p.29 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
GMPhotography wrote:
Rich I already know that . Here is the bottom line. I learned this from the best digital techs from a Phase One as they have been on at least 15 workshops with me and I taught one Phase One Workshop myself. Certainly I may have my wording or definitions maybe incorrect. I'm a photographer not a scientist or math doctorate under my belt . I honestly don't give a hoot about that stuff. But what I care about is what is going on with the gear I'm working with and doing a lot of tests with these folks testing backs/ lens combinations these are the findings that we come up with. Bottom line MF digital is no picnic with the best gear in the business. Things simply start falling apart. The rest is meaningless to me. Charts and math in some of those articles are outdated and I'm not so sure any of them take lens IQ into consideration either. I spotted on one of thos average lenses. I don't shoot average anything. Anyway regardless I don't really give a hoot . I made a comment , go hammered and I hope those that enjoy putting down others enjoyed themselves because I'll never post anything again with them. I said I was out than respect that folks . I know what I know through experience and working with this stuff. I don't belong to photo clubs or have golden rocking chairs. I'm here to help if that's not good enough than I'm gone. I have better things to do as we all do. Have a great day everyone. I'm going to go make money buy the best gear I can and run into more walls to deal with. Lol
Btw this Fuji is very exciting and I'm seriously considering it. Looks very good so far...Show more →
Guy, we all respect your experience, but you dug your heels in early on this and seemed to not be listening. Everyone seems to be responding respectfully. Undoubtedly what you experienced was real, but likely not for the reasons you are attributing them to.
p.29 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Sorry to deviate from the diffraction discussion but the Swedish site Fotosidan had a guy attending a presentation of the GFX camera held by some chief developers and wrote an article about it, here are some of the highlights from that article:
The camera felt very thought through and they have listened to photographers when developing the camera with a lot of details that will please entusiast and pro photographers.
Some examples of this is that you access the battery on the side of the camera and not the bottom, the viewfinder is tiltable and can be rotated when used with an adapter or you can use the camera without the viewfinder and the vertical grip has the same button layout as the ordinary grip.
The LCD on top remains on even when you have turned off the camera and shows some basic info about the camera like how full the memory card is.
Size is roughly like a Canon 5D.
Weather sealed.
Different crop-modes, 3:2, 1:1, 16:9, 5:4, 7:6, 65:24.
Focal-plane shutter, CS lenses supported via adapter.
Buttons and knobs larger than on X-series, camera feels solid to handle
Lenses looks and feels like X lenses only larger.
Lock button for Aperture ring and the aperture ring can also be set to set aperture from camera.
Handling: large and good grip makes the camera feel balanced, decently quiet shutter.
p.29 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
rbf_ wrote:
It likely to get even murkier with Fuji's new LMO deconvolutional algorithms to calculate and then reduce/remove the diffraction effect from the final images using per lens correction data
My feeling looking at Fuji Jpegs over the years is there is a lot going on in-camera...
Given this camera and its target audience, I wonder how many will shoot Jpeg-only? It's the only way to take advantage of the in-camera LMO feature (or convert raw files in-camera). Admittedly, of all the brands, Fuji's Jpegs are some of the best...
Considering also that this camera appears to be non X-Trans CFA, is it possible Fuji is expecting users will be more likely to rely on 3rd party raw converters in their workflow...?
p.29 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
It's not X-trans, that was mentioned in the article I referred to above and the following quote is from a Fuji press release "...will be compatible with various RAW conversion application software". Let's see what that means
p.29 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Overall this looks like a really nice camera. After saying earlier I'm not feeling compelled because of the lens choices (not fast enough), I have a lot of admiration for the quality of camera it looks like they made. I want to get one just to support that.
p.29 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
If I have an 85mm lens with an entrance pupil of 57mm, I have entire coverage of GFX's 50 MP sensor, correct? But the quality of the outer regions--outside FF but within the 33x44 sensor will be lens dependent?
Is this how to think about it?
But I see the CY 50 1.7 has an entrance pupil of 30.4--a bit short of the horizontal 36 of FF, and that obviously gives full FF coverage...so how does this work? Sorry for the simplistic questions, never thought about moving up before.
p.29 #8 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Very well stated from one good FM'er to another.
jhinkey wrote:
Guy, we all respect your experience, but you dug your heels in early on this and seemed to not be listening. Everyone seems to be responding respectfully. Undoubtedly what you experienced was real, but likely not for the reasons you are attributing them to.
p.29 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Matt Grum wrote:
Indeed - I ran the numbers on this yesterday.
It wouldn't just be limited movements - 67.2mm is huge, large enough to cover 645, and larger than you actually need for 12mm shift on full frame. Using the full image circle you would be able to get about +/- 9mm vertical shift and +/- 7mm horizontal shift on a 44x33 sensor!
n.b. the numbers in my original post were based on the image circle used at full shift on full frame.
That's amazing Matt. Thanks for the info.
Someone who already owns all Canon TS-E lenses would already have a great kit for this MF body with 14mm, 18mm, 35mm and 70mm primes! (equiv.)
p.29 #10 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
joakim wrote:
It's not X-trans, that was mentioned in the article I referred to above and the following quote is from a Fuji press release "...will be compatible with various RAW conversion application software". Let's see what that means
For my part, I think that moving away from x-trans if probably just fine. I don't have any issues with the x-trans sensors on my other Fujifilm cameras, but in my experience the advantages are not really significant. It may have some effect on diminishing the potential for visible aliasing effects, but frankly I don't have a problem with that using non-x-trans sensors either. (I shoot another system that also does do AA filtering and that has a traditional Beyer design.)
rscheffler wrote:
My feeling looking at Fuji Jpegs over the years is there is a lot going on in-camera...
Given this camera and its target audience, I wonder how many will shoot Jpeg-only? It's the only way to take advantage of the in-camera LMO feature (or convert raw files in-camera). Admittedly, of all the brands, Fuji's Jpegs are some of the best...
Considering also that this camera appears to be non X-Trans CFA, is it possible Fuji is expecting users will be more likely to rely on 3rd party raw converters in their workflow...?
Considering the reasons that almost everyone cites for their interest in miniMF systems like this one, it is difficult to imagine that any significant number of folks will forego shooting in raw mode.
p.29 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Now I am really really interested in this camera. I hope adapters will be available soon too.
This Fuji platform will be a perfect match for my Leica M system (well, I am just a hobbyist).
p.29 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
The phoblogger is reporting the AF appears to be contrast detect only and is similar in speed to the AF of the original Sigma DP line. It shouldn't be a problem for those using manual focus lenses. Sony will eventually put PDAF on these sensors. It might take some time as they need to get their return on investment for this generation first.
p.29 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
If I have an 85mm lens with an entrance pupil of 57mm, I have entire coverage of GFX's 50 MP sensor, correct? But the quality of the outer regions--outside FF but within the 33x44 sensor will be lens dependent?
Is this how to think about it?
But I see the CY 50 1.7 has an entrance pupil of 30.4--a bit short of the horizontal 36 of FF, and that obviously gives full FF coverage...so how does this work? Sorry for the simplistic questions, never thought about moving up before.
No, the coverage has nothing to do with the entrance pupil, I'm afraid. It's impossible to derive from the lens specifications unless it's explicitly stated, which is rare outside of large format lenses or shift lenses.
Someone is going to have to buy one and try a load of 35mm lenses out for us
p.29 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
GMPhotography wrote:
Granted I'm talking about the best lenses around Rodenstock tech lenses which are of the highest resolving power of most lenses so diffraction along with small microns cause diffraction earlier . Now this was going against mostly 36 Mpx sensor which today at 42 like our Sonys the pixel pitch I think is 4.8 it has gotten closer . If we pair the new 50 1.4 Sony with something like a Rodenstock one may wonder how they would compare.
Mid-zone dip aside, the FE has higher overall resolution at f/4 and f/5.6 than my Rodenstock 60 shooting landscape distances. However, the Rodenstock is so even across the frame, it's still my choice for tripod-mounted landscapes and panos (being about half the weight and size helps make that choice, too). The Sony also maintains better resolution through haze.
Mid-to-close performance is surprising close between the two, with a slight edge going to Rodenstock since it manages to do it without the aid of an FLE. In it's current housing, I can get close to 1:2, but I've got some different parts on the way that should allow for 1:1.
Both the 35 and 60 are fun to shoot on the a7rII and I've learned a lot in getting them to their current frankenlens states, but I'm much more excited to get them remounted to GF and get my hands on this camera where I know they will shine.
p.29 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Come to think of it, if you guys want to buy me a bunch of Actus adapters and loan me all of the lenses you want tested, I'm open to giving you IC calculations using the Actus. You know, just putting it out there.
p.29 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Matt Grum wrote:
No, the coverage has nothing to do with the entrance pupil, I'm afraid. It's impossible to derive from the lens specifications unless it's explicitly stated, which is rare outside of large format lenses or shift lenses.
Someone is going to have to buy one and try a load of 35mm lenses out for us
Thanks Matt. This is sadly what I thought looking at the CY 50 1.7 and FF. It's just trial and error--FM testers will have a new project. I was hoping to jump the gun and figure out a correlation/formula/specs that would indicate coverage. I read a thread last night about a guy who modded the CY 85 1.2 for a larger MF than the GFX as the image circle covered it.
p.29 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
freaklikeme wrote:
Mid-zone dip aside, the FE has higher overall resolution at f/4 and f/5.6 than my Rodenstock 60 shooting landscape distances. However, the Rodenstock is so even across the frame, it's still my choice for tripod-mounted landscapes and panos (being about half the weight and size helps make that choice, too). The Sony also maintains better resolution through haze.
Mid-to-close performance is surprising close between the two, with a slight edge going to Rodenstock since it manages to do it without the aid of an FLE. In it's current housing, I can get close to 1:2, but I've got some different parts on the way that should allow for 1:1.
Both the 35 and 60 are fun to shoot on the a7rII and I've learned a lot in getting them to their current frankenlens states, but I'm much more excited to get them remounted to GF and get my hands on this camera where I know they will shine. ...Show more →
Hi Brad,
I am just going to have to make due with my lowely Rodenstock 50mm f2.8 Apo Rodagon N and Rodenstock 55mm f4.5 Apo Sironar lenses on my A7r/Cambo Actus since I do not have the Rodenstock 60mm HR lens at the present.
