One of the next YouTube reviews will be on the Contax 645 80mm f/2 with autofocus adapter (Fringer). Am actually testing the Otus 85 as well.. fun times.
Haven't had a chance to get all the images I need yet for the videos but should over the Fourth holiday. Anyway, here are some random ones in case anyone's curious how the 645 80/2 works on the GFX.
Will get some Ninja video of the autofocusing experience for the YT review, but it's slow as one would expect from a lens from the 90's. If you've used the Hasselblad X1D (Mk 1) it's about the same as that.
GFX100SContax 645 80/2 lens80mmf/2.01/1600s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SContax 645 80/2 lens80mmf/2.01/2500s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SContax 645 80/2 lens80mmf/2.81/640s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX 50RContax 645 80/2 lens80mmf/2.01/640s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SContax 645 80/2 lens80mmf/2.01/125s800 ISO0.0 EV
thrice wrote:
Anyone tried the Irix 30mm F/1.4 yet?
Yep. I was hopeful, but between the mechanical vignetting and the poor performance outside of the 135 format frame until f/8, it wasn't worth it. That was in F-mount with the Steelsring. I also tried with the cine version in EF-mount (I only have a dumb EF adapter) with the same results.
With the F-mount, I was also able to put the lens on Laowa's MFC and the Metabones 1.26x Expander. It appears to be too long for MFC, since it made the edge resolution situation worse (but it did clear up the vignetting). It did better with the Expander, but there I think it might be a bit too wide and too fast. By f/4, the edges caught up with the center, but that just makes it a big, heavy, slow 37ish.
Have you tried the Milvus 25, Dan? The optics are so large, it looks like it was made for the format. I've been going back and forth on renting. I'm curious, I just don't know if I'm 1.1kg curious. I'm afraid it'll be excellent and I'll want to replace the relatively petite 23/4 with that monster.
Thank you for doing the testing! How disappointing about the Irix.
I haven't tried the 25 Milvus, maybe I can find a store to try it in 🤔
freaklikeme wrote:
Yep. I was hopeful, but between the mechanical vignetting and the poor performance outside of the 135 format frame until f/8, it wasn't worth it. That was in F-mount with the Steelsring. I also tried with the cine version in EF-mount (I only have a dumb EF adapter) with the same results.
With the F-mount, I was also able to put the lens on Laowa's MFC and the Metabones 1.26x Expander. It appears to be too long for MFC, since it made the edge resolution situation worse (but it did clear up the vignetting). It did better with the Expander, but there I think it might be a bit too wide and too fast. By f/4, the edges caught up with the center, but that just makes it a big, heavy, slow 37ish.
Have you tried the Milvus 25, Dan? The optics are so large, it looks like it was made for the format. I've been going back and forth on renting. I'm curious, I just don't know if I'm 1.1kg curious. I'm afraid it'll be excellent and I'll want to replace the relatively petite 23/4 with that monster....Show more →
Picture This! wrote:
I have the Milvus 25, can try it on my gfx and let you know. Based on everything I've heard from others it vignettes quite heavily on the gfx.
I am pretty sure I have reported on the Milvus 25 earlier in the thread. The vignetting is pretty strong. It is better than the Milvus 21 but a little worse, but very similar to the Milvus 35. For my tastes it need fairly extensive cropping, so I never used on the GFX.
After 95 pages, I wish there way to auto compile all the observations plus samples. Kinda like that master adapted list but with samples.
I no longer have gfx but recently I saw that someone on YouTube adapted the 75 and 125mm ARRI Signature Primes designed for full frame cine cams on the GFX. I don't think anything under the 75mms worked, but the rendering was expectedly beautiful.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I am pretty sure I have reported on the Milvus 25 earlier in the thread. The vignetting is pretty strong. It is better than the Milvus 21 but a little worse, but very similar to the Milvus 35. For my tastes it need fairly extensive cropping, so I never used on the GFX.
No hits when searching the thread for "Milvus"
If you can find your original post and link that would be great
MAubrey wrote:
Yeah, the Nikon F mount is so narrow and the rear element so deep inside, this is not surprising.
I held out hope because my Nikon 58/1.4 and 105/1.4 work very well on GFX.
I had been looking into a GFX 110/2, but after using the 105/1.4 I have no interest. The icing on the cake is that it’s also adaptable to my other systems.
thrice wrote:
No hits when searching the thread for "Milvus"
If you can find your original post and link that would be great
I haven't been able to find my post when I reported on the Milvus 25 f/1.4 and Milvus 35 f/1.4. My post at the beginning of the thread didn't include those lenses and as I didn't have them yet (I don't think they were even produced yet). You will see in the posts from the beginning of this thread that the Milvus 21 f/2.8 and the Otus 28 f/1.4 did very poorly on the GFX. Among the worst of any lenses I tested for vignetting and coverage of the sensor. The Milvus 25 f/1.4 and Milvus 35 f/1.4 were a bit better, but still had substantial vignetting. I am pretty sure I posted about these lenses in the middle of the thread somewhere when I got them, but perhaps I did not. The bottom line is for me, they had too much vignetting to use without substantial cropping as I said above. You may be happy with these lenses, but I was not.
