss C/Y lens is much lens expensive, however. I think the 100-300 is much more likely to be interesting to folks. By the way, as above if you use the GFX with the 4 X 3 crop or squarer, as I almost always do, then the 35-70 is more of a 25-50 lens and the 100-300 is more like a 75-220, a small difference but it makes them seem more conventional.

As far as rangefinder
...Show more

Thanks for the answers Steve. I saw the 90 cron, missed the 50.

If the GFX fuji lenses render like the crop body counterparts, I'd prefer other MF lenses, especially the CY lenses. Not that the Fuji's are at all bad, I just don't quite see the Fuji magic like so many others. They are solid modern offerings though. Honestly, I am more interested in the next gen of Fuji GFX with the newly announced sensor. From my reading and understanding (though I haven't shot!) this iteration uses the older sensor tech, and the newest FF's compare too well.



Nov 17, 2017 at 06:58 PM
JLRII
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #9 · p.12 #9 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


I'd suggest giving some of the native GF glass a try, it really is quite good. I've been very pleased with both the 110mm f/2 and the 32-64mm f/4, and just added the 23mm f/4 - the 32-64mm and 110mm easily come out ahead with respect to quality of rendering when compared to any of the similar full-frame glass I had (Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II and 24-105mm f/4 IS, Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS Macro), and, judging from limited testing, the 23mm has surprisingly smooth bokeh for such a wide lens.

I suspect that you'd run into coverage issues with the C/Y 35-70mm - most of the designed for 35mm zooms that I've tried failed to fully cover the GFX or only had decent coverage at certain focal lengths or focus positions. The only zoom I still have from my Canon EF kit is the 100-400mm IS II, it doesn't fully cover the GFX past about 135mm (that said, I can get nearly 45 usable MP at 400mm when cropped at 4:3).



Nov 17, 2017 at 08:12 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #10 · p.12 #10 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


nehemiahphoto wrote:
Thanks for the answers Steve. I saw the 90 cron, missed the 50.

If the GFX fuji lenses render like the crop body counterparts, I'd prefer other MF lenses, especially the CY lenses. Not that the Fuji's are at all bad, I just don't quite see the Fuji magic like so many others. They are solid modern offerings though. Honestly, I am more interested in the next gen of Fuji GFX with the newly announced sensor. From my reading and understanding (though I haven't shot!) this iteration uses the older sensor tech, and the newest FF's compare too well.


Actually the sensor in the GFX is basically the sensor in the Sony A7r and Nikon D800 made bigger. It is a very nice sensor, but the higher resolution of the new sensor (said to be 100mp) is bound to be nice. The rumors are that the new sensor is back side illuminated as well, so imagine a sensor that is more like the A7r II and A7r III but bigger. Actually if the rumors are correct it will have a slightly higher pixel density than those sensors as well. Being a BSI sensor will also allow the cameras to shoot at up to 6 fps and greatly improve its video capabilities. It should be a very nice upgrade, but I don't expect it in working models until at least 2019.
Personally, I am not interested in the Fuji G mount lenses either largely because they are focus by wire and I am putting a priority on getting lenses with a good manual focus experience and to me that means it isn't focus by wire. A number of the C/Y lenses are excellent choices for the Fuji. The 35 f/1.4 works quite well, not perfectly buy very nicely. The little 45 f/2.8 Tessar is reported to work very well, and less surprisingly the 85 f/1.4, the 100 f/2, and the 135 f/2 are all reported to cover the sensor with no difficulties. I am taking a serious look at the 200 f/2 Aposonnar, which is a lens that has always intrigued me and would make a very interesting 145 f/1.5 when cropped to 4 X 3 or squarer. If you like the C/Y look you should also consider the Hasselblad V series lenses which to my eye have a very similar look and as 6 X 6 lenses cover the sensor quite easily. I have the 40 f/4 CFE IF, the 100 f/3.5 C, and the 180 f/4 CF, and I might well get the 110 f/2 F. Also the Contax 645 lenses share a similar look as well. In that line I have the 45 f/2.8 and the 120 f/4 APO macro, and I might well get the 80 f/2. All of these lenses are Zeiss lenses from a similar era just made for different mounts and film sizes, so it isn't surprising to me they share a fairly similar look.



Nov 17, 2017 at 08:22 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #11 · p.12 #11 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


nehemiahphoto wrote:
If the GFX fuji lenses render like the crop body counterparts, I'd prefer other MF lenses, especially the CY lenses. Not that the Fuji's are at all bad, I just don't quite see the Fuji magic like so many others.



I'm not sure what you mean be "rendering", but in terms of sharpness and contrast, the two GF lenses I have are in a class of their own - I have never used any other lens (including many Zeiss lenses) that matches the clarity and vibrance these lenses produce.



Nov 17, 2017 at 09:02 PM
nehemiahphoto
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #12 · p.12 #12 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


molson wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean be "rendering", but in terms of sharpness and contrast, the two GF lenses I have are in a class of their own - I have never used any other lens (including many Zeiss lenses) that matches the clarity and vibrance these lenses produce.


I just meant I like gentler older lenses. I owned the Milvus 85 1.4. Ultra sharp, very clean, extremely high micro contrast. Not the look I prefer, and hard to process it out. I shoot lots of older glass, with a few exceptions. Nothing wrong with Fuji glass specifically.



Nov 17, 2017 at 09:08 PM
nehemiahphoto
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #13 · p.12 #13 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Steve Spencer wrote:
Actually the sensor in the GFX is basically the sensor in the Sony A7r and Nikon D800 made bigger. It is a very nice sensor, but the higher resolution of the new sensor (said to be 100mp) is bound to be nice. The rumors are that the new sensor is back side illuminated as well, so imagine a sensor that is more like the A7r II and A7r III but bigger. Actually if the rumors are correct it will have a slightly higher pixel density than those sensors as well. Being a BSI sensor will also allow the cameras
...Show more

Good info Steve. I also despise fbw. I am not interested in video, faster FPS or even AF. I am interested in a larger sensor for the look of the files, hopefully more DR, more malleable files and better color. I am very familiar with FF lenses, and I've owned both the CY 35 and 100 (a couple times...). They are spectacular. I do have a CY 100-300 and 50 1.7 right now.

I know the MF lenses and realm far less than well.

I read some time ago--don't remember where--someone had used a contax 85 1.2 on MF and it covered it quite well, but not sure if it was crop MF or "normal" MF. Given the a7 series cameras keep bumping up in size and weight with each generation, the GFX gets more tempting. I am curious how the contax n 85 1.4 would do on the GFX, but that's an awkward FL for me.

I have a very nice FF set up with lots of small RF glass with lovely rendering, but I have an eye half open for the GFX.



Nov 17, 2017 at 09:23 PM
JLRII
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #14 · p.12 #14 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


I can certainly understand the aversion to focus-by-wire, I haven't used a focus-by-wire lens (GF lenses included) that doesn't give me some feeling of disconnectedness while manually focusing. I will say that the native GF lenses seem to have a better FBW implementation that most (at least the focus rings are nicely sized and feel well damped) - but there is no replacement for a good mechanically linked focus ring. I've found myself frequently using the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art for candid images of family, it's usually quite nice on the GFX.


Nov 17, 2017 at 09:46 PM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #15 · p.12 #15 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


I don't like FBW either, but now that I've gotten used to using touch-AF on the GFX, I've had no reason to want to focus those lenses manually.


Nov 18, 2017 at 12:17 AM
Desmond79
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #16 · p.12 #16 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Steve Spencer wrote:
I have the 65 f/4 L-A and the 140 f/4.5 L-A Macro, but as you know they have no helicoid. I am planning to use them with the Cambo Actus GFX, but I just got it and I haven't set it up yet. I think you would need some sort of bellows system to focus your RZ glass.


Thanks for the info Spencer I was looking at the adapters from Fotodiox. I believe the bellows wont be necessary?
it says the focusing Helicoid is built in. will find out next time I stop into B&H. Thanks for the info.

rb/rz adapter



Nov 18, 2017 at 02:26 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #17 · p.12 #17 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Desmond79 wrote:
Thanks for the info Spencer I was looking at the adapters from Fotodiox. I believe the bellows wont be necessary?
it says the focusing Helicoid is built in. will find out next time I stop into B&H. Thanks for the info.

rb/rz adapter


It does look like that could work, but I haven't tried it. If you do get a chance to and could let us know how well it works that would be great.



Nov 18, 2017 at 07:45 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #18 · p.12 #18 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Here are a couple of shots with the Hassy CFE IF 40 f/4. This lens has a good floating element and decent close up performance. These are at or near MFD.










I was shooting this scene with the Leica R 80 and forgot to change the lens identification, but it was with the Hassy 40




Nov 23, 2017 at 09:23 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #19 · p.12 #19 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


Here is a shot with the Hassy CF 180 f/4. This is a very nice lens with very good sharpness. This particular shot shows off how it handle shadow and light. I converted it to B & W as I liked that look.







Nov 23, 2017 at 09:25 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #20 · p.12 #20 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX


The final shot here is with the Hassy C 100 f/3.5. This is a super sharp lens with a great rendering--or at least that is my take so far. This is at or near MFD and the lens does surprisingly well there.







Nov 23, 2017 at 09:27 PM
1       2       3              11      
12
       13              104       105       end






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

1       2       3              11      
12
       13              104       105       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.