Fpessolano wrote:
Nice.
I bought instead the 80. It fits better in my dual kit and it is on rebate. Next rebates maybe the 55 also.
My GF 55/1.7 was also discounted.Favourite retailer managed to get it for 2560 USD versus RRP of 3000 USD.
I like GF 80/1.7 very much.After acquisition of GF 55/1.7 though, I let the GF 63/2.8 go as I don't need that many standard lenses.Also GF 63/2.8 while being nice and compact is not as good overall as both GF 80/1.7 and GF 55/1.7.
My concern now is that GF 55/1.7 is very close to GF 45/2.8,yet GF 45/2.8 is too good to part with it.
A nice thing with fast lenses is that it makes it way easier to focus in very low light. Maybe especially with the 50 mpix sensor, that really struggles with the preview in dark conditions. Forget about AF though.
GFX50S IIGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.725s100 ISO0.0 EV
Agree .... The only camera that seems to focus (AF) fine with the 55 is the 100II ..... tried the combo at the Fuji Tokyo midtown store and it was so much more usable than on my older bodies.
envydd wrote:
Agree .... The only camera that seems to focus (AF) fine with the 55 is the 100II ..... tried the combo at the Fuji Tokyo midtown store and it was so much more usable than on my older bodies.
I had the 55+100s on me and the showroom have the 55 on the 100ii ..... the difference in AF was *very* noticeable, even by my teenager (who uses my GFX at times, which amused the Fuji folks!). The slight difference in weight was also noticeable. The EVF on the ii was much better.
I didn't mean that the 55 focuses worse than any other lens on my camera (50S II), but that the camera won't AF at all in very low light. Or it will at least not hit what I aimed it at.
Focusing manually is easier with a fast lens because there is less lag and less noise in the viewfinder. And if it's veeery dark, a slow enough lens will not yield a preview image at all.
A very strange thing is that when I use the GF 55 or 80 with thumb AF, both the AF-On button and enlarge button (I assigned that function to the front Fn button) are unresponsive now and then. It doesn't happen with any other GF lens, and both these lenses seem to have the same type of AF motor. I wonder what the heck is going on with that... It also never happens if I use the main shutter button.
Edit: I use thumb focusing in "M" mode and the regular shutter button in "AF-S" mode. Which has the benefit that the camera won't try to (re)focus when half-pressing the shutter button, and you still have a button for AF in "M" mode. It makes it very fast to switch between MF and AF.
My copy of GF 55/1.7 isn't master of autofocusing on both of my 100s bodies.In lower light it is slow,hunts and misses the focusing point very often.Yet it is nothing new compared to other GF primes and zooms on the 100s.
My go to for portraits is usually the 110 or the 80 but been trying to do more environmental portraits. Some motion blur on the hand due to the low shutter speed and the model moving but I still like the shot.
Certainly not my best work but still figuring out this lens and focal length.
Awesome work! On a more unrelated point, how do you like that CV 50mm f1 on the Z? Per your Flickr, you've used a lot of the top-tier glass so I'd appreciate your impressions over people taking photos of their cats and doors
Makten wrote:
I didn't mean that the 55 focuses worse than any other lens on my camera (50S II), but that the camera won't AF at all in very low light. Or it will at least not hit what I aimed it at.
Focusing manually is easier with a fast lens because there is less lag and less noise in the viewfinder. And if it's veeery dark, a slow enough lens will not yield a preview image at all.
A very strange thing is that when I use the GF 55 or 80 with thumb AF, both the AF-On button and enlarge button (I assigned that function to the front Fn button) are unresponsive now and then. It doesn't happen with any other GF lens, and both these lenses seem to have the same type of AF motor. I wonder what the heck is going on with that... It also never happens if I use the main shutter button.
Edit: I use thumb focusing in "M" mode and the regular shutter button in "AF-S" mode. Which has the benefit that the camera won't try to (re)focus when half-pressing the shutter button, and you still have a button for AF in "M" mode. It makes it very fast to switch between MF and AF. ...Show more →
It is not a surprise it cannot autofocus well under some conditions. There is very little contrast in the dark.
The same happens when you try to focus on the middle of the cloud on a perfectly well lit day. Usually you have to find an edge to focus on.
olegkin wrote:
It is not a surprise it cannot autofocus well under some conditions. There is very little contrast in the dark.
The same happens when you try to focus on the middle of the cloud on a perfectly well lit day. Usually you have to find an edge to focus on.
I think it has more with general lack of light to do. The sensor is pretty ancient and you can see how everything starts lagging and there is noise from hell in the viewfinder. Of course AF can't work if there is not a sufficient signal to noise ratio.
Edit: And my whole point was that the 55 is focusing _better_ than the other lenses, because it's faster and thus lets more light in.
lukeiam wrote:
Awesome work! On a more unrelated point, how do you like that CV 50mm f1 on the Z? Per your Flickr, you've used a lot of the top-tier glass so I'd appreciate your impressions over people taking photos of their cats and doors
I appreciate your kind words! I personally really like the CV 50mm f1 on the Zf. For a manual lens it is quite fat and heavy so I could see more than a few people not liking it for the lack of convenience but I've always been someone who pushes through inconveniences to get the results I'm looking for and this lens does not disappoint. The build quality feels absolutely amazing and the lens is a joy to manually focus even at f1. I find the rendering to be quite beautiful especially at f1 and it is a lovely portrait lens and wonderful for low light situations. No regrets and I plan on keeping the lens.
After first shootout with GF 55/1.7 I can confirm my previous findings - this lens has very little CA of any kind wide open and is sharper and contrastier than GF 80/1.7.I did not expect that I'll become to like it very much that quickly.
GFX100SGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/480s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/1100s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/8.01/70s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/40s400 ISO+1.0 EV
GFX100SGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/40s250 ISO0.0 EV
Peire wrote:
After first shootout with GF 55/1.7 I can confirm my previous findings - this lens has very little CA of any kind wide open and is sharper and contrastier than GF 80/1.7.I did not expect that I'll become to like it very much that quickly.
I agree! Still like the rendering of the 80 better though. :-)
The only real issue with the 55 is how it can flare badly with strong light sources within the frame.
Example where I think any other GF lens would have done better...
GFX50S IIGF55mmF1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/4s500 ISO0.0 EV
Makten wrote:
I agree! Still like the rendering of the 80 better though. :-)
The only real issue with the 55 is how it can flare badly with strong light sources within the frame.
Example where I think any other GF lens would have done better...
Yes.I noticed that as well.It is visible on my picture no 4 above. Yet as I take photographs mainly in daylight it does not bother me much.
Thanks, I'm sure I'll cope but you're right the AF isn't great (have the lens now) on 100S.
envydd wrote:
I had the 55+100s on me and the showroom have the 55 on the 100ii ..... the difference in AF was *very* noticeable, even by my teenager (who uses my GFX at times, which amused the Fuji folks!). The slight difference in weight was also noticeable. The EVF on the ii was much better.
