p.1 #2 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Very nice. I had a full set of lenses for the C645 and sold them with the camera ages ago...whoever thought they would have a new life? They would've come in handy now if I get a GFX....
p.1 #3 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Very nice. I had a full set of lenses for the C645 and sold them with the camera ages ago...whoever thought they would have a new life? They would've come in handy now if I get a GFX....
I now have 4 of them for the GFX, the 35 f/3.5, the 55 f/3.5, this 80 f/2 and the 120 f/4 APO Macro. Other than the 80, the others are still pretty reasonably priced--I didn't pay over $600 for any of the other three--so you many well have done the right thing in selling yours if the price doesn't go up too much. I think these 4 will be all that I get. I had the 45, but I like the 35 and 55 quite a bit more, and I think there are better options for the longer glass. Still these are very nice lenses and awfully nice to have for the GFX.
p.1 #4 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
I saw the 80 for sale a few days ago and couldn't believe what it's going for nowadays. I don't remember what I paid, but it couldn't have been much...actually, I think it came with the camera, just like a 50 used to be included with 35mm bodies.
I loved the 120 - at that time, it was the best lens I'd ever used, and I was reluctant to sell the 645 because of it. I ended up doing it, though, and replaced the whole lot with a Fuji GX680 setup. Which I also loved, but not for carrying in the field...much too heavy and bulky for that.
Thinking back, I never had the Contax 55, 140, nor the zoom. I had the 35, 45, 80, 120, 210, and even the monstrous 8.5 pound 350/4 + Mutar TC. The 350 was so heavy that it never went far from the car.
p.1 #5 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Steve Spencer wrote:
I now have 4 of them for the GFX, the 35 f/3.5, the 55 f/3.5, this 80 f/2 and the 120 f/4 APO Macro. Other than the 80, the others are still pretty reasonably priced--I didn't pay over $600 for any of the other three--so you many well have done the right thing in selling yours if the price doesn't go up too much. I think these 4 will be all that I get. I had the 45, but I like the 35 and 55 quite a bit more, and I think there are better options for the longer glass. Still these are very nice lenses and awfully nice to have for the GFX....Show more →
Steve,
If I may ask how do you like the 120 APO on the GFX? I just pulled the trigger on a 50r, and am looking at various options for macro work, including the Contax, the Hassleblad 120mm and of course the Fuji.
p.1 #6 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
lostinjapan wrote:
Steve,
If I may ask how do you like the 120 APO on the GFX? I just pulled the trigger on a 50r, and am looking at various options for macro work, including the Contax, the Hassleblad 120mm and of course the Fuji.
Thanks!
Ryan
Hi Ryan,
I love the 120 APO on the GFX. It is a fantastic lens with basically no flaws except for the somewhat slow f/4 aperture. Sharp, actually very sharp from wide open across the frame, very nice bokeh, basically no color aberrations, wonderful up close and at infinity focus. Just a lovely lens. I got mine for $550 dollars too, if it is your only Contax 645 lens the adapter is pretty expensive but even paying for the adapter it is a great option for macro on the GFX cameras.
p.1 #8 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
chris9 wrote:
What adapters do you use for Contax 645 to GFX? Is the setting of the aperture a problem with the adapter?
Do you recommend those lenses to adapt on a A7?
I use the Fringer adapter and on Contax 645 lenses. You set the aperture on the lens and it works perfectly with the adapter. It is technically an AF adapter on the GFX, but I use exclusively MF with these lenses. The AF is pretty glacial (i.e., read it takes at least a couple of seconds), it seems to be fairly accurate, however. Take that with a grain of salt as I almost never use the AF. I do wish the GFX let me shut off the AF entirely, but it doesn't. I have handled this by hobbling the AF in my settings so that it hardly does anything, but I wish I could just shut it off.
I don't know if I would recommend any of the lenses besides the 120 f/4 APO (which is just a lovely lens) for the A7. The 80 f/2 is a great lens with very nice rendering, but it is classic Zeiss and there are other options for the A7. If you are fine with MF, then I would prefer the Loxia 85, which is another lens I adore. The Loxia is smaller (but about the same weight) only a half stop slower, sharper wide open, has less aberrations, and is cheaper. If you want AF any of the excellent trio of Sony 85 f/1.8, Zeiss Batis 85 f/1.8, or Sony GM 85 f/1.4 would be excellent choices. Personally for the A7 I would probably go with the Batis to pick up the image stabilization and used its price is a lot less than the Contax 645 80 f/2, and it is smaller. The 35 f/3.5 is a great lens, but it is big (it had to be to clear the mirror in the Contax 645 camera), I think it would be particularly out of place on an A7. Finally the 55 f/3.5 is nice and small and a great performer, but it doesn't really compare well to either the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8 if you want AF--the ZA 55 f/1.8 is smaller, faster, has much better AF, and at least as sharp with similar level of aberrations. If you wanted MF, then I would pick the CV 65 f/2 APO, which is almost as small and optically better is pretty much every way. So, for the A7, I think only the 120 f/4 APO macro might make sense. I think, although it has a slow max aperture, it is such a nice lens in so many ways and such a good value I might use it on an A7, but it would just be for the cost savings. Even here you are probably better off spending just a bit more money and getting the new CV 110 f/2.5 APO macro. I have that lens on order and when I get it I am pretty sure I won't bother to adapt even the 120 f/4 APO macro.
p.1 #9 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Lovely, Steve. You should check out the Sonnar 140/2.8. It's very inexpensive and has the same flat-field low-res draw of the Hassy Sonnar 180, one I think is very well-suited for portraiture, if you have the working space it requires. Stopped down, the flat-field and low distortion make it a good choice for panos.
p.1 #10 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
freaklikeme wrote:
Lovely, Steve. You should check out the Sonnar 140/2.8. It's very inexpensive and has the same flat-field low-res draw of the Hassy Sonnar 180, one I think is very well-suited for portraiture, if you have the working space it requires. Stopped down, the flat-field and low distortion make it a good choice for panos.
Hi Brad,
I keep looking at that lens and it seems great. The trouble is I have two faster 135s (The Milvus 135 f/2 APO; and the Minolta MD 135 f/2) both of which do a very good job covering the sensor on the GFX. The Minolta is a lovely portrait lens with very nice rendering colours and bokeh. The Zeiss is as sharp as they come with zero aberrations. Then for landscapes I really like the 120 f/4 APO Macro (which is also flat field with zero distortion plus it has zero aberrations) and I also have the Hassy 180 Sonnar, so given those other lenses I just can't figure out when I would use the Contax 645 140. It does look like a nice lens though.
p.1 #11 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi Brad,
I keep looking at that lens and it seems great. The trouble is I have two faster 135s (The Milvus 135 f/2 APO; and the Minolta MD 135 f/2) both of which do a very good job covering the sensor on the GFX. The Minolta is a lovely portrait lens with very nice rendering colours and bokeh. The Zeiss is as sharp as they come with zero aberrations. Then for landscapes I really like the 120 f/4 APO Macro (which is also flat field with zero distortion plus it has zero aberrations) and I also have the Hassy 180 Sonnar, so given those other lenses I just can't figure out when I would use the Contax 645 140. It does look like a nice lens though....Show more →
That lens has very beautiful bokeh. However, it also has lots of CA. I agree with you for your case, adapt 35mm glass make more sense. For S, I can't adapt others but contax 645. It is very small compare to similar speed and focal length from Leica and it is also cheap.
p.1 #12 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
zhangyue wrote:
That lens has very beautiful bokeh. However, it also has lots of CA. I agree with you for your case, adapt 35mm glass make more sense. For S, I can't adapt others but contax 645. It is very small compare to similar speed and focal length from Leica and it is also cheap.
Yeah, I think the Contax 645 140 f/2.8 shares a lot in common with the Minolta MD 135 f/2. Both have the same weaknesses--a bit too much CA and octagonal out of focus highlights--but on CA the Minolta seems a bit better and it is a stop faster and smaller when you consider the relevant adapters. The Minolta isn't quite as cheap, but it isn't very expensive either.
p.1 #13 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi Brad,
I keep looking at that lens and it seems great. The trouble is I have two faster 135s (The Milvus 135 f/2 APO; and the Minolta MD 135 f/2) both of which do a very good job covering the sensor on the GFX. The Minolta is a lovely portrait lens with very nice rendering colours and bokeh. The Zeiss is as sharp as they come with zero aberrations. Then for landscapes I really like the 120 f/4 APO Macro (which is also flat field with zero distortion plus it has zero aberrations) and I also have the Hassy 180 Sonnar, so given those other lenses I just can't figure out when I would use the Contax 645 140. It does look like a nice lens though....Show more →
Hey, Steve,
Yeah, you're kind of stacked up there at that focal length. It's good to hear the APO 135/2 is working out well.
I agree, the 140's not perfect, though I do think it has the perfect amount of SA wide open. The bulk of the CA issues are spherochromatism, and while it does get bad in certain situations, I can't say that I own a lens I would use for portraits that doesn't have the same problem at wide apertures. Axial CA's easily corrected and there's no transverse ruining panos. I don't know that I'd buy the Fringer adapter just to use it without an interest in any of the other C645's, but if I were doing it for the landscape-ready 55 anyway, it would be an automatic inclusion for me.
p.1 #14 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
I had 30 mins with a Hasselblad X1D and 80/2 this afternoon. Wow, wow, wow for the lens ! I found the camera quirky, the AF is very slow and grip not the best but I could easily get used to it (however at around US$20,000 for the pair I would need to get divorced first) !
The shop sent me a couple of the shots I took but they are low res sent by WeChat (something like What's App) so I'll have to see if I can get them uploaded here. But that 80/2 ..........
They liked my work on Instagram and, without prompting, said they would consider giving me a week with the pair ... fingers crossed !!
EDIT. Note this thread is in the Alternative Forum as well as the Fuji one.
p.1 #15 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Does one need a smart adapter to adjust the aperture of C645 lenses (via the aperture ring) on a GFX? I don't want autofocus and don't care about adjusting aperture from the camera, so if a "dumb" adapter would work in conjunction with the lens aperture ring, I'd prefer that to the Fringer.
p.1 #16 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
Frogfish wrote:
I had 30 mins with a Hasselblad X1D and 80/2 this afternoon. Wow, wow, wow for the lens ! I found the camera quirky, the AF is very slow and grip not the best but I could easily get used to it (however at around US$20,000 for the pair I would need to get divorced first) !
The shop sent me a couple of the shots I took but they are low res sent by WeChat (something like What's App) so I'll have to see if I can get them uploaded here. But that 80/2 ..........
They liked my work on Instagram and, without prompting, said they would consider giving me a week with the pair ... fingers crossed !!
EDIT. Note this thread is in the Alternative Forum as well as the Fuji one....Show more →
If X2D has real mechanical focal plane shutter. I would seriously consider it for adapting glass. It has very nice design and form factor. Price wise, it is also not unreasonable consider the IQ and how many they sold and carrying HASSELBLAD name.
p.1 #17 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Does one need a smart adapter to adjust the aperture of C645 lenses (via the aperture ring) on a GFX? I don't want autofocus and don't care about adjusting aperture from the camera, so if a "dumb" adapter would work in conjunction with the lens aperture ring, I'd prefer that to the Fringer.
The C645 lens apertures are electronically controlled, so there is no way to operate them mechanically. That said, some have been able to modify (at least) the 35 mm lens to incorporate manual aperture control, but this process is not inexpensive and will require some additional fettling to mount on a GFX body.
Alternatively, one can simply preset the aperture using either a smart adapter or a Contax body and use it that way. In my experience, for anything but nighttime photography, this approach works surprisingly well, although if one has to change the aperture often, it can become a bit of a PITA.
p.1 #18 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Does one need a smart adapter to adjust the aperture of C645 lenses (via the aperture ring) on a GFX? I don't want autofocus and don't care about adjusting aperture from the camera, so if a "dumb" adapter would work in conjunction with the lens aperture ring, I'd prefer that to the Fringer.
Yes, you need smart adapter for C645. Otherwise, I will use those C645 for 35mm system. Especially that 120, still my favorite mid-tele lens. I rated it higher than 135APO ZF in term of final output but of course with S system.
p.1 #19 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
OK, thanks to both of you. I thought that might be the case, unfortunately; I couldn't remember whether the apertures were electronically controlled. I will likely want to use some C645 lenses, so I suppose I'll need the Fringer unless something else comes out by then. I haven't had a C645 body in 15-16 years, and don't want to buy another one!
p.1 #20 · A few Contax 645 80 f/2 portraits on Fuji GFX 50s
zhangyue wrote:
Yes, you need smart adapter for C645. Otherwise, I will use those C645 for 35mm system. Especially that 120, still my favorite mid-tele lens. I rated it higher than 135APO ZF in term of final output but of course with S system.
I too like the 120 f/4 APO a bit better than my Milvus 135 f/2 APO. I still pull out the Milvus when I want the wider aperture, but anything where I am happy with f/4, which on the GFX is a lot, I go with the C645 120.
