ruthenium wrote:
This is a long thread (125 pages!), and it may take too long for me to read through the posts. This lazy thinking is behind the question that, perhaps, those who actively contributed here may kindly answer for me.
I became interested in adding a MF lens for my GFX100S II to use in the full-frame equivalent 24 - 28 mm range. Consulting with the AI suggested adapting the Voigtlander Ultron Vintage Line 28mm F2.0 Aspherical VM lens. This should be close to 22mm on the GFX, but cropping this to 24mm would leave me with 85MP - sufficient for most reasons. This cropping can also remove some vignetting.
The intended use of the lens is while closed to f/6.3 to f/11, or around f/8 on average.
The question is whether this is a reasonable idea?
I have the GF20-35mm lens; thus, this interest of mine is all about exploring shooting a MF lens in the range (and on subjects) where critical focussing is unnecessary.
Thanks in advance for sharing any relevant experience!...Show more →
So the GF20-35 that you have is not good enough for whatever you want to do?
RWNPhoto wrote:
So the GF20-35 that you have is not good enough for whatever you want to do?
I have three lenses in my GFX kit (20-35, 55, and 500mm), and about 40% of recent pictures have been taken with this zoom. Yes, it is good enough. I tend to use the 20-35 more on the wide side (in the full-frame equivalent 24 to 28mm range).
There is an insightful study by Jack Hogan on "DOF AND DIFFRACTION: 24MM GUIDELINES" https://www.strollswithmydog.com/dof-and-diffraction-24mm-landscape/#more-4086
There, Jack discusses different shooting scenarios at full-frame FL 24mm. For example, for the specific case: "When focusing at 7m, f/8 looks like a good compromise for depth of field, with a near limit of 3.21m and everything between 3.70m and infinity producing higher resolution than 57.3mm lp/mm. Higher f/stops are a losing proposition all around."
The above points suggest that for shooting at, or close to 24 mm, it might be more appropriate to set the aperture and focussing distance manually, rather than use AF (for city, street, and landscape photography). I am interested in investigating this approach with a manual focus lens. Thus, my interest here is of an exploratory nature.
I can think of an analogy, e.g., driving a truck in an area where the use of a bicycle might be more appropriate. This doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the truck itself, only with the manner of using it. I have no reason to criticize the GF20-35mm lens. I am only interested in exploring possible alternatives that may have certain advantages, e.g. in terms of size and weight.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think you won't like the results as I am pretty sure you will have to crop to basically a FF image and even then you will still have pretty high vignetting, just like the lens has on FF. In my experience most Leica M mount lenses are poor choices for adapting to Fuji GFX as they struggle to cover the FF image circle already as they are made to be so small. That is true of Leica M mount lenses generally and I think is especially true of the Voigtlander 28 f/2, which I owned and used quite extensively on a Leica M10.
If you want a small lens you can shoot in this way, consider the Pentax 31 f/1.8 limited. It actually has pretty good coverage of the 44 X 33 frame and I think would provide better results for what you seem to be trying to do. If that doesn't work, then the next lens I would try would probably be the Zeiss 28 f/2, either the "Hollywood," C/Y mount lens or the ZE/ZF version that is somewhat similar. If you can live with a bit slower aperture, and the price of the lens, then a Leica R mount 28 f/2.8 (second version with the built-in hood) might be another potentially interesting option and it is smaller. That lens despite being a fairly old design doesn't come cheaply, however....Show more →
I see vignetting on some of these, then there are examples with minimal or no vignetting. Many of the photos look like cropped; thus, seeing no vignetting might be due to cropping. Unfortunately, one can only guess on what was the aperture set on the lens. It could be f/5.6 but I am not sure (he makes an obscure reference to "Hyperfocal is the way. Set the aperture and infinity to f/5.6 and let it rip" - that I don't think I fully understand)
Eric seems to be very happy about the lens and the (newly added) camera.
Seeing that vignetting makes me a bit nervous. It is hard to tell whether shooting at f/8 and cropping the 22m frame to 24mm should remove the vignetting. Perhaps, if I see the lens priced attractively somewhere, I might give it a try.
Thanks again!
Dmitri
ruthenium wrote:
I can think of an analogy, e.g., driving a truck in an area where the use of a bicycle might be more appropriate. This doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the truck itself, only with the manner of using it. I have no reason to criticize the GF20-35mm lens. I am only interested in exploring possible alternatives that may have certain advantages, e.g. in terms of size and weight.
I hear you. I have and love the 20-35, use it a lot. But I also have a Contax 645 35mm/3.5 that I really like too. It doesn't have the resolving power of the 20-35 but has a softer look, warm tones, and nicer transition/bokeh. I really like the 35mm focal length on medium format. If Fuji comes out with a fast 35-ish, 1.7 ish, I would want that too.
HereIAm wrote:
I'm finding it tough to search here, but anyone have any examples with the 50mm Olympus OM f/1.2?
No, but I've tried my OM 55/1.2 (and Nikkor 55/1.2 too). Supposedly the 55 has a slightly larger image circle than the 50, but for my type of photography (no images focused closer than ~2 meters) it was quite useless. Vignetting can be alright, but the usual backwards curvature of field ruins every shot that isn't at very close range.
It might work for you, but I would definitely not get one only to use/try on GFX.
---------
I still wonder if you could mitigate the curvature of field with a weak lens element attached to the front of the camera lens, like has been discussed and explored in the Leica-on-Sony part of the photo community. Not sure how to calculate the focal length of that element though, and it's a bit too expensive to just order a bunch of different ones.
I see vignetting on some of these, then there are examples with minimal or no vignetting. Many of the photos look like cropped; thus, seeing no vignetting might be due to cropping. Unfortunately, one can only guess on what was the aperture set on the lens. It could be f/5.6 but I am not sure (he makes an obscure reference to "Hyperfocal is the way. Set the aperture and infinity to f/5.6 and let it rip" - that I don't think I fully understand)
Eric seems to be very happy about the lens and the (newly added) camera.
Seeing that vignetting makes me a bit nervous. It is hard to tell whether shooting at f/8 and cropping the 22m frame to 24mm should remove the vignetting. Perhaps, if I see the lens priced attractively somewhere, I might give it a try.
Thanks again!
Dmitri...Show more →
There is a lot to overcome with using this lens on the GFX. It does not have a wide image circle and vignettes a lot even on FF. There will be a lot of induced field curvature because it was designed for very thin cover glass and the GFX has pretty thick cover glass. F8 might help with both these concerns but I doubt it will help enough. If you want good performance my guess is that you will be cropping to 28mm FF almost all the time, and 26mm perhaps at some focus distances but likely no better.
I like a few of Eric's shots and his style, but I think the vignetting ruins many of the shots he has posted, but that is just me.
You can find a lens for this experiment. I wouldn't try an M lens for this, however. If it were me, I would start with the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AiS. I have used that lens quite a bit and it is a decent performing lens and widely available and not very expensive. Adapters are easy to get as well and I am pretty sure it has a wider image circle than the Voigtlander lens.
If that lens doesn't work the Schneider 28mm PC lens will definitely work as it has a bigger image circle, but that would cost a bit more and it is a pretty big lens.
Steve Spencer wrote:
There is a lot to overcome with using this lens on the GFX. It does not have a wide image circle and vignettes a lot even on FF. There will be a lot of induced field curvature because it was designed for very thin cover glass and the GFX has pretty thick cover glass. F8 might help with both these concerns but I doubt it will help enough. If you want good performance my guess is that you will be cropping to 28mm FF almost all the time, and 26mm perhaps at some focus distances but likely no better.
I like a few of Eric's shots and his style, but I think the vignetting ruins many of the shots he has posted, but that is just me.
You can find a lens for this experiment. I wouldn't try an M lens for this, however. If it were me, I would start with the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AiS. I have used that lens quite a bit and it is a decent performing lens and widely available and not very expensive. Adapters are easy to get as well and I am pretty sure it has a wider image circle than the Voigtlander lens.
If that lens doesn't work the Schneider 28mm PC lens will definitely work as it has a bigger image circle, but that would cost a bit more and it is a pretty big lens....Show more →
Thanks again, Steve - I am glad I asked for advice in this thread!
I also find the vignetting to be distracting when it is seen in many of the Eric's photos.
Clearly, it doesn't bother him, but it might be a problem to me.
markhout wrote:
FWIW I have tried my Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 28mm F2 on my 50SII and the vignetting, while mild, is such that I would only shoot 1:1 (square) images.
The lens is razor sharp though. I imagine that you're looking for a more vintage / stylish rendering, if you already own the GF 20-35.
I don't know how different are these lenses:
Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 28mm F2
Voigtländer 28mm f/2 Ultron Vintage Line Aspherical (Type I & Type II)
My question was about the latter, however, for that simple reason that it was suggested by Claude AI (together with the Nikon 28mm PC and Schneider Super-Angulation 28mm PC).
I wouldn't trust Claude or ChatGPT, nevertheless, the information is a food for thought; thus, I asked for advice in this thread.
ruthenium wrote:
I don't know how different are these lenses:
Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 28mm F2
Voigtländer 28mm f/2 Ultron Vintage Line Aspherical (Type I & Type II)
My question was about the latter, however, for that simple reason that it was suggested by Claude AI (together with the Nikon 28mm PC and Schneider Super-Angulation 28mm PC).
I wouldn't trust Claude or ChatGPT, nevertheless, the information is a food for thought; thus, I asked for advice in this thread.
I have the Schneider 28 PC and while it covers and even allows a little bit of shift when stopped down, it has a major problem: cyan color shift away from the center.
There are ways to get around this, but considering how much better and even smaller the GF 30/3.5 is, I see no reason to use the Schneider.
Steve Spencer wrote:
If it were me, I would start with the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AiS. I have used that lens quite a bit and it is a decent performing lens and widely available and not very expensive. Adapters are easy to get as well and I am pretty sure it has a wider image circle than the Voigtlander lens.
The Nikkor 28/2.8 AI-S hard vignettes just at the edge of the GFX sensor, IIRC. Would not use it for larger than 33×33.
Makten wrote:
I have the Schneider 28 PC and while it covers and even allows a little bit of shift when stopped down, it has a major problem: cyan color shift away from the center.
There are ways to get around this, but considering how much better and even smaller the GF 30/3.5 is, I see no reason to use the Schneider.
I of course thought of the Fuji 30 f/3.5, but he wants a manual focus lens not an AF lens.
Just for laughs, quote:
My "dream" compact GFX travel kit:
If I wanted the smallest high-quality manual-focus kit for a GFX100S II, I'd choose:
43 mm Mamiya 7 (ultra-wide)
Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35 mm f/2 VM (general wide)
GF 50 mm f/3.5 (normal)
Mamiya 7 80 mm f/4 (portrait/short tele)
The total weight would be well under that of many full-frame professional zoom kits.
One lens that intrigues me:
Of everything we've discussed over the last week, the Voigtländer Ultron Vintage Aspherical 28 mm f/2 VM stands out.
It's unusual that:
I couldn't find a single serious GFX test,
yet its optical design is modern,
it's extremely compact,
and it has a reputation for excellent performance on high-resolution sensors.
If it covers the GFX sensor as well as I suspect, it could become one of the best compact 22 mm-equivalent lenses available for the system.
End of quote.
Who says?
ChatGPT
Even AI dreams of a compact GFX kit and feels intrigued by a lens! Now we know what robots dream of.
Note the nice personal touch: "Of everything we've discussed over the last week..."
Even my wife isn't that attentive to my photography interests! I look forward to the future when ChatGPT may become available as a standalone product, in a well-made female shape.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I of course thought of the Fuji 30 f/3.5, but he wants a manual focus lens not an AF lens.
Yes, but if one of the reasons to go manual focus is to get more compact lenses, it doesn't make much sense with one that is larger AND worse performing than a GF lens, right? Not even sure it's cheaper.
Makten wrote:
Yes, but if one of the reasons to go manual focus is to get more compact lenses, it doesn't make much sense with one that is larger AND worse performing than a GF lens, right? Not even sure it's cheaper.
I think his intent is, at least in part, that he wants the controls of manual focus, particularly he wants to be able to set the focus distance and leave it. That is a lot easier with a manual focus lens with a distance scale. And further it seems he plans to shoot the lens exclusively at f/8, so that will of course limit optical differences. So, in this context I don't see performance of the lens as long as it covers the image circle with reasonable performance to be that much of a driving force in the choice of lens, but manual focus controls and especially a distance scale to be.
Ruthenium here are three PC lenses you might want to check out. These lenses have the advantage of being designed with a larger image circle. They are all a bit old, but if you use them at f/8 I don't think that will matter much and going with one of these lenses might be the only way to avoid pretty strong vignetting if you want a 24mm FF perspective. Almost all SLR and DSLR 28mm lenses seem to just cover the FF image circle and not much more. Anyway, here are three to check out:
Nikkor 28 f/3.5 PC -- this lens is the smallest at just 310g and it only costs about $100 to $200. I think it is worth a shot. It isn't a great performer, but for your intended use it might work well. Here are couple of links with discussions of the lens that might prove helpful:
Pentax also had a 28mm f/3.5 PC lens. It isn't rated that highly at Pentax Forums, but it isn't completely panned either. It is bigger at 510g and seems to run more like $500. Here is the link at Pentax Forums with users comments on the lens:
Finally, I think the Schneider 28mm f/2.8 PC lens is also worth considering. It probably is a better performer than the other two lenses, but I am not so sure it would be at f/8. It is just a bit bigger than the Pentax lens at 535g. The color issues that Marten noted are definitely something to check into, but are those on both the FSI GF 50 sensor and the BSI GF 100 sensor? Usually BSI sensors avoid such color issues. So definitely research that a bit more if you decide to consider this lens and it is more expensive as well costing in the $800 to $900 range.
ruthenium wrote:
Just for laughs, quote:
My "dream" compact GFX travel kit:
If I wanted the smallest high-quality manual-focus kit for a GFX100S II, I'd choose:
43 mm Mamiya 7 (ultra-wide)
Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35 mm f/2 VM (general wide)
GF 50 mm f/3.5 (normal)
Mamiya 7 80 mm f/4 (portrait/short tele)
The total weight would be well under that of many full-frame professional zoom kits.
One lens that intrigues me:
Of everything we've discussed over the last week, the Voigtländer Ultron Vintage Aspherical 28 mm f/2 VM stands out.
It's unusual that:
I couldn't find a single serious GFX test,
yet its optical design is modern,
it's extremely compact,
and it has a reputation for excellent performance on high-resolution sensors.
If it covers the GFX sensor as well as I suspect, it could become one of the best compact 22 mm-equivalent lenses available for the system.
End of quote.
Who says?
ChatGPT
Even AI dreams of a compact GFX kit and feels intrigued by a lens! Now we know what robots dream of.
Note the nice personal touch: "Of everything we've discussed over the last week..."
Even my wife isn't that attentive to my photography interests! I look forward to the future when ChatGPT may become available as a standalone product, in a well-made female shape....Show more →
Were you under the influence of something when you wrote this? Regardless, AI is hallucinating if it thinks the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO M is a good lens to adapt to the GFX sensor. The Ultron 28 M is even worse.
Not even sure it's cheaper.