p.31 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Or a mount for my Actus. :-)
mcbroomf wrote:
An RF "style" body to me means mirrorless, so an EVF with high mag for very accurate focusing, no mirror to reduce size, smaller lenses (perhaps). But I'd need to see a lens roadmap with a series of shift and tilt shift lenses included before I'd consider this a useful landscape alternative
p.31 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Edward Castro wrote:
Latest info on fujirumors will make many people happy:
"There will be a range of adapters to connect third-party lenses to the GFX 50S, including leaf shutter lenses for studio and flash work."
Please note that the sensor maker of the camera has given up on adapted lens focusing (peaking has not been improved/modified since its introduction 5 years ago) and made adapting lenses harder every year by removing features previously available (i.e. one touch zoom magnification).
Unfortunately, this sets a dangerous precedent that adapting lenses, going forward, gets better. Clearly, Sony only allowed adapted lenses for A7 because the lens selection was so paltry at the beginning.
I wouldn't be surprised if the next gen A7 cameras will not allow the camera to be used with non 1st party lenses.
Manufacturers HATE when you adapt lenses. It's clearly a stopgap, and I would be prepared for them to take it away.
p.31 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Taran, I undestand and your logic. I am not saying you are wrong, but that, if Sony were foolish enough to adopt that strategy, they would not only lose my business, but also that of many others, who use their A7* as a platform for adapted lenses. Besides, enough brands have now either licensed or reverse-engineered the FE mount (Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, Tokina, Hande, Laowa, Samyang, Techart, Metabones) that this would create a huge mess.
p.31 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
taran wrote:
Please note that the sensor maker of the camera has given up on adapted lens focusing (peaking has not been improved/modified since its introduction 5 years ago) and made adapting lenses harder every year by removing features previously available (i.e. one touch zoom magnification).
Firstly what the sensor maker of the new Fuji camera does with their own bodies does not dictate in any way what Fuji do with their own bodies!
Secondly focus peaking is a feature that essentially works, it's difficult to make it better without significantly more processing, clearly features that generate more reveneue (eye tracking AF) will be prioritised. That's completely different to "giving up" on adapted lenses. One touch zoom magnification is a feature that applies to native and adapted lenses so any changes will clearly impact both.
taran wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the next gen A7 cameras will not allow the camera to be used with non 1st party lenses.
I'd be frankly amazed. Especially as it wouldn't work anyway since you could simply have an adapter which pretended to be any lens you like.
taran wrote:
Manufacturers HATE when you adapt lenses.
Nonsense - Canon could have removed the "release without lens" feature years ago, and would definitely have done so if this were true.
Manufacturers LOVE when you spend money. People who are wanting to adapt lenses probably aren't going to buy native or continue to buy bodies if that option is removed so it would be a highly questionable business decision to do so.
p.31 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
@ taran,
I do not understand your position on focus peaking: it works brilliantly on the X-E2, allowing perfect focus to be nailed every time (assuming we are not shooting sports) so the fact that it has not changed in five years as you say (if this is true) means nothing—it works perfectly as it is.
And the X-E2 has one-touch zoom magnification. Do you know for sure the new Fuji does not have this?
p.31 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
zhangyue wrote:
only until we tried to know. I know 80mm summilux will cover this sensor, and by judge OTUS corner performance and vignette profile, it mostly will cover as well. The big merit of FF lens is speed.
If we were solely talking about MF lens, then I'd just buy OEM ones as they are way smaller and faster or about same speed most likely with better performance.
I assume there are no makers of FF-lens to MF camera adapters today and I wonder if we will see many or anysuch adapters at all.
p.31 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
gdanmitchell wrote:
My general feeling is the one gets miniMF because he/she wants better image quality of one sort or another. For this reason, I don't quite get the idea of considering the use of FF lenses that may compromise resolution and/or light transmission near the corners of the 33 x 44 frame.
When I had my 1D mkIV with its 1.3 crop APS-H sensor I found quite a few APS-C lenses would cover the APS-H sensor (sometimes you had to crop a tiny bit to remove black corners).
However the quality of the areas outside the intended image circle were generally very poor - so I completely agree with you there - it wouldn't be any good for landscape photography for example (unless you had no other option).
However the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I had would work well wide open without black corners, and gave me a 43mm f/1.8 equivalent (something no-one was offering for full frame). And since the corners were generally out of focus at f/1.4 softness wasn't an issue.
That's where I see the uses for mounting full frame lenses on the 44x33 Fuji camera. It would open up a range of looks which are currently not possible on any other system - 40mm f/0.79, 67mm f/0.95, 107 f/1.1 (35mm equivalent).
And before people complain about eyelashes in focus, superfast lenses are not just about extremely shallow depth of field, they also extend the focus distance at which you can still get separation of subject and background.
There's also a 16:9 crop mode, which would use a 44mm x 24.5mm region of the sensor - making it a widescreen 135. This also reduces the required image circle by 5mm!
p.31 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
joakim wrote:
I assume there are no makers of FF-lens to MF camera adapters today and I wonder if we will see many or anysuch adapters at all.
Not currently as all existing MF mounts* have considerably longer flange distance.
But producing a purely mechanical adapter is no particularly difficult so I'm sure someone will make one. And if not just get a spare body cap, cut a hole in it and attach it to a set of bellows!
p.31 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
I think that the adapted lens potential can work a bit differently with the miniMF systems like the Fujifilm than it does with FF and smaller. While I agree that not all users will be served well by those non-native lenses, especially if they surrender automation and communication with the camera electronics, I think that given the kinds of things people are more likley to do with such a camera, that the use of adapted and largely manually operated lenses for things like landscape photography myay not be quite such a stretch.
The Sony example actually tends to support this a bit. While not everyone is happy with adapted lenses there in situations where fast automatic lens operation is critical, among folks like landscape photographers, who most often focus manually, the Sony bodies have been perhaps more popular than in some other kinds of photography.
In addition, while quite a few of us here may regard miniMF format as something to move up to, among current MF (and to some extent LF) photographers, they look at it as something that then can move down to while getting very high quality in a much smaller and lighter package. Quite a few of them already have MF lenses that they would happily use, at least at first, on such a camera.
I have no illusions that this will appeal to all photographers who are attracted to the camera, but I think there could be a significant number. (I have at least one nice MF lens that I'd love to use, a lens that isn't yet covered by anything on the Fujifilm road map.)
Matt Grum wrote:
When I had my 1D mkIV with its 1.3 crop APS-H sensor I found quite a few APS-C lenses would cover the APS-H sensor (sometimes you had to crop a tiny bit to remove black corners).
However the quality of the areas outside the intended image circle were generally very poor - so I completely agree with you there - it wouldn't be any good for landscape photography for example (unless you had no other option).
However the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I had would work well wide open without black corners, and gave me a 43mm f/1.8 equivalent (something no-one was offering for full frame). And since the corners were generally out of focus at f/1.4 softness wasn't an issue.
That's where I see the uses for mounting full frame lenses on the 44x33 Fuji camera. It would open up a range of looks which are currently not possible on any other system - 40mm f/0.79, 67mm f/0.95, 107 f/1.1 (35mm equivalent).
And before people complain about eyelashes in focus, superfast lenses are not just about extremely shallow depth of field, they also extend the focus distance at which you can still get separation of subject and background.
There's also a 16:9 crop mode, which would use a 44mm x 24.5mm region of the sensor - making it a widescreen 135. This also reduces the required image circle by 5mm!...Show more →
I can't say that I disagree with what you are pointing out as far as what is physically/optical possible. My point, I think, is not to deny that but to think about the fact that the appeal of such things is likely to be limited enough in this market that we are unlikely to see adapters for the lenses from a smaller system. On the other hand, given the number and variety of existing MF lenses floating around that could work well and provide good corners and all the rest, I think that is where the adapted lens offerings are going to happen.
p.31 #15 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Matt Grum wrote:
There's also a 16:9 crop mode, which would use a 44mm x 24.5mm region of the sensor - making it a widescreen 135. This also reduces the required image circle by 5mm!
Or if you want to go square, as Kit says,, the image circle is only 46.5 mm, reduced more than 8 mm.
Still 1 / 1.37 crop factor compared to square from 36x24 mm sensor.
p.31 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
gdanmitchell wrote:
My general feeling is the one gets miniMF because he/she wants better image quality of one sort or another. For this reason, I don't quite get the idea of considering the use of FF lenses that may compromise resolution and/or light transmission near the corners of the 33 x 44 frame.
Well,
(a) at 36x24 crop this is still a 30.6 megapixel sensor, that's nothing to sneeze at
(b) Fuji has listened to many of the desires of the potential market for this camera, so there's every reason to hope it has a quality imaging pipeline and uncooked raw at least on par with pro DSLRs (which would make it the only mirrorless option [with a focal plane shutter] which does)
(c) As Fred mentioned, the Tilt/Shifts would *actually* cover 44x33 (and still have room for some movements). A Canon 13mm f/3.3 with some movements? That's pretty frakking cool.
Now, I don't think this camera is a good investment if that's all you're going to use it for. But if you'd also use it "right" (buy native lenses or adapt other MF ones), the above are some neat "bonus" possibilities.
Myself, I think Sony is going to realize that designing cameras to up-sell NEX customers (A7 series) isn't going to get them everywhere they want to go and finally design one to convert pro DSLR users (A9). And by then (or immediately thereafter), Canon and Nikon are finally going to get with the 21st century. I'm leaning toward waiting for that.
p.31 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
alundeb wrote:
Or if you want to go square, as Kit says,, the image circle is only 46.5 mm, reduced more than 8 mm.
Still 1 / 1.37 crop factor compared to square from 36x24 mm sensor.
Yep, by my calculations the image circle would only need to be 1.7mm larger all round, so I'd wager almost all FF lenses would be suitable for this. And assuming the advertised square crop mode is implemented correctly in the electronic viewfinder this could be the square format camera that people have been waiting for for a long time!
p.31 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
naturephoto1 wrote:
I know of no makers, however, Cambo makes lens adapters for mounting FF and MF lens adapters for their Cambo Actus and Cambo Actus DB2 cameras.
p.31 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Matt Grum wrote:
Yep, by my calculations the image circle would only need to be 1.7mm larger all round, so I'd wager almost all FF lenses would be suitable for this. And assuming the advertised square crop mode is implemented correctly in the electronic viewfinder this could be the square format camera that people have been waiting for for a long time!
I didn't think I was going get intrigued by this, but I am. How long will we have to wait for smart adapters to control the aperture of EF and TS-E lenses? They will be operable with dumb adapters, but is very cumbersome to dismount the lens and mount it on another device each time I want to change the aperture.
..or Metabones SpeedDrainer..