p.5 #4 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Peire wrote:
Thank you anlundeb.
The tubes don't fit as they have plastic baffles that prevent the rear lens element to get through.And yes - Hemerocallis (day lilies).
Peire, I was curious about this and just received my GF 500mm and tested it with two tubes and both worked. One is the 11mm from Fotodiox and the other is the 18mm from Fujifilm. Were you trying to use the 45mm? Additionally, I wanted to know if your flower shots were cropped. I'm finding that the tubes make a relatively small difference, which is to be expected given the long focal length. The difference between 11mm and 18mm is also very slight, unlike with a wider lens where it can be significant.
Below are two test shots, first with the 11mm and then 18mm (didn't take one with a bare lens, forgot).
And here is an example of the closest I could get to a flower with the 18mm attached:
p.5 #6 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ketang wrote:
Peire, I was curious about this and just received my GF 500mm and tested it with two tubes and both worked...
I was also curious about this. I have the 18mm Fujifilm extension tube (MCEX-18G WR) and use it with my GF 250mm lens and have had no trouble at all. I would be surprised if the GF 500mm lens is designed differently from the GF 250mm in terms of the mount, especially since they both accept the GF 1.4x TC.
p.5 #7 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
I have the only one tube - 18mm,Viltrox made.And it fits 500/5.6 GF.For some unknown reason I have mistaken it with some other incompatible accessory while describing and put the wrong info above.Sorry for that.
None of my flower pictures were crop,save a pair of yellow day lilies and only very slightly.18mm works best on shorter fls,i.e.from 45mm to 110mm.
As for 45mm tube - I'm afraid a bit of increased vignetting and field curvature issues it may theoretically induce.Yet I shall try it one day.I'm thinking of combining it with GF 100-200/5.6,GF Macro 120/4,GF 250/4 and GF 500/5.6.
p.5 #8 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
gear-nut wrote:
Would love to see some distance city or landscape images to see performance at distance.
From everything posted so far, it looks great!
Not exactly that, but I ran my standard brick wall test. It's pretty consistent across the frame from f/5.6 and sharpness seems totally sufficient. It really peaks from f/8-f/9 where it is very sharp. If I could shoot something distant on a tripod unaffected by wind I would choose f/9 and I'm sure it would be incredible.
p.5 #10 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Peire wrote:
I have the only one tube - 18mm,Viltrox made.And it fits 500/5.6 GF.For some unknown reason I have mistaken it with some other incompatible accessory while describing and put the wrong info above.Sorry for that.
None of my flower pictures were crop,save a pair of yellow day lilies and only very slightly.18mm works best on shorter fls,i.e.from 45mm to 110mm.
As for 45mm tube - I'm afraid a bit of increased vignetting and field curvature issues it may theoretically induce.Yet I shall try it one day.I'm thinking of combining it with GF 100-200/5.6,GF Macro 120/4,GF 250/4 and GF 500/5.6.
Thanks for clarifying that! When looking at your day-lilly / hemerocallis images, if I had to pick a favorite lens for those, it would be the 500 over the 120 macro. The reason being the perspective that comes from using a very long working distance. So using a tube for getting closer would work against that, and if I need more magnification I would consider using a teleconverter instead. Just my preference, nobody needs to listen to it
p.5 #12 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
alundeb wrote:
Thanks for clarifying that! When looking at your day-lilly / hemerocallis images, if I had to pick a favorite lens for those, it would be the 500 over the 120 macro. The reason being the perspective that comes from using a very long working distance. So using a tube for getting closer would work against that, and if I need more magnification I would consider using a teleconverter instead. Just my preference, nobody needs to listen to it
I choose tele perspective for close up shots very often either.Preferably with shallow dof and smooth oof blurr.Alas,both Fuji GF and Sony FE systems that I use,have not introduced so far anything like dedicated 180-200/2.8 macro FE (250/2.2 Macro GF).Being fed up with adapted lenses I still wait and hope that one day lens like this will appear.Yet sometimes 18mm tube combined with a short tele/standard/narrow wide lens does the job if I fancy something dreamy.
GFX100SFujifilm Fujinon GF63mm F2.8 R WR lens63mmf/2.81/350s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SFujifilm Fujinon GF110mm F2 R LM WR lens110mmf/2.01/140s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SFujifilm Fujinon GF110mm F2 R LM WR lens110mmf/2.01/950s100 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SFujifilm Fujinon GF110mm F2 R LM WR lens110mmf/2.01/420s200 ISO0.0 EV
GFX100SFujifilm Fujinon GF55mm F1.7 R WR lens55mmf/1.71/550s100 ISO0.0 EV
p.5 #15 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
The GF 500mm looks very impressive in the posts above. Is it in the same category of GF lenses as the (wonderful) GF 250mm? From some of the examples posted here, my eyes say yes, but judging lenses based on image quality online isn't usually the best indicator. In any case, it looks very promising.
p.5 #17 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
jbush wrote:
The GF 500mm looks very impressive in the posts above. Is it in the same category of GF lenses as the (wonderful) GF 250mm? From some of the examples posted here, my eyes say yes, but judging lenses based on image quality online isn't usually the best indicator. In any case, it looks very promising.
Jon
I would say that GF 500/5.6 is in the same league overall as GF 250/4,however it seems to be a tad less contrasty.
