p.3 #4 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Luis Cunha wrote:
To all my friends here and Steve Spencer ,-)
Bought the GFX50R.
I am selling all my Canon and Zeiss lenses as I see no advantage in keeping them. Everything they do is done with GF lenses. The investment will have to be slower, step by step, but I will be able to take full advantage of the camera.
There is always a vignette with my lenses, correctable, but it takes work and requires time between 21mm and 50mm (in my case these are 4 lenses Canon and Zeiss).
The Zeiss 85mm behaves well, but a GF will not be worse, even if it is a 45-100mm zoom I guess. GF Glass is really good.
The Canon 100mm macro behaves well, but the GF 110mm with macro tubes or the 120mm macro will definitely be better. I can see some weird effects on the adapted lenses (I mean the images of course); some more than others. Adaptation with FF lenses is a huge compromise.
I will just keep the Canon MP-E 65mm macro x5 because it is unique and behaves well. The used camera (mint) I bought included an EF> GFX AF adapter from Kipon. Fits the 65mm MP-E for macro between 1: 1 and 5: 1 .-)
To begin with I am undecided and would like to have your opinion.
For macro:
FUJINON GF 120mm F/4 Macro R LM OIS WR (I know it doesn't do 1: 1 except with the Fujifilm Macro Extension tube MCEX-45G WR, but it's not a serious problem). I will lose infinity with the tubes. No problem.
or
FUJINON GF 110mm F/2 R LM WR with one of the tubes?
Fujifilm Macro Extension tube MCEX-18G WR
or
Fujifilm Macro Extension tube MCEX-45G WR
(I love the results of Jonas Rask here: https://jonasraskphotography.com/2018/04/12/moving-in-close-a-look-at-the-fujifilm-mcex-18g-and-mcex-45g/)
For more general stuff:
FUJINON GF 45mm F / 2.8 R WR
or
FUJINON GF 50mm F / 3.5 R LM WR
A last word for Steve Spencer: what exactly was the macro lens on the Mamiya 645 option (a link please)? And which adapter should I use?
Thank you all again. This forum is awesome.-D...Show more →
Did you try your 85mm ZE on GFX. It fully cover the sensor and have great performance after f5.6 cross frame. 50ZE can't cover full and depend on shooting distance. It can be 1X1 no problem but 5X4 is highly depend on what you shoot and distance.
I use metabone smart adapter, having no need for AF. The shooting experience is wonderful, I love ZE on it. OTUS 55 and 85 can cover mostly. 85 OTUS is about the same as ZE 85 planar. 55 OTUS offers less coverage compare to 85 siblings but fully usable and better than ZE planar 50. I do love ZE's size and handling. The problem is wide, almost no FF lens can cover 4433 fine. I have 30 and 45 OEM for that and having zero desire for mid long FUJI glasses. Don't forget classic V and PENTAX, contax 645 glasses.
GFX is a multi format for me. I don't mind shooting crop depend on distance and subject. I treat everything in additional to 35mm format as a plus.
p.3 #5 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Hello Zhangyue thanks for your reply.
So far and after much thought and testing, I have kept my Zeiss ZE lenses alongside the Fujinon GF. I use 35mm mode for 21mm, 35mm and 50mm and for 1.4/85mm it's not even necessary. I use these lenses when I do more "personal and artistic (I hate that word)" work and I'm not worried about the extreme precision of the GFX camera with the GF lenses. I see the GFX system as a plural, capable of great precision and rigor but also as an experimental platform. On the other hand, the resale value of these manual Zeiss lenses doesn't pay for their optical and mechanical quality, so I didn't sell them.
One day I will try to exchange the GFX50R for the GFX100s, for several reasons but also because even in 35mm mode, with 100 megapixels, the files will be huge enough for any use.
Last but not least; I really like Zeiss .-)
When I bought the used GFX50R, it came with the Kipon adapter for Canon EF lenses and that's why I use it; no problems with both Zeiss and a Canon MP-E which is also manual. Best wishes.
p.3 #6 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Luis Cunha wrote:
Hello Zhangyue thanks for your reply.
So far and after much thought and testing, I have kept my Zeiss ZE lenses alongside the Fujinon GF. I use 35mm mode for 21mm, 35mm and 50mm and for 1.4/85mm it's not even necessary. I use these lenses when I do more "personal and artistic (I hate that word)" work and I'm not worried about the extreme precision of the GFX camera with the GF lenses. I see the GFX system as a plural, capable of great precision and rigor but also as an experimental platform. On the other hand, the resale value of these manual Zeiss lenses doesn't pay for their optical and mechanical quality, so I didn't sell them.
One day I will try to exchange the GFX50R for the GFX100s, for several reasons but also because even in 35mm mode, with 100 megapixels, the files will be huge enough for any use.
Last but not least; I really like Zeiss .-)
When I bought the used GFX50R, it came with the Kipon adapter for Canon EF lenses and that's why I use it; no problems with both Zeiss and a Canon MP-E which is also manual. Best wishes....Show more →
You made the right decision. ZE classic are final pieces bridge classic and modern with modern coating and classical rendering. They are fine for most photographic task I give them.
The beauty of GFX is you have multi-format option for free. a small 50mm ZE planar give you Legendary Hasselblad 80mm field of view in squared mode. How cool is that.
p.3 #7 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Thanks for your opinion.
As for the similarities between the ZE 1.4/50mm and the Hasselblad 80mm, it won't be exactly the same, but close. This Zeiss ZE will give a 40mm FOV (in 35mm on the GFX sensor). Would a Hasselblad/Zeiss 80mm on an old square sensor give something between 50mm-60mm (35mm equivalent)? I may be wrong... but I understand and share your excitement ,-)
p.3 #8 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
You can calculate this way. 80/56=X/33 for square format on GFX. X=47, so 47mm Lens will give same field of view of 80mm. it is close enough.
You need f1.8 to get similar f2.8 original on Hasselblad. ZE 50 at f1.8 is still not fully tight up but rendering can be fun. F2.5 will give you exceptional performance and look.
Having said that, if you haven’t looked or tried, metabone speedboost for Hasselblad V to GFX pretty much recreate the Hasselblad Zeiss performance and look. The negative is the adapter is expensive, big and heavy, positive is I never had any adapter have better quality than that one. Both mechanics and Optics are great.
110f2 hassy with this adapter on GFX will give you 55mmf1 on FF. None of f1 lens I have seen give this kind of contrast and relaxed look. (Maybe new 58mmZ)
Luis Cunha wrote:
Thanks for your opinion.
As for the similarities between the ZE 1.4/50mm and the Hasselblad 80mm, it won't be exactly the same, but close. This Zeiss ZE will give a 40mm FOV (in 35mm on the GFX sensor). Would a Hasselblad/Zeiss 80mm on an old square sensor give something between 50mm-60mm (35mm equivalent)? I may be wrong... but I understand and share your excitement ,-)
p.3 #9 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Thanks for the clarification. The Metabones adapter is very expensive indeed. I think it doesn't justify being so expensive. It's just a ring with contacts and glass; even with build quality, it's not a lens. For the price of this one, we can buy two Zeiss ZE lenses or many other great lenses. It must be because you are Canadian .-)
p.3 #10 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
I am not Canadian but I guess it is harder to talk about price than value as preference will be different.
For me, get 55mm f1 and having full manual V Zeiss glass cover all the 44X33 and get one stop faster is already worth the ticket. The negative is weight and size for sure.
The lens element used are huge with 6 element design inside the adapter. that white paper claimed it optimized for taking consideration of all hsselblad V glasses and improve center sharpness for them. The designer is Brian Caldwell. You can google him. I personally feel it is under priced compare to other adapter or $900 lens you buy now.
Well, I know you may feel it is over priced. Since I have already mentioned here, this info won’t be meant to you but really I just want share here for anyone who are interested to know.
Luis Cunha wrote:
Thanks for the clarification. The Metabones adapter is very expensive indeed. I think it doesn't justify being so expensive. It's just a ring with contacts and glass; even with build quality, it's not a lens. For the price of this one, we can buy two Zeiss ZE lenses or many other great lenses. It must be because you are Canadian .-)
p.3 #11 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
I spoke in Canada because I think the brand is from there (I can be mistaken) and the standard of living there is quite high as well as the prices of things. I'm in Portugal as you can see and around here this adapter is more than a worker's minimum monthly wage. Of course the GFX system is also an expensive system, but as long as there is work ,-) the tools pay for themselves.
Can you please tell me the exact links of the adapter and your Hasselblad lens(s) so that I can in detail assess the performance and possible cost of such a solution? 55mm f1.0 is very... interesting ,-)
A note: you mention the Hasselblad/Zeiss lens adapter for the GFX mount systems; right?
There is also a Metabones for Zeiss ZE 35mm lenses for the GFX mount, which makes these lenses cover the sensor completely (at least it is what they promise); this is not what you have is it?
Sorry if I'm confusing things.
Thank you very much.
p.3 #13 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Luis Cunha wrote:
I spoke in Canada because I think the brand is from there (I can be mistaken) and the standard of living there is quite high as well as the prices of things. I'm in Portugal as you can see and around here this adapter is more than a worker's minimum monthly wage. Of course the GFX system is also an expensive system, but as long as there is work ,-) the tools pay for themselves.
Can you please tell me the exact links of the adapter and your Hasselblad lens(s) so that I can in detail assess the performance and possible cost of such a solution? 55mm f1.0 is very... interesting ,-)
A note: you mention the Hasselblad/Zeiss lens adapter for the GFX mount systems; right?
There is also a Metabones for Zeiss ZE 35mm lenses for the GFX mount, which makes these lenses cover the sensor completely (at least it is what they promise); this is not what you have is it?
Sorry if I'm confusing things.
Thank you very much....Show more →
Hi, I fully understand about price. No worry.
Yes, there is another one for ZE that reduce the speed of lens to stretch the coverage to cover full 4433 frame. I personally don't see that is needed. if the purpose is to have as much pixel as possible, then yes, it will fulfill. but I will just use regular adapter in FF mode of GFX to have lens native performance and treat anything above FF are plus. It give 32M in your case and 64M for 100s. That is plenty for most thing.
However, most people want "speed boost" for rendering purpose and it is much more meaningful product for me. I like manual focus, V glasses especially build well last life time. and rendering is classic. Again, I don't want make this as truth but really personal preference thing.
Your link about the designer is correct. White paper is on Metabone website. A Hongkong company I believe.
p.3 #15 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
Yes. That is the one. It was recommended by my friend and I love it, worth the wait. It is a customer order. Most customer are cinema users that are less sensitive to cost.
I am personally only interested in two lens 80mmf2.8 and 110mmf2 that both are legendary.
As for images, this thread is about ZE for GFX. It is a little off topic
And more importantly, I don't have any for now but make sure you can check back Alt forum Medium format images thread. I will share some later when I upload my images to flickr. I will pm you when I do so if you are not regular visitor for that forum or thread.
Do some research to see if you love Hasselblad V results first. GFX with Metabone almost recreate the looks.
p.3 #19 · Fujifilm GFX 50R+Canon and Zeiss ZE glass
I've had some good results with Zeiss ZE on my GFX100. But, I'm now using GF lenses and I'm offering for sale my ZE 21, ZE 35, ZE 50, and ZE 85. All minty.
but I guess it is harder to talk about price than value as preference will be different.