prashant wrote:
any recommendations for an adpter for Pentax 645 lenses or Mamiya 645 lenses on Fuji GFX here? I really like Novoflex and don't need AF functionality or any other frills.
FINALLY I've found an adapter-and-lens combo that autofocuses correctly.. The (expensive!) fringer C645-to-GF auto adapter is the same one that didn't AF well with the CZ210, but my friend loaned me his CZ80/2, and it works perfectly.. I shot a bunch yesterday, and EVERY one of the dozens I developed was in perfect focus.. The combo hunts focus 2 or 3 cycles but plenty quickly enough for me, and when it locks, it locks accurately.
I've ordered a 140/2.8 and 1.4X Mutar.. I truly love the results of my F32-64, so my adapted lenses are for medium and longer reaches.. I'll be selling my F45-100 and 100-200.
Following are a few examples with little artistic value.
Studio session with my youngest son. He just received his football uniform and we decided to set up a shoot.
GFX100s with EF 100mm 2.8 Macro and Fringer Pro Adapter.
Here's a later version of this scene, shot with '100S, Contax 645 80/2 and fringer autofocus adapter.
I've now tried 4 other CZ645s--the 35/3.5, 45/2.8, 55/3.5, and 210/4--and none of them autofocus accurately on my system.. I have a 140/2.8 and Mutar 1.4X coming this week; we'll see about those.
Here's what I hope is my last post on adapting medium-format autofocus Contax 645 lenses to my '100S with a fringer adapter..
The only C645Z lens that autofocuses reliably, and that's about 90% of the time, is the 80/2.. Those that didn't were the 35/3.5, 45/2.8, 55/3.5, 140/2.8, and 210/4.. The 140 wasn't horrible, just about half-good; the Mutar dropped that to zero good.
The 80/2 with the fringer focuses accurately MORE often than the Fugi 80/1.7, something that surprised me.. The CZ/fringer is now my only 80mm lens, and it's a tad lighter than the F80/1.7, too.
I have a Canon EF 70-300/4-5.6 L IS coming to see if it's usable as a long lens; more info on that later.
So far with my Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 L IS USM (phew!!!!) lens, when I can get it running with the Viltrox adapter, I've discovered that it's quite resolving and has an image circle that covers all but the most-extreme of the corners. (1st image)
Cropping to 3:2, which I do for the vast majority of my pics, eliminates the majority of that corner darkening. (2nd image)
Using CCPS's Camera Raw/Optics/Vignette control at 100% eliminates the vast majority of the remaining corner darkening. (3rd image.) This performance is plenty good enough for me, altho of course others may have different opinions.
The Viltrox adapter has a couple glitches that caused me to order a different adapter.. One is that it reports ALL focal lengths as 70mm. The 2nd is serious--it re(mis)focuses a manually focused image when the shutter button is pushed, even with both lens and camera switches are set to manual AND with focus set removed from the shutter button in the menu.. A fringer adapter is arriving today; we'll see how that goes.
The lens handles very well, as it's short (about 6-1/2" or 16.5cm including adapter) and does NOT seem to rotate the front of the camera down, and it's not too heavy.. Without adapter and foot, it's 2 grams lighter than the F100-200. Without foot for handheld shooting but including adapter, it's 0.17 pounds heavier than the F100-200.
Satisfied myself that my results with the Canon 70-300L are statistically reliable, so...even with the new fringer adapter, the Canon does NOT autofocus reliably.. Almost all pics are almost-correctly focused--that is, none is badly OOF--but 'close enough' doesn't appy in fotografy.. So back to my 'old reliable' long lens (and at only 82-164[35e], it's not very long), the Fuji 100-200.. It too isn't perfect, but its hit rate is infinitely better than that of the Canon/fringer combo.
Naturally enough, I observed about the same slight corner darkening with the Canon/fringer as with the Canon/Viltrox.. The Canon combo is 0.43 pounds heavier than the F100-200.
After reading about older med.-fmt. lenses with fewer elements having more 3D perspective and 'pop' and liking that when I was seeing it from some Zeiss lenses--notably the Otus 55/1.4 but a few others, too--I decided to borrow again the Contax 645 CZ55/3.5 from my good friend.. Fell into a U-tube hole ( ) when I got home this aft. but managed to catch the ending lite with a few handheld shots to test, 1st, its autofocus with the fringer adapter..
Suprise, surprise--in 4 consecutive quick frames, if autofocused until I get 2 consecutive AF locks, the AF is very good to excellent.. I'll be comparing it with my Fuji 32-64 and also testing its behavior in manualfocus and on a tripod tomorrow.. Will also be retesting the CZ140/2.8, so more info coming tomorrow.
Here's what I hope is my LAST note on my experiences with various Contax 645 Zeiss lenses, all in combination with Fuji '100S and a fringer autofocus adapter.
SUCCESSES--1. The CZ80mm F2 is now my slightly long-normal lens, and
2. the 55mm F3.5 is my short-normal lens. Both these lenses autofocus accurately 80- to 90% of the time AFTER I achieve 2 consecutive AF-Lock icons.. If I shoot after the first AF lock, the resulting pic is most likely NOT in excellent focus.
3. The CZ140/2.8 autofocuses accurately only about 50% of the time (same technique as above), hence is not worth my carrying it.
4. I did not retest the 210 and didn't test the 35/3.5 as each is too heavy for this chubby oldfart to handhold.
I thank my goodybuddy 'audii-dudii' for the loan of these lenses and sale of one.
I've retired my excellent Fuji 32-64/4 (and, previously, my Fuji 45-100) and ordered a Fuji 30/3.5 (subject to a $300 rebate ).
This landscape kit, carried in a Think Tank Airport Advantage Roller bag, includes the Fuji GFX 100S with SmallRig all-around 90-degree plate; Fuji 30, C645Zs in 55 and 80 mm with fringer autofocus adapter; and Fuji 100-200/5.6.. All this gear weighs only 9.6 pounds, plus filters, batteries, etc.
Jeffrey Behr wrote:
I've retired my excellent Fuji 32-64/4 (and, previously, my Fuji 45-100) and ordered a Fuji 30/3.5 (subject to a $300 rebate ).
Glad you're closing in on your optimized kit.
I was curious why you gave up the 45-100, since it covers much of your mid to medium length. Was it due to weight, focusing, image quality? Or, do you just prefer the experience of using primes?
I can understand abandoning the 32-64, seems that one gets tried and passed around regularly.
I'm a new owner of the 100s and after trying my EF collection with the Fringer I'm pretty sure GF lenses are in my future.
DES-1 wrote:
Glad you're closing in on your optimized kit.
I'm curious why you gave up the 45-100, since it covers much of your mid to medium length. Was it due to weight, focusing, image quality? Or, do you just prefer the experience of using primes?
I can understand abandoning the 32-64, seems that one gets tried and passed around regularly.
I'm a new owner of the '100S and after trying my EF collection with the Fringer I'm pretty sure GF lenses are in my future.
The 45-100 covered very well the midrange, but I decided it was a bit heavy for handholding--each of us has our own limitations! 😊--and also I seem obsessed with Zeiss lenses...and also with primes.. The 32-64 performed very well but not up to the 2 primes I replaced it with.. FWIW, I owned a Fuji 23 twice and decided both times that it was too short.
On the long end, I couldn't find other MF format lenses that were light enough for me to roll around or handle, even after trying my third copy of a Canon EF 70-300 L IS USM that wouldn't autofocus accurately with two electronic adapters.
Thanks for the reply, I found it helpful. I might give the 45-100 a try as my first GF. Don't know if I'll venture into other adapted lenses. Ideally, I'd like a GF kit that fits in a single case and not have to partly assemble a kit from my canon gear.
Of my EF lenses, quickly tested indoors, so far my 40 2.8, 180 3.5, 85 1.2, and 70-200 f4 seem promising. The 11-24 is good at f8 and the 8-15 fisheye is only usable at 15. My beloved 24-70 2.8 is dark in the corners when open, and the 100 2.8 produced some dark corners as well. I need to follow these quick conclusions with some real world shooting to confirm the results.
UPDATE: I finally took a few adapted lenses outside and I'm not satisfied with the performance, too much vignetting for me, sure it can be cropped out but I'd rather avoid having to do this. I need to try the 85 and 180 again, if those darken the corners I'll have a decsion to make with my Canon gear.
Jeffrey Behr wrote: Here's what I hope is my LAST note on my experiences with various Contax 645 Zeiss lenses, all in combination with Fuji '100S and a fringer autofocus adapter.
SUCCESSES--1. The CZ80mm F2 is now my slightly long-normal lens, and
2. the 55mm F3.5 is my short-normal lens. Both these lenses autofocus accurately 80- to 90% of the time AFTER I achieve 2 consecutive AF-Lock icons.. If I shoot after the first AF lock, the resulting pic is most likely NOT in excellent focus.
3. The CZ140/2.8 autofocuses only about 50% of the time (same technique as above), hence is not worth my carrying it.
4. I did not retest the 210 and didn't test the 35/3.5 as each is too heavy for this chubby oldfart to handhold.
I thank my goodybuddy 'audidudi' for the loan of these lenses and sale of one.
I've retired my excellent Fuji 32-64/4 (and, previously, my Fuji 45-100) and ordered a Fuji 30/3.5 (subject to a $300 rebate ).
This landscape kit, carried in a Think Tank Airport Advantage Roller bag, includes the Fuji GFX 100S with SmallRig all-around 90-degree plate; Fuji 30, C645Zs in 55 and 80 mm with fringer autofocus adapter; and Fuji 100-200/5.6.. All this gear weighs only 9.6 pounds, plus filters, batteries, etc.
Glad to see that you are building your kit around the Contax CZ 645 lenses. I have been using Contax lenses on my GFX 50S and I really like the IQ from these lenses. Here is one that I took this morning with Contax CZ 35/3.5.
There is a link somewhere to a spreadsheet listing many non GF lenses in terms of how well they work on a GFX. Color-coded in green, yellow, orange, and red.
) when I got home this aft. but managed to catch the ending lite with a few handheld shots to test, 1st, its autofocus with the fringer adapter.. 
). 
