lifef8 wrote:
Anybody used the Canon 50mm 1.8 STM on GFX?
Probably not since it doesn't make much sense to use a very cheap lens that requires a very expensive adapter.
Doesn't look very usable to me if we consider the MTF's on 24x36. Here's a screen grab with f/1.8 (red, blue is f/8), f/2.8 and f/4:
figured I'd mention it as an option since the 40mm STM is an extremely popular option on GFX. if anyone has samples and not charts that would be helpful
freaklikeme wrote:
What I consider to be the best of the SLR lenses I looked at between 40 and 60mm was the Nikon 58/1.4G. It maintains a nicely flat field and the central performance is fantastic from wide open. While not a dedicated MF lens, Nikon puts in some soft indents with good resistance at MFD and infinity and the scale is simple but usable. I wound up with the 85/1.4G because I prefer the focal length on the GFX, but performance-wise, I would've been equally happy with the 58.
I use the Nikon 58/1.4 and it’s excellent on my GFX100S. Corners are a bit mushy at f/1.4, but no more so than 50’s have been historically, and when do you need edge-to-edge sharpness at f/1.4 on medium format anyway? In any case, it is very clean by f/2.8.
If you can live with that (and a bit of LoCA wide open), you’re rewarded with a lens with beautiful rendering. If you’ve shot with the Canon 85/1.2, Leica 50/1.4, or Nikon 105/1.4, it’s in that league. The lens oozes character, and it’s fully intact on GFX. It doesn’t hurt that it has full AF support on GFX, either!
Speaking of the 105/1.4, I know it’s longer than what you want, but it’s outstanding as well. Flawless, really. If you’re shopping 100’s, it’s an easy choice, especially if you shoot other systems as well. I use mine on GFX and Z, and it’s the best portrait lens I will likely ever own.
Working on the next YouTube video, should be ready in a couple of weeks. This one will be on the Contax 645 35mm f/3.5. It's a beast of a lens, but the autofocus works just fine on the GFX 100s via Contax 645 Fringer adapter.
I think this is somewhere in the 28mm range FoV on FF.. It always confuses me going from 645 to 44x33 to FF..
Sharp throughout the frame, no real vignette to speak of.
The biggest challenge with this lens is the super convenient 95mm filter thread size..
GFX100SContax 645 35/3.5 lens35mmf/8.01/80s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SContax 645 35/3.5 lens35mmf/8.01/160s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SContax 645 35/3.5 lens35mmf/8.01/200s200 ISO0.0 EV
gdanmitchell wrote:
What do the corners look like if you use the full frame and do not crop? Can you share an example?
I'll definitely be covering that in my YouTube review but seeing as how it's #3 in my backlog, that video is a couple months out.. Happy to give you the gist of it now..
There is significant vignette due to the hood and some color shift up to about 18mm, after that all is pretty manageable. Overall, some mustache distortion which is a bit difficult to correct for in C1, but nothing terrible. I have read about some people cutting the hood which apparently helps quite a bit, but this is from LensRentals and I have heard they frown upon that kind of thing..
I'd treat this as an 18-24 on GFX full sensor, unless, like me, you typically shoot 16x9 or x-pan, then you can get away with 16mm if you crop in a bit to lose the color shift on the edges.
You may notice some of these seem soft, not sure why, must have to do with the C1 export and sharpening settings, will look into that.. but here are a link to a couple raw files.. very nice center sharpness in the raws.
I originally looked at this a potential budget option to the 20-35. But given the vignette issues, and the weight (almost 2x of the 20-35) and bulbous front element, I will opt for my 20-35 any day of the week.
Hood vignette and color shift
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens16mmf/8.01/800s640 ISO0.0 EV
much cleaner at 19mm, still minor vignette mid top/bottom
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens19mmf/8.01/640s640 ISO0.0 EV
20mm is definite safe territory.. a hint of that bottom mid vignette, but easily fixable if one even notices
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens20mmf/8.01/500s640 ISO0.0 EV
top left corner on 20mm, not much distortion, pretty sharp
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens20mmf/8.01/500s640 ISO0.0 EV
15mm = bad news..
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens15mmf/8.01/1000s640 ISO0.0 EV
Top right crop, still sharp and holding up well.. until it doesnt.
GFX100SSIGMA 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM A018 lens15mmf/8.01/1000s640 ISO0.0 EV
It'd be interesting to see what that lens does after you trim the shade. The Canon 11-24 covers the full GFX frame very well from 15mm to 20mm and would probably cover a wider range if you can figure out how to pull the rear baffle, which is not as straightforward as many of their other lenses.
Peter Figen wrote:
It'd be interesting to see what that lens does after you trim the shade. The Canon 11-24 covers the full GFX frame very well from 15mm to 20mm and would probably cover a wider range if you can figure out how to pull the rear baffle, which is not as straightforward as many of their other lenses.
Good to know, will add that to the list for the reviews! It was nice to use the Sigma 14-24 for the trip, but glad I didn't buy it.
Been using the EF 40 2.8 STM as well here to good effect. That one I did buy since it was so cheap. Not sure if I'll get a ton of use out of it, if I want a small kit I just use the X-S20, but it's easy enough to toss in the bag in case I do need to go stealth GFX mode.. well, as stealth as a 100s can be!
On the new GFX 100 II product page it mentions this:
"Redesigned microlenses improve light coverage at the corners of the sensor, delivering better image quality and increased AF accuracy at the periphery of the lens."
Geoff CB wrote:
On the new GFX 100 II product page it mentions this:
"Redesigned microlenses improve light coverage at the corners of the sensor, delivering better image quality and increased AF accuracy at the periphery of the lens."
Hopefully that means better corner performance for adapted lenses! Especially Leica M mount glass.
I saw that! I, too, am hopeful this improves some performance for FF adapted lenses. I have a few M42, Rokkor and C/Y lenses are decent performer outside the corner issues. I don't think it'll solve the 'swirl' we see at the edges with some lenses towards the extremes of the image circle, but if the color shift and smearing can be improved, then that will be a game changer.
Geoff CB wrote:
On the new GFX 100 II product page it mentions this:
"Redesigned microlenses improve light coverage at the corners of the sensor, delivering better image quality and increased AF accuracy at the periphery of the lens."
Hopefully that means better corner performance for adapted lenses! Especially Leica M mount glass.
I can't hurt... but I suspect that the improvement will be minimal and that it surely won't overcome lens vignetting like that from many adapted FF lenses.
IIRC, the issue is that the light hitting the sensor in the corners strikes at a greater angle than that in the center where it is more perpendicular to the sensor plane.
This was less of an issue with film but with digital micro lenses the are all 'pointing up," perpendicular to the sensor plane, with a given amount of light across the frame the photo sites near the corners get a bit less light. My understanding is that sensor designers try to do things with photo site micro lenses to lessen this effect, though I suspect that it cannot be eliminated.
But it is just one element in the vignetting picture, and the greater issues with corner light falloff are going to come from things like the actual coverage of the lens, I would think.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I can't hurt... but I suspect that the improvement will be minimal and that it surely won't overcome lens vignetting like that from many adapted FF lenses.
IIRC, the issue is that the light hitting the sensor in the corners strikes at a greater angle than that in the center where it is more perpendicular to the sensor plane.
This was less of an issue with film but with digital micro lenses the are all 'pointing up," perpendicular to the sensor plane, with a given amount of light across the frame the photo sites near the corners get a bit less light. My understanding is that sensor designers try to do things with photo site micro lenses to lessen this effect, though I suspect that it cannot be eliminated.
But it is just one element in the vignetting picture, and the greater issues with corner light falloff are going to come from things like the actual coverage of the lens, I would think....Show more →
Definitely, I agree it won't impact vignette to any significant degree, and I'm not holding my breath on even swirl or color shift being improved.. but Fuji has surprised us before. Obviously Leica did something similar with the SL series to get M-glass to resolve more similarly to the M bodies, but that's FF -> FF.. Excited to test it out though, my first test is going to be the Rokkor 40/2 pancake. In the image below you can almost see where the image circle falls off, you just get a circular swirl across all the corners of the image. It's an amazing lens and so tiny.. if they can improve that performance, I'll be dancing in the streets.
GFX 50S63 mm f/-- lens63mmf/1.01/2000s100 ISO0.0 EV
Hi everyone. First post. I recently acquired a used 100S and started testing with my collection of vintage FF lenses. Two that look great (to me) with little to no vignetting are the Petri 55mm 1.8 M42 and Minolta AF 100mm 2.8 Macro. These are Neg Chrome Jpegs with only exposure adjustment.
