Digital Medium Format Thread

Mr Perceptive said:
I know, the two lenses I might be interested in (GF32 and GF80) are not in this promotion - stops temptation at least!
Click to expand...
I've held off the 80 due to the slow focusing and some chroma wide open. I've been spoiled with a 100% accurate and fast AF with the R5!
 
SFTPhotography said:
Random question - anyone here run another system other than their medium format one?

I run a D850 and 24-70 and 70-200 2.8. I know @TimHughes runs a Canon 35mm system.

If you do - do you use your medium format gear more, or less than the smaller format system?
Click to expand...

Steve

I have :-

  • GFX50S+3xGF Lenses and a collection of adapted glass (mainly Canon EF)
  • Fuji X100F system, I have both the WCL and TCL adapters so its effectively a 3 lens system (28/35/50)
  • Canon EOS 35mm Film (takes the same EF lenses as the GFX adapter)
  • Fuji GA645 Film
  • Bronica SQA 6x6 film
I probably us the GFX most out of the two digital solutions, the X100 though provides a real lightweight solution when I need it.

In film terms I use the Fuji GA645 the most, and often will take the GFX and the GA645 in the same bag. the GA645 is a 'lightweight' (in MF terms) camera.

I have ben thinking that maybe I should add an EOS-R, but in all honesty, I would only use it as a one lens solution with a Sigma 35mm F1.4, as for proper 'photography days' I'd take the GFX, but I'm quite happy taking the GFX+GF45mm as a one lens solution, so will put the EOS-R money towards more glass.

I am perhaps slightly odd in my requirements, I'm not interested in super wide, nor telephoto, I much prefer to be in the 24-50mm FF Focal length. I often like to take a lightweight combination, and the GFX is half the weight of the 645Z (and weighs less than the D850), and my lens choices are also designed to keep the weight down. I know you prefer a heavier combination, but for me, if I didn't keep the weight down I'd take it out less often. I really couldn't be doing with the weight of your bag (especially with two 645Z bodies!!)
 
SFTPhotography said:
Random question - anyone here run another system other than their medium format one?

I run a D850 and 24-70 and 70-200 2.8. I know @TimHughes runs a Canon 35mm system.

If you do - do you use your medium format gear more, or less than the smaller format system?
Click to expand...
I’m using them for different things. GFX is for studio and landscape. And Canon for sports and events. Recently events have started again so Canon is getting more use.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Steve

I have :-

  • GFX50S+3xGF Lenses and a collection of adapted glass (mainly Canon EF)
  • Fuji X100F system, I have both the WCL and TCL adapters so its effectively a 3 lens system (28/35/50)
  • Canon EOS 35mm Film (takes the same EF lenses as the GFX adapter)
  • Fuji GA645 Film
  • Bronica SQA 6x6 film
I probably us the GFX most out of the two digital solutions, the X100 though provides a real lightweight solution when I need it.

In film terms I use the Fuji GA645 the most, and often will take the GFX and the GA645 in the same bag. the GA645 is a 'lightweight' (in MF terms) camera.

I have ben thinking that maybe I should add an EOS-R, but in all honesty, I would only use it as a one lens solution with a Sigma 35mm F1.4, as for proper 'photography days' I'd take the GFX, but I'm quite happy taking the GFX+GF45mm as a one lens solution, so will put the EOS-R money towards more glass.

I am perhaps slightly odd in my requirements, I'm not interested in super wide, nor telephoto, I much prefer to be in the 24-50mm FF Focal length. I often like to take a lightweight combination, and the GFX is half the weight of the 645Z (and weighs less than the D850), and my lens choices are also designed to keep the weight down. I know you prefer a heavier combination, but for me, if I didn't keep the weight down I'd take it out less often. I really couldn't be doing with the weight of your bag (especially with two 645Z bodies!!)
Click to expand...

Ha - yes the bag is insanely heavy actually - I realised this when I "just" took a D850 and 70-200 F2.8 out or when I went "light" with one 645z and 28-45.

Oddly liberating.

I don't tend to stray far from the car but when I do - like I did in Spain where there was hking it can be less than idea.
 
In the last few months, I have managed to adapt an Ipsco Ultra MC 125mm f/2 cinema lens for my GFX50S. These Ipsco lenses are 70mm projection lenses that share the same design as the Schneider Cinelux Ultra MC line, so plenty of sensor coverage and great performance. This gives me a lens similar to the Fujifilm GF 110mm f/2 in a relatively more affordable package. It's all set for infinity focus and I've even managed to adapt it so it can take 77mm filters (it's not ordinarily possible to fit filters to the front).



I haven't managed to use it much though as I've generally been carrying my Mitakon 65mm. A few of the handful of photos that have come from the lens are below. As I'm mostly using the Mitakon, I'm not sure yet if I'm going to hold onto this or not.




 
skysh4rk said:
In the last few months, I have managed to adapt an Ipsco Ultra MC 125mm f/2 cinema lens for my GFX50S. These Ipsco lenses are 70mm projection lenses that share the same design as the Schneider Cinelux Ultra MC line, so plenty of sensor coverage and great performance. This gives me a lens similar to the Fujifilm GF 110mm f/2 in a relatively more affordable package. It's all set for infinity focus and I've even managed to adapt it so it can take 77mm filters (it's not ordinarily possible to fit filters to the front).

I haven't managed to use it much though as I've generally been carrying my Mitakon 65mm. A few of the handful of photos that have come from the lens are below. As I'm mostly using the Mitakon, I'm not sure yet if I'm going to hold onto this or not.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few people who use projection lenses on GFX cameras to great effect, Its something I've gieven some consideration to, but have ventured down that path yet.

As an aside, I have got quite a few adapted lenses 'working' on the GFX50S, see below

Canon FD50mm F1.4 with Pixco Adapter, lovely rendering but hard vignette - very usable if cropped slightly
Samyang 85mm F1.4 Manual Focus with Pixco Adapter, works but lens is quite soft wide open - slight vignette
Helios 58mm 44-2 F2 K&F M42 -> EF, then Pixco EF Adapter, Full Sensor Coverage, good swirly bokeh, needs using more
Canon EF40mm on Andoer AF Adapter - Works fine, Full Sensor Coverage, not as sharp as native GF Glass but makes a nice pancake package
Canon EF100mm F2.8L Macro on Andoer AF Adapter- Works Fine, Full Sensor Coverage, very very slight Vignette wide open, nice and sharp
Sigma 35mm F1.4 ART on Andoer AF Adapter - Works Fine, Full Sensor Coverage, nice and sharp, recent purchase needs more frames under its belt.

I also have an EF-to Bronica SQ Adapter, but other than a brief test have not used by Bronica Lenses on the GFX (with Pixco EF daapater)

None of these lenses are 'better' than the Fuji Native Glass, and in fact the Fuji Glass is the sharpest (with the snappiest AF, if a GFX50S can ever have snappy AF)
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
There are quite a few people who use projection lenses on GFX cameras to great effect, Its something I've gieven some consideration to, but have ventured down that path yet.

As an aside, I have got quite a few adapted lenses 'working' on the GFX50S, see below

Canon FD50mm F1.4 with Pixco Adapter, lovely rendering but hard vignette - very usable if cropped slightly
Samyang 85mm F1.4 Manual Focus with Pixco Adapter, works but lens is quite soft wide open - slight vignette
Helios 58mm 44-2 F2 K&F M42 -> EF, then Pixco EF Adapter, Full Sensor Coverage, good swirly bokeh, needs using more
Canon EF40mm on Andoer AF Adapter - Works fine, Full Sensor Coverage, not as sharp as native GF Glass but makes a nice pancake package
Canon EF100mm F2.8L Macro on Andoer AF Adapter- Works Fine, Full Sensor Coverage, very very slight Vognette wide open, nice and sharp
Sigma 35mm F1.4 ART on Andoer AF Adapter - Works Fine, Full Sensor Coverage, nice and sharp, recent purchase needs more frames under its belt.

I also have an EF-to Bronica SQ Adapter, but other than a brief test have not used by Bronica Lenses on the GFX (with Pixco EF daapater)

None of these lenses are 'better' than the Fuji Native Glass, and in fact the Fuji Glass is the sharpest (with the snappiest AF, if a GFX50S can ever have snappy AF)
Click to expand...

The projection lens was quite a bit more work, but I also have a couple of more readily adapted lenses for the GFX50S as well. These include a Minolta MD Rokkor 45mm f/2 and a Minolta MC Rocker 58mm f/1.4.

To be honest, those lenses, which have received quite good write ups on the internet for use on the GFX cameras, are terrible and it's put me off adapting any further 135-format lenses (because I don't know if the lens will work and I feel I can't trust any reviews of adapted lenses). I can handle a bit of vignetting (as much of this can be corrected), but the extreme field curvature is a deal breaker for me. The 45mm lens is okay at apertures of f/5.6 or smaller, but I've been getting some sort of weird glare, artefact, or something on long exposure shots with it, so having trouble finding any circumstances where I feel I can use/trust it.

I've been considering getting a Fotodiox tilt/shift Pentax 6x7 to GFX adapter for my medium format lenses for the past several months, but have yet to pull the trigger. At least I know my Pentax lenses will easily cover the sensor with their huge image circles (which also means I could make good use of the lenses for tilting and shifting on the GFX).
 
skysh4rk said:
The projection lens was quite a bit more work, but I also have a couple of more readily adapted lenses for the GFX50S as well. These include a Minolta MD Rokkor 45mm f/2 and a Minolta MC Rocker 58mm f/1.4.

To be honest, those lenses, which have received quite good write ups on the internet for use on the GFX cameras, are terrible and it's put me off adapting any further 135-format lenses (because I don't know if the lens will work and I feel I can't trust any reviews of adapted lenses). I can handle a bit of vignetting (as much of this can be corrected), but the extreme field curvature is a deal breaker for me. The 45mm lens is okay at apertures of f/5.6 or smaller, but I've been getting some sort of weird glare, artefact, or something on long exposure shots with it, so having trouble finding any circumstances where I feel I can use/trust it.

I've been considering getting a Fotodiox tilt/shift Pentax 6x7 to GFX adapter for my medium format lenses for the past several months, but have yet to pull the trigger. At least I know my Pentax lenses will easily cover the sensor with their huge image circles (which also means I could make good use of the lenses for tilting and shifting on the GFX).
Click to expand...

For me the adapted lenses need a "reason" for me to keep them in my ownership.

The EF40mm I almost certainly won't use on the GFX, but I do have Canon Film SLRs which can use it. Most of the others are faster than the native GFX Glass, and I only have the 100mm Macro to scan Negatives with!

The Pentax67 on a tilt shift sounds great, but the combination will not be lightweight!
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The Pentax67 on a tilt shift sounds great, but the combination will not be lightweight!
Click to expand...

The tilt/shift adapter plus the Pentax 45mm, which is the main lens I would plan to use, come in at a total of 777g, which is 273g lighter than the lens that is normally on my GFX50S (i.e., Mitakon 65mm f/1.4). That weight seems really reasonable for a tilt/shift lens with lots of coverage too, as these tilt/shift lenses can be really big too given the large image circles ordinarily required. Length will probably be the bigger issue with any adapted Pentax 6x7 lens for me because of the long flange distance of the Pentax system.
 
skysh4rk said:
The tilt/shift adapter plus the Pentax 45mm, which is the main lens I would plan to use, come in at a total of 777g, which is 273g lighter than the lens that is normally on my GFX50S (i.e., Mitakon 65mm f/1.4). That weight seems really reasonable for a tilt/shift lens with lots of coverage too, as these tilt/shift lenses can be really big too given the large image circles ordinarily required. Length will probably be the bigger issue with any adapted Pentax 6x7 lens for me because of the long flange distance of the Pentax system.
Click to expand...

That Mikaton is 'heavy' - twice the weight of most of my GFX lens combinations!
 
Mr Perceptive said:
That Mikaton is 'heavy' - twice the weight of most of my GFX lens combinations!
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's not little, but this lens and camera combo still weighs less than my usual set up prior to purchasing the GFX50S: My Pentax 6x7 with 105mm f/2.4 total over 2.5kg.

My "compact" camera option, the Plaubel Makina 67, which I've used often for travel, is still 1.5kg. The folding-lens design means that it is easier to pack though than anything else I own.

The main benefit of the GFX50S for me is that I don't need to worry about carrying film and avoiding those new airport CT scanners that damage film, so even if the GFX50S and Mitakon weigh a bit, my bag overall weighs much less and travel is a bit easier (although now I need to worry about batteries and chargers, I guess).
 
Anyone here with a 100mp who's also had the 50mp care to comment if they think the 100mp files are as clean and recover shadows as well as the 50mp.

The 645z shadow recovery - and the genuine cleanliness of the shadows continues to impress.

In saying that - I've added a D850 to the fleet and it's to all intensive purposes just as clean with resolution not a million miles off.

IE do I move on to Fuji at some stage to get 100mp but I wouldn't want to sacrifice DR etc for that. Both my present systems are a joy to work with but I am resolution whore.
 
Last edited:
SFTPhotography said:
Anyone here with a 100mp who's also had the 50mp care to comment if they think the 100mp files are as clean and recover shadows as well as the 50mp.

The 645z shadow recovery - and the genuine cleanliness of the shadows continues to impress.

In saying that - I've added a D850 to the fleet and it's to all intensive purposes just as clean with resolution not a million miles off.
Click to expand...

I think @trevorbray has had both, the 100MP obviously has deeper bit depth 16 v 14, not that I've had any issues with the 50S
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I think @trevorbray has had both, the 100MP obviously has deeper bit depth 16 v 14, not that I've had any issues with the 50S
Click to expand...

It does - but do the shadows pull as well. I've only got limited experience from some sample files.

I was reading back this thread/some PMs to some comments re D850 and A7Riv and how the D850 files were favoured slightly for the adjustability by @srhmoto

Well - the photosites in the GFX100s are common to the A7Riv - it's got 100million of them, the Sony 60 million of them arranged in a slightly different way - see where I am going with this. Yes - it's a medium format sensor - but essentially a scaled up 35mm one. The photosites etc in the 50mp cameras I think are unique to the sensor - ie it's a bespoke sensor. Brass tacks - I expect the GFX100s files to behave like A7Riv ones in post.

I do have other misgivings around the Fuji system - mainly the lens range - I prefer zooms to primes. I shoot stopped down, I find zooms convenient and a bag of Fuji primes to get wide shooting is beyond my fiscal reach. The 32-64 isn't really quite short enough - and I really wasn't impressed with the samples I've seen - some are clearly better than others and that was demonstrated by receipt of further files from @TimHughes .

There is also concerns around diffraction - I don't see this on 645z files until around F20. That's when you see actual visible softening. With the very fine pixel density that's going to kick in earlier - and at what stage will that affect DoF in real world landscape shooting? On the D850 I observe this at F13 - and really F11 is as narrow as I can go before visible diffraction kicks in - and that can present focussing challenges. On the D810 - that point was F16 with F13 being totally fine - but again - larger photosite size.

I could adapt my 28-45 to the 100mp camera, but lose out on AF - DXO camera/lens profiles etc. I'd rather have native. The 45-100 and 100-200 I'd use but I have misgivings re the 200mm not being quite long enough. To finance all this both systems would have to go and I am still not quite there yet.
 
Last edited:
@SFTPhotography

Its always a difficult decsision when chnaging systems or buying into a new one, more so when the £££ numbers start to get big!

At the moment, Fujifilm don't have a full range of zooms, the wide angle one GF 20-35 is on the roadmap for 2022, but no other zooms are due in 2022 or 2023 (or course this could change)

fujifilm-x.com

G Mount lens roadmap | FUJIFILM X Series & GFX – Global

Learn the future development plan for G Mount Lens for the GFX system
fujifilm-x.com fujifilm-x.com

I like primes (and prefer them to zooms), so for me in my preferred focal length range there is native glass.

In your shoes unless you absolutely need 100MP then I would stay put with the Pentax System, you've invested heavily in it - you can then revisit when the GF20-35mm becomes available.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Anyone here with a 100mp who's also had the 50mp care to comment if they think the 100mp files are as clean and recover shadows as well as the 50mp.

The 645z shadow recovery - and the genuine cleanliness of the shadows continues to impress.

In saying that - I've added a D850 to the fleet and it's to all intensive purposes just as clean with resolution not a million miles off.

IE do I move on to Fuji at some stage to get 100mp but I wouldn't want to sacrifice DR etc for that. Both my present systems are a joy to work with but I am resolution whore.
Click to expand...
Stephen, seems you’ve got the hugely sized files syndrome bad.
 
Last edited:
TimHughes said:
@SFTPhotography Does this link https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100/visual-comparisons-of-fuji-gfx-100-shadow-noise/ answer your question?
Click to expand...

Very - you can see the PDAF banding in the 100 - which you cannot in the 50. But the 50 does look quite a bit cleaner - look at the "blacks" on the dark book. It's quite noticeable. In reality you won't ever treat a file in this way - but even more modest recovery I'd expect to see just a cleaner, smoother look to the 50mp file over the 100mp.

My thoughts have been confirmed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top