leonasj wrote:
bob,im waiting your test tamron35/1.8 on techart adapter, does tamron is sharper at f2.8 vs gf63 or gf45 both at f2.8 too.
I don't need to see Bobby's tests to tell you that absolutely no way on this green earth that the Tamron comes close to the GF63 or GF45 in the centre and it's likely on a different planet when it comes to corner performance.
thrice wrote:
I don't need to see Bobby's tests to tell you that absolutely no way on this green earth that the Tamron comes close to the GF63 or GF45 in the centre and it's likely on a different planet when it comes to corner performance.
gf45 same sharpness 4450lines corner to corner, but gf63 sharpness centre on same gfx50 body shows 4750lines only centre and corner sharpness loose 15%, by https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/fujifilm-fujinon-gf-45mm-f28-r-wr imatest tests.Sharper for both at centre and corners is Sigma art macro 70mm f2.8 on A7r ii 42mpix body shows 4750lines(on 50mpix bodyt would be higher of course), so tamrons 35/1.4 or 35/1.8 at 2.8 must outperform old gf lenses too i think.
gf110 on 50S body shows only 4550lines at f2 , stopped to 2.8 shows 4820lines and at f5.6 shows maksimum 5600 lines, and never reach gf120 which shows even 6400 lines at f4.this is normal as macro lenses are made for max sharpness and resolution. p.s. yes, but on full gfx sensor any lens not better for native gf lens
Why would one get EF lenses to use on a format that EF lenses are not meant to cover? I understand if you already have lenses and want to continue using them, but buying them for using on GFX is really strange.
Yes, one can get "reasonable" results with a few of them when stopping down a lot, but then what's the point with the larger sensor?
I tested on GFX50s using TechArt. AF is crap. I was using timer. Lens would AF again right before taking the shot. So I ended up taking in manual focus.Also 2 times, my camera went into hung up state with green recording LED blinking and me not being able to do anything. Not that good, wouldn't recommend TechArt and this lens on GFX50s.
I wouldn't recommend EF lenses (other than the TSEs) for the GFX. If you want AF, then I would recommend the GF lenses. If the GF lenses are too expensive, then I would recommend Mamiya 645 MF lenses. The Mamiya 645 55 f/2.8 is a very good lens available at a low price and their longer lenses can be had inexpensively and perform very well. Wider than 55mm, and medium format lenses get large, perform less well, and are a bit more expensive. For wider than 55mm I would recommend staying with Fuji. So, here would be my recommendation for three different kits:
All Fuji GF (budget not a constraint can live with larger size):
GF 30 f/3.5; GF 45 f/2.8; GF 80 f/1.7; GF 110 f/2 (and I would probably replace the 45 with the 55 f/1.7 when it comes out.
All Fuji GF (focus on smaller size lighter weight kit)
GF 30 f/3.5; GF 63 f/2.8; GF 110 f/2
Mixed Fuji GF/Mamiya 645 kit (this is small, light weight and pretty cheap)
GF 30 f/3.5; Mamiya 55 f/2.8; Mamiya 110 f/2.8
Edit: Another lens that I really like is the Irix 45 f/1.4 in GF mount (it is manual focus, however). That is a really nice lens at a quite reasonable price.
I think a kit with:
GF 30 f/3.5; Irix 45 f/1.4; and GF 80 f/1.7 could be a really nice kit if you want fast lenses.
Steve, what's wrong with using say Sigma 85mm f1.4 if you have one. Same with Sigma 135mm f1.8. Or the Canon 200mm f2.8 or the 300mm f4. There are enough shots posted by different people that these work fine. Maybe Maiya or Pentax are better but I haven't seen the comparisons. Auto focus can be real helpful and with the Fringer adapter it is almost as good as native GF lens. Maybe I don't know. I do have Mamiya 120mm f4 but haven't tried it much. I had another, like 70mm f2.8 but then sold it as I wan't using it.
May 29, 2022 at 09:06 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
bobby350z wrote:
Steve, what's wrong with using say Sigma 85mm f1.4 if you have one. Same with Sigma 135mm f1.8. Or the Canon 200mm f2.8 or the 300mm f4. There are enough shots posted by different people that these work fine. Maybe Maiya or Pentax are better but I haven't seen the comparisons. Auto focus can be real helpful and with the Fringer adapter it is almost as good as native GF lens. Maybe I don't know. I do have Mamiya 120mm f4 but haven't tried it much. I had another, like 70mm f2.8 but then sold it as I wan't using it.
Nothing wrong with using those lenses if you have them, and there are lots of other good options as well. It is just if I were starting with a new kit, those wouldn't be the options that I would choose, for a walk around kit. (For longer lenses I think the 200 f/2 and 300 f/2.8 offer options that aren't available from Fuji and cover the sensor quite well, but they obviously aren't walk around lenses).
The bottom line is that I think Fuji has covered the walk around kit quite well and you can cover a walk around kit quite inexpensively with medium format lenses and if I am starting out I would choose either of these options (or a mix of them) for a walk around kit way before I would turn to EF lenses. Now if you already have EF lenses that is a different story as nothing is cheaper than using the lenses you already own, so there can certainly be value in doing that, but that isn't what this thread is about as far as I can tell.
irix 45mm f1.4 is very heavy 1100gr, and sharp only from f2.8 and it is FF lens with gfx mount only,not cover gfx sensor? , mamyia 55mm f2.8 is autofocus lenses?
May 29, 2022 at 10:48 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
leonasj wrote:
irix 45mm f1.4 is very heavy 1100gr, and sharp only from f2.8 and it is FF lens with gfx mount only,not cover gfx sensor? , mamyia 55mm f2.8 is autofocus lenses?
Who says the Irix 45 f/1.4 is only a FF lens? That is not what they say. In fact, they say, "The Irix 45mm f / 1.4 GFX is a professional lens designed for FujiFilm GFX cameras." and that its design is "based on the knowledge of Irix Lens engineers gained during the design and production of full-frame lenses." So the claim is specifically that it is not a rebadged FF 35mm lens. Who knows if that is just marketing, but IMO, one should not rush to the judgment that it is a FF 35mm lens without evidence of that when the company claims otherwise.
It is a very heavy lens, but I think a good one. It has some SA at wide apertures, but that can be nice at times for a certain look and as you say it sharpens up nicely from f/2.8 which is still pretty fast on a 44 X 33 sensor. Mamiya 645 lenses come in three generations. Both the first and second generation were manual focus and are great options for the GFX. The newest generation is for the Phase One MF cameras and they have very rudimentary AF and are very expensive. I don't think you can even adapt them to the GFX with aperture control. What I was recommending is the first or especially the second generation manual focus lenses with an N designation. If you want to read more about Mamiya 645 lenses here is the wiki page for them:
Nothing wrong with using those lenses if you have them, and there are lots of other good options as well. It is just if I were starting with a new kit, those wouldn't be the options that I would choose, for a walk around kit. (For longer lenses I think the 200 f/2 and 300 f/2.8 offer options that aren't available from Fuji and cover the sensor quite well, but they obviously aren't walk around lenses).
The bottom line is that I think Fuji has covered the walk around kit quite well and you can cover a walk around kit quite inexpensively with medium format lenses and if I am starting out I would choose either of these options (or a mix of them) for a walk around kit way before I would turn to EF lenses. Now if you already have EF lenses that is a different story as nothing is cheaper than using the lenses you already own, so there can certainly be value in doing that, but that isn't what this thread is about as far as I can tell....Show more →
I have 23mm, 45-100mm, 80mm f1.7, 110mm f2 and the 250mm f4. I had 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8 and 100-200mm but sold them. I feel bad for selling 32-64mm as my copy was pretty good. 45mm f2.8 was ok, I wish it was f2. 100-200mm I don't. know I think. my 20 yr old Canon for $500 does as well, obviously not a zoom.
If one doesn't have 80mm f1.7 then starting with Sigma 85mm f1.4 is not bad. You are talking $700 or so lens and it would do better than any MF lens if one wants to shoot f2 or faster. Maybe my assumption is wrong. I bought Sigma 135mm f1.8 as I liked Sigma 105mm f1.4 on FF and Fuji has no equivalent. I only got to test it a very short time as work and other stuff comes first. So far on GFX100s it looks good to me.
bobby350z wrote:
I have 23mm, 45-100mm, 80mm f1.7, 110mm f2 and the 250mm f4. I had 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8 and 100-200mm but sold them. I feel bad for selling 32-64mm as my copy was pretty good. 45mm f2.8 was ok, I wish it was f2. 100-200mm I don't. know I think. my 20 yr old Canon for $500 does as well, obviously not a zoom.
If one doesn't have 80mm f1.7 then starting with Sigma 85mm f1.4 is not bad. You are talking $700 or so lens and it would do better than any MF lens if one wants to shoot f2 or faster. Maybe my assumption is wrong. I bought Sigma 135mm f1.8 as I liked Sigma 105mm f1.4 on FF and Fuji has no equivalent. I only got to test it a very short time as work and other stuff comes first. So far on GFX100s it looks good to me.
Bobby, the OP was talking about a walk around kit. I don't think the Sigma 135 f/1.8 really fits in what I would call a walk around kit. You also have to buy an expensive adapter for any of the EF lenses and that adapter has been reverse engineered to work with EF lenses, reverse engineered to work with GFX cameras and if you start adding Sigma lenses that were also reverse engineered to work with EF cameras there is just a lot of things that can go wrong. It might work fine in many instances, but glitches are to be expected with such a system.
Also it is not true that there aren't medium format options for fast 80mm lenses. The simple and inexpensive choice at 80mm is the Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9. Cheaper than the Sigma. Bug free operation with a simple dumb adapter and manual focus, more than full coverage of the 44 X 33 sensor, and smaller and lighter than the Sigma too. It would be, IMO, a much better choice for starting a walk around kit if you think you need a lens that fast than the Sigma 85 f/1.4 which wasn't built for this large an image circle, is over twice the weight, over twice the price when you including the adapter, and has three times reverse engineering to potentially cause problems.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Also it is not true that there aren't medium format options for fast 80mm lenses. The simple and inexpensive choice at 80mm is the Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9. Cheaper than the Sigma. Bug free operation with a simple dumb adapter and manual focus, more than full coverage of the 44 X 33 sensor, and smaller and lighter than the Sigma too.
Pentax and Mamiya were duking it out in the 645 space, and this is one area where Mamiya wins. The fastest lens Pentax offered in the "normal" focal length for 645 is the 75/2.8, which is a very nice, tiny lens -- fabulous for "walking about" -- but not nearly as fast as Mamiya's 80/1.9.
One question I can't answer is whether the Mamiya is any good at 1.9. The Pentax is usable at f/2.8 if you like glowy, but it needs f/4 to be decent across the frame. After that it's very good to excellent.
Also interesting (to me anyway!) is that the 45mm and 55mm offerings for 645 from both Pentax and Mamiya have mixed reputations. The Pentax 645 45/2.8 is generally considered "OK" at best, while the 55/2.8 is not a home run. I know some people who love it on GFX, but the copy I tried was great in the centre from nearly wide open, but needed to be closed down a lot (as in f/8 to f/11) to get good across the frame. I have no personal experience with Mamiya's 645 45 and 55 offerings, but I have read similar findings.
The Pentax-A 645 35/3.5 is a whole other thing. It's the mainstay of my outfit -- just a superb performer on GFX.
May 29, 2022 at 04:36 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
rdeloe wrote:
Pentax and Mamiya were duking it out in the 645 space, and this is one area where Mamiya wins. The fastest lens Pentax offered in the "normal" focal length for 645 is the 75/2.8, which is a very nice, tiny lens -- fabulous for "walking about" -- but not nearly as fast as Mamiya's 80/1.9.
One question I can't answer is whether the Mamiya is any good at 1.9. The Pentax is usable at f/2.8 if you like glowy, but it needs f/4 to be decent across the frame. After that it's very good to excellent.
Also interesting (to me anyway!) is that the 45mm and 55mm offerings for 645 from both Pentax and Mamiya have mixed reputations. The Pentax 645 45/2.8 is generally considered "OK" at best, while the 55/2.8 is not a home run. I know some people who love it on GFX, but the copy I tried was great in the centre from nearly wide open, but needed to be closed down a lot (as in f/8 to f/11) to get good across the frame. I have no personal experience with Mamiya's 645 45 and 55 offerings, but I have read similar findings.
The Pentax-A 645 35/3.5 is a whole other thing. It's the mainstay of my outfit -- just a superb performer on GFX. ...Show more →
I have had the Mamiya 55 f/2.8 N and I was very happy with it. I think the outer image circle on 645 isn't quite as good, but on the GFX that doesn't matter. I think it is an excellent option. The Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9 is an interesting lens. Fairly sharp in the middle wide open, but the bokeh can be a bit funky. Some like that and call it character, others don't. So, as usual with a fast lens from this era some really like it and others don't. It is not a modern lens with aspherical elements but is a classic double gauss with the typical properties of such a lens. Some SA wide open but not too bad from 2m or so but gets worse closer than that, but if you stop down it gets super sharp. The bokeh is a bit funky wide open, but looks very nice, IMO, stopped down.
I am attaching below one of my favorite shots with the Mamiya 55 f/2.8
Steve Spencer wrote:
I have had the Mamiya 55 f/2.8 N and I was very happy with it. I think the outer image circle on 645 isn't quite as good, but on the GFX that doesn't matter. I think it is an excellent option. The Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9 is an interesting lens. Fairly sharp in the middle wide open, but the bokeh can be a bit funky. Some like that and call it character, others don't. So, as usual with a fast lens from this era some really like it and others don't. It is not a modern lens with aspherical elements but is a classic double gauss with the typical properties of such a lens. Some SA wide open but not too bad from 2m or so but gets worse closer than that, but if you stop down it gets super sharp. The bokeh is a bit funky wide open, but looks very nice, IMO, stopped down.
I am attaching below one of my favorite shots with the Mamiya 55 f/2.8...Show more →
Excellent intel. Thanks. I really like the results you got with your 55/2.8. It has a look I find very appealing. If I wasn't very happy with my Mamiya G 50/4, I'd be all over that 55/2.8.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Bobby, the OP was talking about a walk around kit. I don't think the Sigma 135 f/1.8 really fits in what I would call a walk around kit. You also have to buy an expensive adapter for any of the EF lenses and that adapter has been reverse engineered to work with EF lenses, reverse engineered to work with GFX cameras and if you start adding Sigma lenses that were also reverse engineered to work with EF cameras there is just a lot of things that can go wrong. It might work fine in many instances, but glitches are to be expected with such a system.
Also it is not true that there aren't medium format options for fast 80mm lenses. The simple and inexpensive choice at 80mm is the Mamiya 645 80 f/1.9. Cheaper than the Sigma. Bug free operation with a simple dumb adapter and manual focus, more than full coverage of the 44 X 33 sensor, and smaller and lighter than the Sigma too. It would be, IMO, a much better choice for starting a walk around kit if you think you need a lens that fast than the Sigma 85 f/1.4 which wasn't built for this large an image circle, is over twice the weight, over twice the price when you including the adapter, and has three times reverse engineering to potentially cause problems....Show more →
Off topic but to me shooting fast lens is very hard with manual focus unless one is shooting stationary objects but then why one needs fast lens to begin with. All I am saying is that Sigma AF is working as fast as native GF lens, and performance is not that behind. I need to test 135mm f1.8 more and I may then sell the 110mm f2.
