The 38V is a great lens . . . so is the 55V. But then again, the 35-100E is really nice. While bigger and bulkier it's a one lens solution. Image quality is excellent. Some say you carry a bag of primes in a single lens and I tend to agree.
You are right. I was not very clear in what my conundrum is. I enjoy both landscape and candid type of everyday photos. I am hoping to purchase a lens that scratches both itches. May not be possible.
I have the 38V, 75P, and 90V. Gun to my head, pick one? it's the 38 and it's not even close.
If you're more drawn to the 50mm equivalent, the 75 *could* be a nice choice, depending largely on how you feel about vignetting. It's very strong on the 75 and the falloff at the edges is especially strong. In some scenarios I wouldn't even call it correctable. Aside from that, it's very very sharp and I think it renders quite nicely. It's also not too spendy (relatively).
using the 35-100mm for a few months now can't say too many times why buy their primes there's no advantage, also have the 20-35 and the 55v my only wish is a longer zoom focal length.
the 35-100m does 90% of what you need....walk around with the 55v is the ticket for me.
gwbrown wrote:
Well.....I finally pulled the trigger on the X2D (awaiting delivery now).
But I still have a big decision to make. What lens to pair it with.
On my Leica M10, I really have an affinity to my 50mm summarit over a 35mm. So my initial thought is the 55V lens. I know Gordon loves that lens. But when I look through the Medium Format image thread there is something about the images shot with the 38V that I am drawn to.
Perhaps it boils down to people (55v) vs landscape (38v). Wish I could get them both but I have emptied the coffers so I need to make a choice.
input appreciated.....
RustyRus? RustyBug, Flash? ...Show more →
I would not get the 55V (or 38V) if landscapes are your *primary* thing. I would if it’s for general shooting with landscapes as a secondary. These lenses are just fab but absolute corner performance isn’t as good as some others. I have shot landscapes on the 55V and they’ve sold ( up to A0 size) but it’s not my first choice.
My first choice for landscapes was always the 35-75 (and now the 35-100). Its focus is *OK* but it optically stunning for landscape work. The new 35-100 seems as good but I have yet to use it in anger. The 35-100 has the fastest AF of any XCD lens. Both are better in the extreme corners (I’m talking the last 5-10% here so it’s not life changing unless you print big.) than either of the 38 or 55. AT f8-11 you’ll get away with these two just fine but not really any wider. In Leica land it’d be a bit like the 50mm Summilux. Just fabulous but not the *ideal* landscape lens. The 65 is like the 50mm APO Summicron M.
For a prime the old XCD 65mm 2.8 is your 50 replacement. Stunning corner performance and micro contrast but lazy focusing and heavy. So likely not your only lens.
I have all the current GFX bodies and most of the lenses. It’s like comparing a SL3 and an A7R5 because they share a sensor. Most everything else is different.
The advantages of the GFxXare cost, the 100-200 and the long primes. The GFX20-35 is better than the Hasselblad version by a small margin but the 35-100 is longer, faster and lighter than the GFX 45-100. The Fuji 55 is better than the 55V but the Fuji is an absolute monster. They’re designed for different purposes.
The X2D/X2D2 has superior IBIS, long exposure implementation, handling and menus. Most people looking at the X2D/X2D2 are well aware they can spend half as much on a Fuji.
In a world where most cameras are boring as bat shit the Hasselblad offers something different in the shooting experience.
RustyBug wrote:
Not pay attention to any of them. They were all processed by eye to the content creator. NONE were "pushed" for anything challenging on a technical level. NONE were "pushed" for anything on a creative level.
Likewise, my take on lenses comparison are pretty much the same, while in some scene lenses can absolutely showing minimal differences, in other lightings they can be massive, more so when one start to push the file around.
By the way, I was at flagship (I assumed judging from the sheer size of the store) yodobashi @ akihabara, which I'll always get my hands on the X2D II on display. I really love when you engage the focus clutch it'll activate the focus assist where it'll guide you to turn your lens to the right direction to achieve focus.
I also had a look at the photo album done by pro photogs, I was given an impression that they usually go with HDR processing especially portraits and still lifes, which they were processed to look like paintings. Not my preference and X2D generally produce clean and cheerful looking images (maybe that's what you call Hassy colors). Great camera nonetheless.
We're all discussing, once again, the two crown jewels of the camera world. If we're talking about landscape photography and only have to choose between the M (SL) and the X2D, the choice is obvious: the X2D. If it's raining, then the SL (Fuji or Nikon). But what if we're talking about artistic street or portrait photography?What lens creates the glow effect on the X2D?? None. Which lens does the X2D Dream View have? Only an 80/1.9, but it's discontinued, while there are hundreds of M lenses with f/0.95-1.5. If we're talking about tilt-shift, it's a third system (Fuji, Canon, or Phase One). So, it's all very unclear.
That’s purely in the eye of the photographer. My absolute favourite street/travel lens is the 55V. I’d choose that over the 80mm (which I have) every time. Same for portraits. 90V. I’ve also moved away from super fast lenses for the M system, SL and others. I kind of got bored with the ultra thin DoF look, personally.
If I can’t be creative at f2.5 then I figure 1.9 isn’t some magic pill that’ll polish that turd.
bwcolor wrote:
I’m a big fan of leaf shutters and many of the XCD v lenses will go to 1/4000.
Not without a big caveat, I'm afraid, so this is a dangerously vague statement. I personally try not to exceed 1/2000th on my X2D to maximize IQ...which is a big downside of the system and these lenses IMO.
RoamingScott wrote:
Not without a big caveat, I'm afraid, so this is a dangerously vague statement. I personally try not to exceed 1/2000th on my X2D to maximize IQ...which is a big downside of the system and these lenses IMO.
Jim Kasson has spoken at length about this.
Thank you for bringing up the issue with using faster shutter speeds. I guess there is always a downside.
You missed some big ones. If you need video or a 250 or 500mm, you're out of luck.
For most people, the gfx is the more complete system.
I realize the two system have different philosophies. I dislike the menu system of the Fuji. The Hassy is better in terms of handling and menus. The leaf shutter has some advantages for flash photography. Long exposures, I believe the Fuji has lesser inherent noise. The gf55 is stellar. So is the gf 110/2 (there is no xcd equivalent, no the 80 isn't). The ability to use non-gfx mount gems cannot be over started (Sigma 105/1.4, 135/1.8 and the canikon 200/2 are out of this world). I would never give up the ability to use those.
For what I shoot, if I had to do it all over again (I can afford the Hassy system), I would still pick the gfx.
People talk about the Hassy colors. I don't see it. Perhaps the hassy is a bit more accurate ? My PP skills are advanced enough where I can get any of these files looking how I want it. I love the gfx files/colors and value exciting and a bit more character over accurate. YMMV.
Shoot what you love, love what you shoot.
flash wrote:
I have all the current GFX bodies and most of the lenses. It’s like comparing a SL3 and an A7R5 because they share a sensor. Most everything else is different.
The advantages of the GFxXare cost, the 100-200 and the long primes. The GFX20-35 is better than the Hasselblad version by a small margin but the 35-100 is longer, faster and lighter than the GFX 45-100. The Fuji 55 is better than the 55V but the Fuji is an absolute monster. They’re designed for different purposes.
The X2D/X2D2 has superior IBIS, long exposure implementation, handling and menus. Most people looking at the X2D/X2D2 are well aware they can spend half as much on a Fuji.
In a world where most cameras are boring as bat shit the Hasselblad offers something different in the shooting experience.
RoamingScott wrote:
Not without a big caveat, I'm afraid, so this is a dangerously vague statement. I personally try not to exceed 1/2000th on my X2D to maximize IQ...which is a big downside of the system and these lenses IMO.
Jim Kasson has spoken at length about this.
Interesting. So are you stopping down or using ND filters when you need to stay under 1/2000?
I just picked up the X2d ii and 90V and am heading to the Carribean next week, but the camera/lens won't be here until the end of the week. I wonder if a 3 stop ND will be enough to shoot wide open.
saxguy wrote:
I just picked up the X2d ii and 90V and am heading to the Carribean next week, but the camera/lens won't be here until the end of the week. I wonder if a 3 stop ND will be enough to shoot wide open.
It should be, I used a 3 stop almost by default on my GF 55/1.7 for any outdoor shooting on a sunny day and it worked a treat and allowed for all-day wide open shots.
Picture This! wrote:
You missed some big ones. If you need video or a 250 or 500mm, you're out of luck.
For most people, the gfx is the more complete system.
I realize the two system have different philosophies. I dislike the menu system of the Fuji. The Hassy is better in terms of handling and menus. The leaf shutter has some advantages for flash photography. Long exposures, I believe the Fuji has lesser inherent noise. The gf55 is stellar. So is the gf 110/2 (there is no xcd equivalent, no the 80 isn't). The ability to use non-gfx mount gems cannot be over started (Sigma 105/1.4, 135/1.8 and the canikon 200/2 are out of this world). I would never give up the ability to use those.
For what I shoot, if I had to do it all over again (I can afford the Hassy system), I would still pick the gfx.
People talk about the Hassy colors. I don't see it. Perhaps the hassy is a bit more accurate ? My PP skills are advanced enough where I can get any of these files looking how I want it. I love the gfx files/colors and value exciting and a bit more character over accurate. YMMV.
I did mention the long primes. I have both. And the TC. Plus the 55 and 110 you mention. Plus most of the rest. I have absolutely nothing against the GFX system. Each has advantages and disadvantages. I think most people shooting Hasselblad are very aware of the extra functionality that the GFX offers and have chosen the Hasselblad anyway. I chose both. Just because a system does more things does not make it better.
Personally I have never shot video on the GFX in the last 6 years and I doubt I’ll start tomorrow. And the noise difference is basically irrelevant for long exposures The X2D2 is slightly lower at base ISO and higher at high ISO. you could argue that most long exposure shooting will be at base ISO. But neither is contributing to the final image. The X2D does not require any LENR and doesn’t offer it. It also meters to a one hour exposure and has better post noise reduction (Phocus). For sure the Hasselblad is the better tool for long exposures.
For me you can overstate non native lenses easily as I have absolutely zero interest in them. I shoot in more dynamic environments than that and if I want manual focus I’ll shoot an M. Or use a lens with a focus clutch like a V lens. I’d much rather have the high sync speed support of the leaf shutter lenses.
I absolutely agree with your assessment of the 55 and 110. The 110 might be the best portrait lens ever made. But they are giant. And as a travel photographer, I’m not really using them most of the time. I’d more likely choose between the 50 and 63mm for their excellent portability. That’s why I prefer the 55V. I’ll actually have that one with me. Same for the 35-100 over the 45-100.
But my main point stands. The GFX is just another big black box like any other mirrorless camera. It’s excellent and functional but pretty boring. The menus suck. You will carry more than the equivalent HB system. But mostly the X2D isn’t like holding any other mirrorless camera. That’s its main appeal. If I lost both I’d replace the HB system first, every time.
But yes, as I’ve said many times on this forum, don’t choose the HB if you adapt lenses or need video. Or need a 500mm.
For the record only two XCD lenses go to 1/4000. The 90V and the 35-100. All the rest go to 1/2000 in leaf shutter mode.
But since the X2D/X2D2 go to ISO 64/50, it’s not a huge deal anyway. Plus all my lenses have magnetic filter rings on them. Filters are trivial to use with magnets.
Different strokes for different folks. I do understand your pov.
For me, I prefer faster lenses and willing to put up with the weight. I need video capability (and dont want to carry two bodies). I shoot in what I consider pretty dynamic environments and use non-native autofocus lenses (with the fringer adapter). I have a z8 with some very good manual focus lenses but end up choosing the gfx unless I'm shooting fast action / sports which I dont much.
I mentioned that I hate the fuji menus. But, I don't share your view that the gfx is a boring black box. It produces incredible imagery.
For me personally, maybe I will enjoy the Hassy's handling and ergo more but it is 100% not going to make me a better photographer. How much experience is worth and priority of the above gaps with the hassy system is for the individual to decide.
I still stand by my opinion that the gfx is the more well rounded system with a better ROI for most users.
flash wrote:
I did mention the long primes. I have both. And the TC. Plus the 55 and 110 you mention. Plus most of the rest. I have absolutely nothing against the GFX system. Each has advantages and disadvantages. I think most people shooting Hasselblad are very aware of the extra functionality that the GFX offers and have chosen the Hasselblad anyway. I chose both. Just because a system does more things does not make it better.
Personally I have never shot video on the GFX in the last 6 years and I doubt I’ll start tomorrow. And the noise difference is basically irrelevant for long exposures The X2D2 is slightly lower at base ISO and higher at high ISO. you could argue that most long exposure shooting will be at base ISO. But neither is contributing to the final image. The X2D does not require any LENR and doesn’t offer it. It also meters to a one hour exposure and has better post noise reduction (Phocus). For sure the Hasselblad is the better tool for long exposures.
For me you can overstate non native lenses easily as I have absolutely zero interest in them. I shoot in more dynamic environments than that and if I want manual focus I’ll shoot an M. Or use a lens with a focus clutch like a V lens. I’d much rather have the high sync speed support of the leaf shutter lenses.
I absolutely agree with your assessment of the 55 and 110. The 110 might be the best portrait lens ever made. But they are giant. And as a travel photographer, I’m not really using them most of the time. I’d more likely choose between the 50 and 63mm for their excellent portability. That’s why I prefer the 55V. I’ll actually have that one with me. Same for the 35-100 over the 45-100.
But my main point stands. The GFX is just another big black box like any other mirrorless camera. It’s excellent and functional but pretty boring. The menus suck. You will carry more than the equivalent HB system. But mostly the X2D isn’t like holding any other mirrorless camera. That’s its main appeal. If I lost both I’d replace the HB system first, every time.
But yes, as I’ve said many times on this forum, don’t choose the HB if you adapt lenses or need video. Or need a 500mm.
