- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Digital Medium Format Thread
- Thread starter dancook
- Start date
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 2,011
- Name
- adrian
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
230811 Oulton Park Test Day - Tatuus F3 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
230811 Oulton Park Test Day - Tatuus F3 - 2 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
GFX50S+GF63mm
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Dan (asking for a friend (not!)), have you compared monochrome images from the 50MP X2D with the Leica Q2M (that you used to own), I have more than a passing intertest in a Q2M at moment, and although I can some parallel images with a friends Q2M against my GFX, it would be useful to have other input. This would be to run alongside not replace the GFX,
The X2D is 100MP and I haven't compared them no.
For me, the main draw of the Q2M was cleaner low light high ISO shooting - but the digital lens correction turns the noise into an off-putting patterned moire which didn't appear in the LR preview only when exporting above a certain size - added to that NR software doesn't (didn't, probably still doesn't) work on mono raws (not sure about new LR)
e.g.
Dirty Carols - Halloween
Photo collection by Daniel Cook Photography
danielcookphotography.pixieset.com
The first three photos exported at high resolution
The second three exported at max 1600px, the moire disappears and the blacks are darker
The second three photos are how LR showed the images before exporting, the moire appears when zooming in LR or just viewing high resolution jpgs and it affects the contrast too.
If you want to shoot in less extreme lighting, then it is a lovely camera
You wouldn't get this with the M10M, but you wouldn't get AF either
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The X2D is 100MP and I haven't compared them no.
For me, the main draw of the Q2M was cleaner low light high ISO shooting - but the digital lens correction turns the noise into an off-putting patterned moire which didn't appear in the LR preview only when exporting above a certain size - added to that NR software doesn't (didn't, probably still doesn't) work on mono raws (not sure about new LR)
e.g.
Dirty Carols - Halloween
Photo collection by Daniel Cook Photography
The first three photos exported at high resolution
The second three exported at max 1600px, the moire disappears and the blacks are darker
The second three photos are how LR showed the images before exporting, the moire appears when zooming in LR or just viewing high resolution jpgs and it affects the contrast too.
If you want to shoot in less extreme lighting, then it is a lovely camera
You wouldn't get this with the M10M, but you wouldn't get AF either
Thanks
Sorry I got confused with Hasselblad names, you had an X1D orginally which is the same sensor as my GFX.
Yes Topsaz and DXOPureRAW don't work on Q2M files, I've just checked in LR with a Q2M sample RAW that my mate sent me, the Denoise and Raw Details options are greyed out. Silver Efex Dfine2 does work though, but that now quite long in teh tooth and nowhere near as effective as the others.
One of the reasons that I would want it is to shoot in low light - is the lens correction applied in camera or a function of the RAW import (in which case it can probably be turned off, and more importantly - how important is it!)?
I would like AF and my budget doesn't stretch to an ILC Leica!!!
You can't disable it in Lightroom, but you can in capture one - though I've never tried
The lens is designed to work alongside the digital correction to do all that it does in one little package
I found this example in another forum
the distorted version would actually show a 26mm image i think but it's cropped to match 28mm i assume..
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 3,614
- Edit My Images
- No
Some reading for you.....
High ISO performance in Q3 much better than Q2
I don't think I've seen anyone specifically post about this (recently), but I've tried out higher ISOs in the Q3 v. the Q2. At e.g. ISOs of 12500, 2500, 50000, the noise level in the Q3 is much less than in the Q2. And this is without any pixel peeping. (As a side note, I also tried the lower siz...
www.l-camera-forum.com
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 23,537
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
Just seen the 90V is finally getting released in September...
now that I have the 38/55 and 80 I wonder if I should swap out the 80 for the 90...
It'd be going from 1.9 to 2.5, but it'll have much faster AF and I imagine significantly lighter, but what about the character i wonder
now that I have the 38/55 and 80 I wonder if I should swap out the 80 for the 90...
It'd be going from 1.9 to 2.5, but it'll have much faster AF and I imagine significantly lighter, but what about the character i wonder
- Messages
- 8,523
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Dan. Sounds like you need to add it.
- Messages
- 1,316
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Happy to take the 80 off your hands if you need to offload it
Happy to take the 80 off your hands if you need to offload it
You'd be doing me a favour of course, because it's so.. heavy
I will wait for the reviews and samples!
- Messages
- 1,316
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've just looked it up - it's over a kg! My 45P is 320g so how is this 4 times heavier?! It's also 4 times the cost, so maybe I'll stick to the one lens
Last edited:
Bought a bag for travel to carry the Hasselblad gear plus overnight stuff for me. (wandrd prvke 31L backpack v3)
Overnight stuff fits in the top section which rolls out
Was pondering the 21L, but I was concerned if the side access was big enough for the camera - i've got lots of space for lenses....
Overnight stuff fits in the top section which rolls out
Was pondering the 21L, but I was concerned if the side access was big enough for the camera - i've got lots of space for lenses....
There's one at MPB right now, but I PM'ed you about that.
I had the 135 with the extension tube, I think it'd be a lot better on the X2D because of the built in stabilisation - otherwise you have to push the ISO to compensate for needed faster shutter speeds due to hand shake. I think if you do get the 135 you should look out for the ext tube combo just to get the most out of it.
I bought it because I was waiting for the 80mm (the first one I had) which took 6 months from order and I wanted to get started with some portraits. It's as excellent as the others, just the FL is longer than I'd typically go for and the only reason it'd be at the bottom of my list.
Colour is like my waterproof jacket too
co-ordinated!
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
One for @trevorbray - on Friday I visited my brother and liberated him of some his FD glass (all on loan, 24mm F2.8, 35mm F2.8, 200mm F2.8 and 300mm F4 L) - my son apperas to have permantently borrowed all of my FD glass. Only used the 200mm and 300mm so far, and wide open (is there any other setting). The 200mm covers the whole sensor at all aperture settings but the 300mm has a hard vignette. The 300mm also seems to have a lack of contrast compared to the other FD glass that I've tried.
Anyway one from the 200mm (at F2.8)
Oulton Park USA - Challenger Line Up - Canon FD200mm F2.8 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Anyway one from the 200mm (at F2.8)
Oulton Park USA - Challenger Line Up - Canon FD200mm F2.8 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oulton Park USA - 1932 Ford Tudor (chopped) by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Oulton Park USA - V8 Hide And Seek by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Both GFX50S+GF63mm
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oulton Park USA - 1959 Corvette by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Oulton Park USA - 1977 Corvette by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Both GFX50S+GF100-200mm
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just for reference in case anyone wants to try
Canon FD300mm F4 L lens on GFX
Interesting Lens, L glass in FD mount, no hood with this copy, seems to have poor contrast when used in bright light, but decent contrast when shooting from the shade. Its pretty sharp at F4 (so it should be - being L glass) - difficult to use handheld on the GFX due to weight and nearly 300 degrees around the barrel from min to max focus, also my GFX has no IBIS!!
Has a slight vignette, which can only partially be removed in LR, though the new PS generative fill should be able to remove completely
Both shots below at F4, full images (no crop)
Canon FD300mm F4 L lens on GFX
Interesting Lens, L glass in FD mount, no hood with this copy, seems to have poor contrast when used in bright light, but decent contrast when shooting from the shade. Its pretty sharp at F4 (so it should be - being L glass) - difficult to use handheld on the GFX due to weight and nearly 300 degrees around the barrel from min to max focus, also my GFX has no IBIS!!
Has a slight vignette, which can only partially be removed in LR, though the new PS generative fill should be able to remove completely
Both shots below at F4, full images (no crop)
- Messages
- 8,523
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks David. Good info (ya never know with me)One for @trevorbray - on Friday I visited my brother and liberated him of some his FD glass (all on loan, 24mm F2.8, 25mm F2.8, 200mm F2.8 and 300mm F4 L) - my son apperas to have permantently borrowed all of my FD glass. Only used the 200mm and 300mm so far, and wide open (is there any other setting). The 200mm covers the whole sensor at all aperture settings but the 300mm has a hard vignette. The 300mm also seems to have a lack of contrast compared to the other FD glass that I've tried.
Anyway one from the 200mm (at F2.8)
Oulton Park USA - Challenger Line Up - Canon FD200mm F2.8 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
- Messages
- 3,614
- Edit My Images
- No
Trust me we do know..............
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Going to try the 24mm and 35mm in anger later this week, the 24mm vignettes (not really a surprise) but the 35mm seems ok - must keep them away from my son
And of course your eyes are peeled for Sep 12th when the next GFX is announced - rumours suggest a new sensor...............................
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,523
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Wonder what my Sony gear will fetch…just kidding…Going to try the 24mm and 35mm in anger later this week, the 24mm vignettes (not really a surprise) but the 35mm seems ok - must keep them away from my son
And of course your eyes are peeled for Sep 12th when the next GFX is announced - rumours suggest a new sensor...............................
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'm cured!!! (I've got GAS back!) I actually bought a lens (well an assembly of parts from @skysh4rk ) that allows mounting of a Projection Lens onto a GFX - The lens in question is an ISCO (Cinelux) 125mm Ultra MC designed for 35/70mm projection, fixed aperture at F2 - so one that will appeal to @trevorbray
A couple of quick test shots in the garden
Projection Lens Test-1 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Projection Lens Test-2 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
) that allows mounting of a Projection Lens onto a GFX - The lens in question is an ISCO (Cinelux) 125mm Ultra MC designed for 35/70mm projection, fixed aperture at F2 - so one that will appeal to @trevorbray A couple of quick test shots in the garden
Projection Lens Test-1 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Projection Lens Test-2 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
- Messages
- 8,523
- Name
- Trevor
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep. Gotta get me one of them…I'm cured!!! (I've got GAS back!) I actually bought a lens (well an assembly of parts from @skysh4rk
A couple of quick test shots in the garden
Projection Lens Test-1 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
Projection Lens Test-2 by David Yeoman, on Flickr
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 3,102
- Name
- RJ
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm cured!!! (I've got GAS back!) I actually bought a lens (well an assembly of parts from @skysh4rk
Hope it's working well for you. Initial shots look good.
I have a few more projections lenses (e.g., a 105mm f/2.8 lens and a Leitz Wetzlar 120mm f/2.5 lens) that I'd had been meaning to adapt to GFX (I originally adapted them for use with my old Rolleiflex SL66E, which has some tilt capability), but have found myself really happy using my Mitakon 65mm f/1.4 for most GFX shooting, so have never got around to it.
- Messages
- 8,017
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've seen some lovely work from the Mitakon, as I already own the GF63mm, I'm going to wait until the GF55mm F1.7 is released before making any decisions, one though is to replace teh GF45mm and GF63mm with the GF55mm - but getting rid of two lens to buy one more doesn't seem logical!