thanks. still testing the adapter, so far been good. my copy is lightly flocked and doesn't show light leaks. i can see where more than moderate shift could cause them, but i don't typically need much shift. fingers crossed, really want to be able to use my hassy glass.
sputnik wrote:
Nice! How do you find the adapter? I had to return mine because of a few issues, hoping the’ve solved them by now.
@mmm55
why is everything in the image of the water cascading over the rocks in focus?
shot at
GFX-50R, GF 23mm f/4, ISO 100, 6-stop ND, 30 sec @ f/16
I realize f16 gives good depth of field but this lens is ridiculous. Even the leaf in the foreground is crisp. Did you use hyperfocal distance? And why is there no diffraction softening?
When I see pix like these I want to get a 50r/s for my travels but then my nikon setup is already heavy so i pause.
Oct 28, 2019 at 02:09 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
bwana wrote:
@mmm55@
why is everything in the image of the water cascading over the rocks in focus?
shot at
GFX-50R, GF 23mm f/4, ISO 100, 6-stop ND, 30 sec @ f/16
I realize f16 gives good depth of field but this lens is ridiculous. Even the leaf in the foreground is crisp. Did you use hyperfocal distance? And why is there no diffraction softening?
When I see pix like these I want to get a 50r/s for my travels but then my nikon setup is already heavy so i pause.
I think the answer to why everything is in focus is that wide angle lenses have a lot of depth of field and the 23 GF is a very wide angle lens. Of course it helps that it was shot at f/16. There is little diffraction softening because of both the size of the sensor and the size of the pixels on the sensor. The Fuji GFX 50s and 50r both do f/16 with only a small bit of diffraction softening. It is a very usable aperture on these cameras.
A few reasons. As Steve mentioned, the "deep" DOF at 23mm and shooting at f/16 help. In addition, though, the composition and the selection of the focus point were intentional to keep the entire frame in focus. Keep in mind that I had more rocks and water at my my feet (closer than you can see) that I chose NOT to include in the image. What you see (front to back) is right about at the limit. The DOF scale in the camera helps, but a good DOF calculator is better.
Regarding diffraction, f/16 on this sensor size is pretty safe - I think you'd only notice it if viewing at 100% and looking really, really hard.
Get one! As much as I like my D850, there's no Nikon F-mount glass in the wide to mid focal lengths that can compare.
bwana wrote:
@mmm55@
why is everything in the image of the water cascading over the rocks in focus?
shot at
GFX-50R, GF 23mm f/4, ISO 100, 6-stop ND, 30 sec @ f/16
I realize f16 gives good depth of field but this lens is ridiculous. Even the leaf in the foreground is crisp. Did you use hyperfocal distance? And why is there no diffraction softening?
When I see pix like these I want to get a 50r/s for my travels but then my nikon setup is already heavy so i pause.
mmm55 wrote:
Regarding diffraction, f/16 on this sensor size is pretty safe
Not trying to start a debate here but from my testing there is quite a bit of noticeable diffraction between f/8 and f/16. f/16 is fine for the web but for large printing I'm going to focus stack and stay f/11 or under if I'm trying to stay sharp front to back. Other thing is DOF is thinner on GFX than FF or APS-C. I was caught off guard when I first got my GFX with both DOF and diffraction. Test for yourself and shoot for your purpose and you will be happy.
Oct 29, 2019 at 03:42 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rsk7 wrote:
Not trying to start a debate here but from my testing there is quite a bit of noticeable diffraction between f/8 and f/16. f/16 is fine for the web but for large printing I'm going to focus stack and stay f/11 or under if I'm trying to stay sharp front to back. Other thing is DOF is thinner on GFX than FF or APS-C. I was caught off guard when I first got my GFX with both DOF and diffraction. Test for yourself and shoot for your purpose and you will be happy.
The noticeability of diffraction is a function of both how large your print and what aspect ratio you use for printing as well as sensor size and pixel density. If you use a 4 X 3 aspect ratio or squarer and you print at the same size you will notice diffraction at about a stop later with the GFX then with a 24 MP FF sensor. So, shooting the GFX at f/16 is about like shooting a 24MP FF lens at f/11 if you use the squarer aspect ratios and print at the same size. Whether that is a concern for you or not will vary with the individual and to some extent with the lens you use, so no doubt people's mileage will vary.
I like how you included the lower viewing area itself in the image. I don't know anything about this place, but I would guess that most shots are captured from right at the edge of the railing. You show a nice perspective.
Scho wrote:
Lower Taughannock Falls just above the mouth of the creek as it enters Cayuga Lake. GFX 50R 45/2.8
