molson wrote:
Here's one from yesterday evening; I slightly mis-calulated how fast the tide was coming in, and the water was lapping at the feet of my tripod before this 15-minute exposure ended.
The perspective on this is mind-bending. My brain thinks at first glance that the water is the flat side of an aquarium.
This image is from the barn at the home where my wife grew up. We were recently cleaning it out and I wanted to take some pictures when the dust settled. There is more to process, but I do like this one.
I've shot this local bridge many, many, times, but I just can't help myself when the fall colors kick in. This is a 3 shot vertical pano that I merged in LR.
jbush wrote:
This image is from the barn at the home where my wife grew up. We were recently cleaning it out and I wanted to take some pictures when the dust settled. There is more to process, but I do like this one.
Jon
---------------------------------------------
jbush wrote:
I've shot this local bridge many, many, times, but I just can't help myself when the fall colors kick in.
Jon
Thanks Jon. Terrific images.
I mainly shoot in my local area and return to familiar places quite often.
I am new to MF, got my Fuji GFX gear late last week, so am on a really steep learning curve.
So far I have the 23, 120, and 250mm lens withTC, but am interested in possibly getting more lenses.
Your last two images were shot with the 23 and 45.
What can you tell me about the 45 and other lenses you may have experience with, e.g. the 32-64. TIA.
I mainly shoot in my local area and return to familiar places quite often.
I am new to MF, got my Fuji GFX gear late last week, so am on a really steep learning curve.
So far I have the 23, 120, and 250mm lens withTC, but am interested in possibly getting more lenses.
Your last two images were shot with the 23 and 45.
What can you tell me about the 45 and other lenses you may have experience with, e.g. the 32-64. TIA.
K-H.
Thanks K-H. I am also relatively new to MF though I did have a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder about 25 years ago. I have only had the GFX and lenses since early September and I have not had much time to shoot lately. I started with the 23mm and 32-64mm, but decided I just wasn't happy with the zoom (it's an excellent lens, I just came to the realization that I don't want a zoom and prefer primes for anything between super-wide and 100-120mm) so I returned it and got the 45mm and 63mm primes and, for me anyway, they just feel right...they are light-weight when compared to the zoom, and balance on the camera very nicely (I thought the 32-64mm felt a bit front heavy). Of course they also give you f/2.8 which is a nice bonus. I just recently added the 120mm Macro and feel I am all set for lenses for quite a while. I enjoy using all of them and find they are all quite sharp and focus reasonably well, even when shooting in a poorly lit barn I found little to complain about with focus speed and accuracy.
I'll be able to provide more feedback when I have had more time to shoot, but I would not hesitate a bit in recommending any of the lenses I have and the 45mm will likely be the one that remains on the camera the most.
jbush wrote:
Thanks K-H. I am also relatively new to MF though I did have a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder about 25 years ago. I have only had the GFX and lenses since early September and I have not had much time to shoot lately. I started with the 23mm and 32-64mm, but decided I just wasn't happy with the zoom (it's an excellent lens, I just came to the realization that I don't want a zoom and prefer primes for anything between super-wide and 100-120mm) so I returned it and got the 45mm and 63mm primes and, for me anyway, they just feel right...they are light-weight when compared to the zoom, and balance on the camera very nicely (I thought the 32-64mm felt a bit front heavy). Of course they also give you f/2.8 which is a nice bonus. I just recently added the 120mm Macro and feel I am all set for lenses for quite a while. I enjoy using all of them and find they are all quite sharp and focus reasonably well, even when shooting in a poorly lit barn I found little to complain about with focus speed and accuracy.
I'll be able to provide more feedback when I have had more time to shoot, but I would not hesitate a bit in recommending any of the lenses I have and the 45mm will likely be the one that remains on the camera the most.
"Native Lenses. Very good (the 63) to superb (the 120 macro) image quality. I am not a focus-by-wire fan, however, in this or any other camera. The fact that the 63 doesnt seem to be able to constantly hold the focus point even with the camera continuously on is a worry at best, and a random image-damager at worst. [Added later: Ive now tested the 110/2 and the 23/4, and they are up to the high standards of the 120/4. The 110/2 is in some important ways a better lens than the Zeiss Otus 85/1.4.]"
Jim wrote his remarks about the 63 1.5 years ago.
Do you think these comments about the 63 on the 50S are still valid today.
BTW I updated my 50S to firmware version 3.20.
Thanks again for your advice. With kind regards, Karl-Heinz.
It's interesting that there are a few people on here that have all just gotten into the GFX system... I feel like it may be picking up momentum in the market.
I'm waiting for the 50R next month, but I am going with the 32-64, 45, 65, and just added the 23 through Greentoe this weekend. I don't think I would have gone with the zoom if Fuji had a proper 24mm equivalent lens, but not having it available has forced me into the zoom to cover that focal length. Considering the deals the vendors were offering a few weeks ago, I don't feel like I could go wrong getting all of them anyway, even if I sell one or two off later.
I'm conflicted on the 250mm at the moment, as it feels awfully expensive for such a slow lens. I decided to forego the 250 temporarily and picked up a few longer Mamiya 645 lenses to hold the place until I see what the new zoom looks like in the spring. So, I'll be very interested in comparing the new zoom to the Mamiya 105-210 ULD and possibly the 250 to the Mamiya 300 f5.6, both of which are known to be inexpensive for their quite good performance. Probably won't hold up to the new zoom or the 250 though. I'll try to get those for testing in the spring.
Half of me wants to run this thing entirely with older 645 lenses; fully manual focus, aperture, etc. The other half wants all the gee-whiz of full electronic integration (EXIF, lens profiles, etc).
It's interesting that there are a few people on here that have all just gotten into the GFX system... I feel like it may be picking up momentum in the market.
I'm waiting for the 50R next month, but I am going with the 32-64, 45, 65, and just added the 23 through Greentoe this weekend. I don't think I would have gone with the zoom if Fuji had a proper 24mm equivalent lens, but not having it available has forced me into the zoom to cover that focal length. Considering the deals the vendors were offering a few weeks ago, I don't feel like I could go wrong getting all of them anyway, even if I sell one or two off later.
I'm conflicted on the 250mm at the moment, as it feels awfully expensive for such a slow lens. I decided to forego the 250 temporarily and picked up a few longer Mamiya 645 lenses to hold the place until I see what the new zoom looks like in the spring. So, I'll be very interested in comparing the new zoom to the Mamiya 105-210 ULD and possibly the 250 to the Mamiya 300 f5.6, both of which are known to be inexpensive for their quite good performance. Probably won't hold up to the new zoom or the 250 though. I'll try to get those for testing in the spring.
Half of me wants to run this thing entirely with older 645 lenses; fully manual focus, aperture, etc. The other half wants all the gee-whiz of full electronic integration (EXIF, lens profiles, etc).
"Native Lenses. Very good (the 63) to superb (the 120 macro) image quality. I am not a focus-by-wire fan, however, in this or any other camera. The fact that the 63 doesnt seem to be able to constantly hold the focus point even with the camera continuously on is a worry at best, and a random image-damager at worst. [Added later: Ive now tested the 110/2 and the 23/4, and they are up to the high standards of the 120/4. The 110/2 is in some important ways a better lens than the Zeiss Otus 85/1.4.]"
Jim wrote his remarks about the 63 1.5 years ago.
Do you think these comments about the 63 on the 50S are still valid today.
BTW I updated my 50S to firmware version 3.20.
Thanks again for your advice. With kind regards, Karl-Heinz.
I have not yet seen the issue that Jim mentions regarding the inability of the 63 to hold focus, but, while a very good optic to my eyes, it is also not my most used lens so I don't have a lot of hours on it yet. I expect over time I will have more to say about it, but I'm happy with how it has performed so far and it balances extremely well on the 50S (I'm not thrilled about the external focusing mechanism, but I can overlook that).
I was reviewing images in this thread and had to call out an interesting "connection" between this image by Fishjump and the one labeled "Provincetown Pier" in my second posting on the same page (2).
Provincetown, MA, is on one end of U.S. Route 6 and Bishop, CA, is at the other end...just 3200 miles away.
I have not yet seen the issue that Jim mentions regarding the inability of the 63 to hold focus, but, while a very good optic to my eyes, it is also not my most used lens so I don't have a lot of hours on it yet. I expect over time I will have more to say about it, but I'm happy with how it has performed so far and it balances extremely well on the 50S (I'm not thrilled about the external focusing mechanism, but I can overlook that).
I'm still not sure what to make of it, but I keep looking at it, so something is pulling me in.
