Interesting findings. The GFX series really opens up some interesting possibilities legacy lenses. Would be handy to have a good summary of findings somewhere .
Phillip Reeve wrote:
Interesting findings. The GFX series really opens up some interesting possibilities legacy lenses. Would be handy to have a good summary of findings somewhere .
Phillip Reeve wrote:
Interesting findings. The GFX series really opens up some interesting possibilities legacy lenses. Would be handy to have a good summary of findings somewhere .
it seems like it might be possible to have a nice 3 lens setup with some shockingly cheap and tiny 35mm lenses. i think my favorite might be the rokkor 55/1.7 again...
Phillip Reeve wrote:
Interesting findings. The GFX series really opens up some interesting possibilities legacy lenses. Would be handy to have a good summary of findings somewhere .
Let me summarize the FF 35mm lenses that I think are good options with full coverage or close to full coverage (at least 4 x 5 coverage) and who I have seen present pictures with them:
I will be adding more lenses, soon, and so will Sebboh as we tested together. But I do notice the 75 lux isn't listed above, or Minolta 58 1.2 though I reported on them already (unless I overlooked them).
The 75 Lux hard vignettes at portrait distance but is useable with light cropping--I posted a photos a couple pages back. It's pretty beautiful on the GFX.
The Minolta 58 1.2 hard vignettes more, and even before the hard vingetting, the corners get wonky. It's not very usable outside the FF images circle essentially and a poor choice on the GFX line in book. Sebboh can tell you good things above the Minolta 55 1.7, but I'll let him input on it as it's his and I haven't shot it.
I have updated the list adding a reference to your post for the Minolta MC 58 f/1.2, which was there at least as updated the list and after going through the photos, and I added the Leica M 75 lux as well with a reference to your post as well.
I will be adding more lenses, soon, and so will Sebboh as we tested together. But I do notice the 75 lux isn't listed above.
The 75 Lux hard vignettes, though not much, at portrait distance but is useable with light cropping--I posted a photo a couple pages back. It's pretty beautiful on the GFX.
The Minolta 58 1.2 hard vignettes more, and even before the hard vingetting, the corners get wonky. It's not very usable outside the FF images circle essentially and a poor choice on the GFX line in book. Sebboh can tell you good things above the Minolta 55 1.7, but I'll let him input on it as it's his and I haven't shot it.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
...The Minolta 58 1.2 hard vignettes more, and even before the hard vingetting, the corners get wonky...
Like a lot of adapted lenses used in this thread, the Minolta 58 1.2 works well at close distance when the vignetting adds to the look of the image (many examples in the GFX FB group). I'll go back and re-test mine – if there was a hard vignette, a minor crop removed it. Wondering out loud if there could be minor variations between versions over the years. In any case, there is an artistic use for the Minolta 58 1.2 outside the bounds of the 35mm frame.
As a general statement for people new to adapting to 44x33: Most all 135-format lenses from 50mm and wider will have soft to smeared corners (often but not always with heavy vignetting), so when I see wide angle lenses in a list, I assume no one is shooting infinity landscapes at full 44x33 with them unless they are going for a casual/vintage look. Also most all of these lenses can be shot at 1:1, 16:9, or XPan ratio with great results. For example, the Contax Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 (C/Y) has unusable corner smearing for infinity shots even stopped down to f11, but can be cropped somewhere between 44x33 and 135-format and look great. You can even use it full width XPan ratio and the farthest edges are no more soft than the X100F. Another way to cheat the corner performance and vignetting on many lenses is to use them with extension tubes.
Using distortion correction in C1/LR/PS on the wide lenses (either by profile or by generic) often will hide the darkest hard corners left over after light falloff/vignette correction. Lenses with a profile available in C1/LR/PS are much easier to correct light falloff for since the profile is applying a custom correction based on the lens – makes a big difference compared to just using the Vignette slider. (Many of the Contax Zeiss C/Y lenses have Zeiss ZE/ZF-equivalent profiles that work perfectly.)
It will be interesting to see if the BSI sensor on the GFX 100 helps improve corner performance on adapted lenses.
I am growing more and more interested in a GFX (R). It would make the initial financial pain more bearable if I could buy a pre-owned body and use some of my adapted (mostly Contax C/Y) MF lenses.
Of all lenses in the current list, the Contax 100/2 is the lens I think I would really enjoy on a GFX. The 100/2 may be the "best" lens I have ever owned from a technical standpoint (Sharp across the frame at f/2, well corrected, and much better than average bokeh "for a Zeiss"), and I imagine it would perform very well on a GFX body.
I tried the link to jasvyphoto's images, but I could not find the 100/2 set! Anyone else use a C/Y 100/2 on a GFX? Is the lack of IBIS an issue? Manual focusing adapted lenses on my A7ii is a dream because IBIS locks the image in the finder...
Activatedfx wrote:
I am growing more and more interested in a GFX (R). It would make the initial financial pain more bearable if I could buy a pre-owned body and use some of my adapted (mostly Contax C/Y) MF lenses.
Of all lenses in the current list, the Contax 100/2 is the lens I think I would really enjoy on a GFX. The 100/2 may be the "best" lens I have ever owned from a technical standpoint (Sharp across the frame at f/2, well corrected, and much better than average bokeh "for a Zeiss"), and I imagine it would perform very well on a GFX body.
I tried the link to jasvyphoto's images, but I could not find the 100/2 set! Anyone else use a C/Y 100/2 on a GFX? Is the lack of IBIS an issue? Manual focusing adapted lenses on my A7ii is a dream because IBIS locks the image in the finder......Show more →
I owned the CY 100/2 a couple times--it's a fabulous, fabulous lens. Do you have a German of Japanese version? I too wanted to see how it did in on the GFX 50R. I have loved how my short teles performed on the GFX.
The lack of IBIS is not an issue for my Mino 100/2, 75/1.4 Lux and Sonnetar 75/1.5. Given the weight and not crazy high pixel density, I find I can hold the 50R at about FL equivalent speed (1/100 shutter speed for the Mino) or less and get stable images. Unlike my RX1R2 where I need at least 1/60th to get consistent sharp images despite the 35mm FL.
Also, I just posted my 50R on the B/S board last night, just to tempt you
Contax Distagon 28mm F2 - Almost Well Cover at far distance, well cover at mid and close distance, but corner image quality fall, stop down can only solve a bit.
Contax Distagon 35mm F1.4 - Almost Well Cover at far distance, well cover at mid and close distance, but corner image quality fall, stop down can only solve a bit. But Overall better than 28mm F2
Contax tessar 45mm F2.8 - Well Cover
Contax Planar 50mm F1.4 - Not As Good as the 35 1.4 but still well cover.
Contax S-Planar 60mm F2.8 - Well Cover without any Problem
Contax Planar 85mm F1.4 - Well Cover without any Problem
Contax Planar 100mm F2 - Well Cover
Contax S-Planar 100mm F2.8 - Well Cover"
highdesertmesa wrote:
Like a lot of adapted lenses used in this thread, the Minolta 58 1.2 works well at close distance when the vignetting adds to the look of the image (many examples in the GFX FB group). I'll go back and re-test mine – if there was a hard vignette, a minor crop removed it. Wondering out loud if there could be minor variations between versions over the years. In any case, there is an artistic use for the Minolta 58 1.2 outside the bounds of the 35mm frame.
As a general statement for people new to adapting to 44x33: Most all 135-format lenses from 50mm and wider will have soft to smeared corners (often but not always with heavy vignetting), so when I see wide angle lenses in a list, I assume no one is shooting infinity landscapes at full 44x33 with them unless they are going for a casual/vintage look. Also most all of these lenses can be shot at 1:1, 16:9, or XPan ratio with great results. For example, the Contax Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 (C/Y) has unusable corner smearing for infinity shots even stopped down to f11, but can be cropped somewhere between 44x33 and 135-format and look great. You can even use it full width XPan ratio and the farthest edges are no more soft than the X100F. Another way to cheat the corner performance and vignetting on many lenses is to use them with extension tubes.
Using distortion correction in C1/LR/PS on the wide lenses (either by profile or by generic) often will hide the darkest hard corners left over after light falloff/vignette correction. Lenses with a profile available in C1/LR/PS are much easier to correct light falloff for since the profile is applying a custom correction based on the lens – makes a big difference compared to just using the Vignette slider. (Many of the Contax Zeiss C/Y lenses have Zeiss ZE/ZF-equivalent profiles that work perfectly.)
It will be interesting to see if the BSI sensor on the GFX 100 helps improve corner performance on adapted lenses....Show more →
Interesting thought on the different Minolta versions potentially offering different coverage. I will try to post an uncropped Minolta 58 1.2 shot this evening and figure out which version of the lens I have. Given the coverage and other options in the 50mm realm, I didn't bother shooting crops. I tried it about 9-15 feet. How close is close distance to you?
May 09, 2019 at 10:32 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
sebboh wrote:
it seems like it might be possible to have a nice 3 lens setup with some shockingly cheap and tiny 35mm lenses. i think my favorite might be the rokkor 55/1.7 again...
Lovely shots, as usual Derek. I wonder about the small and cheap options and what you had in mind. My take has always been with FF 35mm lens you can get some good bargains. You can get some unique looks to supplement the relatively small number of GF lenses. You can get some that are small size if you want to go small. But ultimately FF 35mm lenses wider than about 100mm end up having significant weaknesses when focussed at infinity.
I would love to be wrong about that and perhaps some of the lenses that you have just been testing may be the exceptions a number of us have been looking for. Does the Pentax 31 f/1.8 Limited or the Voigtlander M 35 f/1.7 hold up on the wide end when shot at infinity? How about the Minolta MC 55 f/1.7? Have you tried the new Voigtlander M 50 f/1.2 yet? I have heard good things about that lens on the GFX, but I haven't seen hardly any samples yet and none focussed on infinity. I haven't found a 50mm that totally works for infinity focus yet. If can imagine adding the right 100mm to some sort of combination of those lenses might actually work, but I am quite curious to what you were thinking.
Activatedfx wrote:
I am growing more and more interested in a GFX (R). It would make the initial financial pain more bearable if I could buy a pre-owned body and use some of my adapted (mostly Contax C/Y) MF lenses.
Of all lenses in the current list, the Contax 100/2 is the lens I think I would really enjoy on a GFX. The 100/2 may be the "best" lens I have ever owned from a technical standpoint (Sharp across the frame at f/2, well corrected, and much better than average bokeh "for a Zeiss"), and I imagine it would perform very well on a GFX body.
I tried the link to jasvyphoto's images, but I could not find the 100/2 set! Anyone else use a C/Y 100/2 on a GFX? Is the lack of IBIS an issue? Manual focusing adapted lenses on my A7ii is a dream because IBIS locks the image in the finder......Show more →
---------------------------------------------
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I owned the CY 100/2 a couple times--it's a fabulous, fabulous lens. Do you have a German of Japanese version? I too wanted to see how it did in on the GFX 50R. I have loved how my short teles performed on the GFX.
The lack of IBIS is not an issue for my Mino 100/2, 75/1.4 Lux and Sonnetar 75/1.5. Given the weight and not crazy high pixel density, I find I can hold the 50R at about FL equivalent speed (1/100 shutter speed for the Mino) or less and get stable images. Unlike my RX1R2 where I need at least 1/60th to get consistent sharp images despite the 35mm FL.
Also, I just posted my 50R on the B/S board last night, just to tempt you ...Show more →
I bought a mint condition with box Contax 100 f/2 MMJ from eBay the other day, and it's still en route to me from Japan. I'll post samples when it gets here
MMJ version of the Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 35mm f/1.4.
Had to return my eBay AEG version due to a bad aperture rubber ring. The rendering is different between the two. The MMJ is much sharper and is more modern – reminds me of the color/contrast of the GF lenses. The AEG/J seems to have a more soft/organic bokeh rendering. Both lenses control CA very well at f/1.4 – much better than some of the later Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses like the 50 1.4 and 100 f/2. The CA on the AE is more green while the CA on the MM still favors green but splits some to violet, which I don't like as much. You can't really tell the difference in the CA at normal viewing distance, though, only at 1:1.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I owned the CY 100/2 a couple times--it's a fabulous, fabulous lens. Do you have a German of Japanese version? I too wanted to see how it did in on the GFX 50R. I have loved how my short teles performed on the GFX.
The lack of IBIS is not an issue for my Mino 100/2, 75/1.4 Lux and Sonnetar 75/1.5. Given the weight and not crazy high pixel density, I find I can hold the 50R at about FL equivalent speed (1/100 shutter speed for the Mino) or less and get stable images. Unlike my RX1R2 where I need at least 1/60th to get consistent sharp images despite the 35mm FL.
Also, I just posted my 50R on the B/S board last night, just to tempt you ...Show more →
I have an MMJ in Mint+ condition. Bought it a few years ago to use with the A7ii. Every time I think about selling it, I take it out for a spin and am (once again) blown away by the IQ!
.
