p.68 #1 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Interesting that the G adapter with the mechanical ring is the same $150 than the OM and C/Y and EF adapters which are simple "dumb" adapters, while the Mamiya 645 is $20 more. Machining is the overwhelming majority of the cost; were these adapters to be made in identical quantities the extra aluminum for the greater thickness of the Mamiya adapter would make it cost literally just a few cents more to produce. The multiple parts and assembly of the G would have a far greater impact on production cost. Either they expect the Mamiya to sell in far far lower quantities for some reason or they think they can get away with a greater profit margin there because it's physically bigger.
Steve Spencer wrote:
That is good news, but by Contax, I wonder what Contax mount. I assume Contax/Yashica, but I would also like to see Contax 645--I have my eye on a Zeiss 120 f/4 Macro APO in Contax 645. Still this is a good start. I hope Leica R comes soon, Lee, but some of the long OM lenses like the 180 f/2, 250 f/2, & 350 f/2.8 ought to be quite compelling on the GFX, and the 24 and 35 shift lenses might interest some people too.
Yeah it's C/Y. I agree about some OM lenses being *interesting* candidates (I'd love to have the 250) but I would've thought they'd be one of the much *less common* candidates (I'm not sure I've ever seen a 250 listed for sale).
p.68 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Steve Spencer wrote:
That is good news, but by Contax, I wonder what Contax mount. I assume Contax/Yashica, but I would also like to see Contax 645--I have my eye on a Zeiss 120 f/4 Macro APO in Contax 645. Still this is a good start. I hope Leica R comes soon, Lee, but some of the long OM lenses like the 180 f/2, 250 f/2, & 350 f/2.8 ought to be quite compelling on the GFX, and the 24 and 35 shift lenses might interest some people too.
If they have contax 645 adapter, one less reason to not order it. If they have S adapter, I will place order of this fuji now.
Contax120 is one of best lens I ever touched. It is not saying its optics have no peer, but overall total package, rendering, sharpness, handling, and versatility.
p.68 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Lee Saxon wrote:
Interesting that the G adapter with the mechanical ring is the same $150 than the OM and C/Y and EF adapters which are simple "dumb" adapters, while the Mamiya 645 is $20 more. Machining is the overwhelming majority of the cost; were these adapters to be made in identical quantities the extra aluminum for the greater thickness of the Mamiya adapter would make it cost literally just a few cents more to produce. The multiple parts and assembly of the G would have a far greater impact on production cost. Either they expect the Mamiya to sell in far far lower quantities for some reason or they think they can get away with a greater profit margin there because it's physically bigger.
Yeah it's C/Y. I agree about some OM lenses being *interesting* candidates (I'd love to have the 250) but I would've thought they'd be one of the much *less common* candidates (I'm not sure I've ever seen a 250 listed for sale). ...Show more →
I am pretty sure G adapter will be dumb one as well. Unless it is a E type.
p.68 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
zhangyue wrote:
I am pretty sure G adapter will be dumb one as well. Unless it is a E type.
It's dumb but it has a mechanical ring to adjust the aperture, like the Metabones G adapter.
Feb 21, 2017 at 07:08 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.68 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Lee Saxon wrote:
Interesting that the G adapter with the mechanical ring is the same $150 than the OM and C/Y and EF adapters which are simple "dumb" adapters, while the Mamiya 645 is $20 more. Machining is the overwhelming majority of the cost; were these adapters to be made in identical quantities the extra aluminum for the greater thickness of the Mamiya adapter would make it cost literally just a few cents more to produce. The multiple parts and assembly of the G would have a far greater impact on production cost. Either they expect the Mamiya to sell in far far lower quantities for some reason or they think they can get away with a greater profit margin there because it's physically bigger.
Yeah it's C/Y. I agree about some OM lenses being *interesting* candidates (I'd love to have the 250) but I would've thought they'd be one of the much *less common* candidates (I'm not sure I've ever seen a 250 listed for sale). ...Show more →
I think the Mamiya probably costs the extra 20 bucks because it includes a tripod foot. It looks like the others don't. Just these adapters give us a lot of options. I'm not sure how Canon EF lenses are going to work without an aperture ring, however. At the Fotodiox website it says for all these adapters that lenses without an aperture ring will stop down to the smallest aperture by default. I sure hope there is a way to override that default, because I don't think I have ever used the smallest aperture on any of my lenses and if you can't override that default it would pretty much make the adapter useless for lenses without an aperture ring including all Canon EF lenses. Assuming you can use an aperture other than the smallest if we just include the announced Fuji lenses, Hasselblad HC lenses, Mamiya 645 lenses, Canon EF lenses, Nikon G lenses, Olympus OM lenses and Contax/Yashica lenses that we know have a large enough image circle we would have:
17mm f/4 EF (FF 35mm equiv. of 14 f/3.3 even as a skinny rectangle crop)
19mm? - I don't think the Nikon 19 f/4E will work as it is an E lens, but if it does that would give a 16mm equiv.
23mm - Native Fuji GF 23 f/4 by the end of the year (FF 35mm equiv. of 19 f/3.3 as a skinny rectangle)
24mm - Hassy HCD 24 f/4.8; Canon 24 f/3.5 TSE II; Olympus OM 24 f/3.5 shift; Nikon 24 f/3.5D (FF 35mm equiv. of 20mm as a skinny rectangle)
28mm - Hassy HC 28 f/4 (if they make an Leica R adapter the 28 super angulon as well (FF 35mm equiv of 23mm as a skinny rectangle) The Schneider 28 f/4.5 Tilt Shift in Nikon Mount should also cover the image circle.
35mm - Hassy HC 35 f/3.5; Mamiya 645 35 f/3.5; Zeiss C/Y 35 f/2.8 PC; Olympus OM 35 f/2.8 shift; Hartblei super rotator in Nikon mount (FF 35mm equivalent of 29mm as a skinny rectangle; 26mm as 4 X 3 or squarer the f/2.8 lenses would make a pretty fast 26 f/2 equiv.)
40mm - Zeiss glass 40 f/4 IF Hartblei Super Rotator in Nikon mount; (FF 35mm equiv of 33 f/3.3 as skinny rectangle and 29 f/2.9 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
45mm - Native Fuji GF 45 f/2.8 by end of the year; Canon EF 45 f/2.8 T/S; Nikon 45 f/2.8 PC: Mamiya 645 45 f/2.8; Hartblei 45 f/3.5 Medium format Super rotator in Nikon mount (FF 35mm equiv. of 37 as a skinny rectangle and 33 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
50mm - Hassy HC 50 f/3.5; Mamiya 645 50 f/4 shift (FF 35mm equiv of 41 as a skinny rectangle and 37 as 4 X 3 or squarer)
55mm - Mamiya 645 55 f/2.8 (FF 35mm equiv of 45 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 40 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer)
63mm - Native Fuji GF 63 f/2.8 - (FF 35mm equiv of 52 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 46 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer)
65mm - Hartblei 65 f/3.5 Super Rotator in Nikon Mount (FF 35mm equiv. of 53 f/2.9 as a skinny rectangle and 47 f/2.6 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
70mm? - Mamiya 645 makes a 70 f/2.8 leaf shutter lens, but I don't think the leaf shutter will function with the fotodiox adapter, but we will see.
80mm - Hassy HC 80 f/2.8; Mamiya 645 80 f/4 Macro; Mamiya 645 80 f/2.8; Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9; Zeiss glass Hartblei 80 f/2.8 Super Rotator (FF 35mm equiv. of 66 as a skinny rectangle and 58 as 4 X 3 or squarer--and Lee the Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9 gives you a quite decent fast normal with an equivalent of 58 f/1.4 framed as 4 X 3 or squarer).
85mm - Nikon 85 f/2.8 PC (FF 35mm equiv. of 70 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 62 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
90mm - Canon 90 f/2.8 TS - (FF 35mm equiv. of 74 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 66 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer). The Schneider 90 f/4.5 TS in Nikon mount should also cover the image circle.
100mm - Hassy HC 100 f/2.2 (FF 35mm equiv. of 82 f/1.8 as a skinny rectangle and 73 f/1.6 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
110mm - Native Fuji GF 110 f/2 by the end of the year; Mamiya 645 110 f/2.8 (FF 35mm equiv. of 90 as a skinny rectangle and 80 as 4 X 3 or squarer). The f/2 will be a quite fast f/1.5-1.6 equiv. depending on the aspect ratio
120mm - Native Fuji GF 120 f/4 Macro; Hassy HC 120 f/4 Macro; Mamiya 645 120 f/4 APO Macro; Zeiss Glass Hartblei 120 f/4 Macro Super Rotator in Nikon Mount; Hartblei 120 f/2.8 Super Rotator in Nikon Mount (FF 35mm equiv. of 99 f/3.3 as a skinny rectangle and 88 f/2.9 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
135mm - Reports are that the Zeiss 135mm f/2 APO will cover the image circle. (FF 35mm equiv. of 111 f/1.6 as a skinny rectangle and 99 f/1.5 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
145mm - Mamiya 645 145 f/4 Soft focus (FF 35mm equiv. of 119 f/3.3 as a skinnier rectangle and 106 f/2.9 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
150mm - Hassy HC 150 f/3.2; Mamiya 645 150 f/2.8; Mamiya 645 150 f/3.5 (FF 35mm equiv of 123mm as a skinny rectangle and 109mm as 4 X 3 or squarer).
180mm - I strongly suspect the Olympus OM 180 f/2 will cover the image circle. It would have a FF 35mm equiv of 148 f/1.6 as a skinny rectangle and 131 f/1.5 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
200mm - Mamiya 645 200 f/2.8 APO (FF 35mm equiv of 165 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 146 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer). The Zeiss C/Y 200 f/2 APO will likely cover the image circle as well and would be ridiculously fast.
210mm - Hassy HC 210 f/4; Mamiya 645 210 f/4 (FF 35mm equiv of 173 f/3.3 as a skinny rectangle and 153 f/2.9 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
250mm - I strongly suspect the Olympus OM 250 f/2 will cover the image circle. It would have a FF 35mm equiv. of 205 f/1.6 as a skinnier rectangle and 180 f/1.5 as 4 X 3 or squarer).
300mm - Hassy HC 300 f/4.5; Mamiya 645 300 f/5.6; Mamiya 300 645 f/2.8 APO (FF 35mm equiv. of 247mm as a skinny rectangle and 219mm as 4 x 3 or squarer). The 300 f/2.8 would be the equivalent of a 247 f/2.3 or a 219 f/2 depending on the aspect ratio. The Zeiss C/Y mount 300 f/2.8 APO will likely cover the image circle as well.
350mm - I am pretty sure the Olympus OM 350 f/2.8 will cover the image circle. It would have a FF 35mm equiv. of 288 f/2.3 as a skinny rectangle and 254 f/2 as 4 X 3 or squarer.
500mm - Mamiya 645 500 f/5.6; Mamiya 500 f/4.5 APO (FF 35mm equiv. of 411mm ask a skinny rectangle and 365mm as 4 X 3 or squarer). The f/4.5 would even by a relatively fast f/3.3-3.7 depending on the aspect ratio. I am pretty sure the Zeiss C/Y 500 f/5.6 APO will also cover the image circle.
800mm - I am pretty sure the Zeiss C/Y mount 800 f/8 APO will cover the image circle. It would have quite long reach with a FF 35mm equiv of 658 f/6.6 as a skinny rectangle and 584 f/5.8 as 4 X 3 or squarer.
That is a lot of capabilities and it looks like Fotodiox will add adapters for Pentax 645; Pentax 66; Hasselblad C; Leica R; Leica M; and Canon FD before too long (they were listed in one advertisement). So, that would add even more possibilities. So, we have basically 14 to 600mm FF 35mm equivalents available and pretty much every focal length has at least one solid option. It is also quite possible to put together a low priced set of decent lenses. Longer than 85mm portrait teles are available with shallower depth of field capabilities than FF 35mm. There are also lenses which are at least very close in shallow depth of field to 85ish and 55ish f/1.4 FF 35mm lenses. At 35, 28, and 24mm FF 35mm equiv are faster with shallower depth of field capabilities than what is currently available, but with a 4 x 3 or squarer crop at these focal lengths you can at least get the depth of field capabilities of the equivalent of f/2 on a FF 35mm camera. So for alt shooters things are shaping up very nicely for this camera.
p.68 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
For those who can't wait, remember that Leitax offers conversion mounts for many brands of lenses, including some to convert Leica R lenses to a Nikon F mount. For example, I converted my Leica R 28mm Super Angulon PC lens and it works great on my A7R with a Nikon lens adapter.
p.68 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Steve Spencer wrote:
That is a lot of capabilities...
By putting together that list you have out-nerded me, sir. Well done.
The 19/4 is definitely not going to work. The Nikon adapter has a mechanical thing for the lever in the G lenses but Nikon E lenses are going to be as useless as Canon EF lenses. Apparently there's some trick with setting the aperture on a Canon body and then removing it with the aperture preview button depressed? I don't know if Nikon E lenses will do anything like that but I won't be finding out because ain't nobody got time for that.
Also, the Schneider 90 is definitely going to work. It's a rehoused 645 lens so it has even more IC than the CaNikon 85/90 T/S (72 vs 63 IIRC?). BTW I am quite pleased with it; I have a few nice shots already and as soon as I get decent weather again and can get a few more I'll be putting together a post
p.68 #8 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
For those of you using adapted lenses... aren't you concerned that Sony hasn't worked on peaking for at least 4 years, for its own cameras? Why would anyone think the adapted lens experience wouldn't be awful? like on A7 series. No zoom one touch, limited peaking colors, no magnified areas, etc etc.
There is no way in hell Sony will allow a better MF experience than on its own cameras, imho, and that sucks.
p.68 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
I wouldn't worry this. The Sony cameras peaking appears to only consider contrast differences between pixels on the same line, parallel to the long edge of the frame, whereas Magic Lantern on a Canon camera which does not even offer focus peaking, does it differently, and better.
I don't think that Sony will have much to say about how Fuji does focus peaking.
p.68 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
taran wrote:
Why would anyone think the adapted lens experience wouldn't be awful? like on A7 series.
Maybe because most people don't think that the adapted lens experience with the Sony a7 ist awful? Infact I enjoy it a lot. Sure there would be room for improvement but that doesn't mean that the experience is bad as it is.
p.68 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
It will be interesting to find out what will be the filter thickness of Fuji GFX. If I remember correctly Fuji X-series is very similar to Sony, ~1.6mm or even thicker, so my guess GFX will be similar as well. So that could leave potentially lot of disappointed users for adapted lenses if there is going to be same kind of issues due to filter stack...
p.68 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
taran wrote:
There is no way in hell Sony will allow a better MF experience than on its own cameras, imho, and that sucks.
The sensor division is really carrying Sony at the moment, the camera division is tiny in comparison so I think if enabling features would sell more sensors they would do so without a second thought.
However, the only thing I can think of which would seriously improve the manual focus experience on Sony cameras would be picture-in-picture style focus magnification (where you magnify a small square but you can still see the zoomed out image behind.
This is probably impossible though without a specialised readout mode (you can't read the whole sensor in full resolution at the refresh rate of the EVF, so you have the option of line skipping or reading out a small window).
That said there is nothing preventing Sony, or Fuji or anyone else from implementing as many peaking colours as they feel like, or going to full magnification with one button press instead of 2.
Tmuussoni wrote:
It will be interesting to find out what will be the filter thickness of Fuji GFX. If I remember correctly Fuji X-series is very similar to Sony, ~1.6mm or even thicker, so my guess GFX will be similar as well. So that could leave potentially lot of disappointed users for adapted lenses if there is going to be same kind of issues due to filter stack...
I don't see why there would be any issues with the filter stack thickness unless you were going to try and use some M-mount lenses! The filter stack isn't a problem with DSLRs, and all legacy medium format lenses are designed for even longer back focus distances.
The thing I think could be a problem is for people hoping to use it as a digital back for a view camera.
Feb 23, 2017 at 11:39 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.68 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Tmuussoni wrote:
It will be interesting to find out what will be the filter thickness of Fuji GFX. If I remember correctly Fuji X-series is very similar to Sony, ~1.6mm or even thicker, so my guess GFX will be similar as well. So that could leave potentially lot of disappointed users for adapted lenses if there is going to be same kind of issues due to filter stack...
But I guess soon we will know more
I depends on what you are adapting. If you are adapting Medium Format lenses I don't think you will have any issues. First MF lenses have slower apertures which reduces the chance of problems. Second, MF lenses have very long exit pupils (this is because they have a long registration distance) and that is a big reason there won't be issues. Finally, one uses less wide angle lenses on MF, and this of course means less steep ray angles. For all these reasons I don't think there will be any issues with adapted MF lenses. I doubt there will be any issues with adapted 35mm SLR lenses either. Even these have pretty long exit pupils and won't be that wide of angle lenses. If people try to use 35mm rangefinder lenses, I don't think they will work. First, I don't think any of them will have a big enough image circle and that will be especially true of wider angle lenses. If people crop the images they might be able to use some of the longer 35mm rangefinder lenses, but these longer lenses will have longer exit pupils and likely won't show effects of the cover glass. I expect the cover glass will be a minor issue at most on the GFX.
p.68 #15 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Matt Grum wrote:
I don't see why there would be any issues with the filter stack thickness unless you were going to try and use some M-mount lenses! The filter stack isn't a problem with DSLRs, and all legacy medium format lenses are designed for even longer back focus distances.
As far as the really severe color shifts and smearing, yeah, but there's a huge difference between Roger's MTF charts for the Otus with and without a piece of optical glass to simulate the coverglass.
I don't know if it'll be a dealbreaker for many lenses but it could be noticeable.
Feb 23, 2017 at 05:50 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.68 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Lee Saxon wrote:
As far as the really severe color shifts and smearing, yeah, but there's a huge difference between Roger's MTF charts for the Otus with and without a piece of optical glass to simulate the coverglass.
I don't know if it'll be a dealbreaker for many lenses but it could be noticeable.
Lee, the issue with the Otus is that it is a very fast lens. If you look at Roger's third installment on the sensor glass thickness here:
You will see that for a lens at f/1.4 with a cover glass that is 2mm off you get a huge reduction in contrast for 40 lp/mm and that reduction is in the center and across the whole frame. The good news is that from about f/2 this effect is no longer an issue and since there is no MF glass that is really faster than f/2 this effect won't be an issue for people adapting MF lenses to the GFX.
p.68 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Sorry if this has been referenced by someone else already, but here's a post that illustrates how even some non-TS EF mount lenses can be adapted to the GFX.
p.68 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Steve Spencer wrote:
Lee, the issue with the Otus is that it is a very fast lens. If you look at Roger's third installment on the sensor glass thickness here:
You will see that for a lens at f/1.4 with a cover glass that is 2mm off you get a huge reduction in contrast for 40 lp/mm and that reduction is in the center and across the whole frame. The good news is that from about f/2 this effect is no longer an issue and since there is no MF glass that is really faster than f/2 this effect won't be an issue for people adapting MF lenses to the GFX.
...Show more →
This may not matter one bit, depending how much difference there is between the sensor stack Otus is designed for (either Canon or Nikon) and the sensor stack of the Fuji.
Feb 24, 2017 at 10:26 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.68 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
MAubrey wrote:
This may not matter one bit, depending how much difference there is between the sensor stack Otus is designed for (either Canon or Nikon) and the sensor stack of the Fuji.
I think the issue with the Otus on the GFX will be whether the image circle is big enough. It may be, but it may not be. What I was referring to, however, was the issue with the Otus in Roger's testing with different glass in the path and the issue when either too much glass (4mm in Roger's test) or too little (no glass in roger's test) are the one's described in the link I provided. Here you see effect until f/2 or so and the effect is across the whole image field including the centre.
Feb 25, 2017 at 01:13 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.68 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
bvphotos wrote:
Sorry if this has been referenced by someone else already, but here's a post that illustrates how even some non-TS EF mount lenses can be adapted to the GFX.
I think this is interesting, but the difficulty with EF lenses is how do you set the aperture. The fotodiox adapter that has been announced doesn't have any way to do that, and metabones, for now anyway, has told people they do not intend to make an electronic EF lens to GFX camera adapter. Maybe someone else will make such an adapter. Novoflex might be a good candidate. They generally make good adapters and they have an electronic EF lens to Leica SL camera adapter. If you like the Sigma 85 results in the link you might be able to use a different mount. I think you might be better off with the Nikon mount, but I don't know the details of that particular lens in Nikon mount and the details do matter for adapting Nikon lenses. Some have aperture rings and would be easy to mount and use others have electronic control of the aperture.
Infact I enjoy it a lot. Sure there would be room for improvement but that doesn't mean that the experience is bad as it is.