Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

List of MF lenses on Fuji GFX
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2023 4:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
@stevemark

I think I saw your original post a long time ago. The DRO stuff is interesting, but other manufacturers have their own versions. I am not sure if the implementation is the same or similar for all manufacturers. Fujifilm has similar settings for high contrast scenes. The one setting in existence from the beginning in their mirrorless cameras was the dynamic range setting: DR100, DR200, and DR400. Fujifilm later added Dynamic Range Priority in addition to dynamic range and they work in combination. They also offer the ability to set custom settings in the quick menu for highlights and shadows. Here is an article that covers some of them with sample images.

https://jmpeltier.com/fuji-dynamic-range-priority-vs-dynamic-range/

The dynamic range priority and custom settings are for jpeg files. The dynamic range is more controversial and less understood. I have heard that one is for jpegs only as well, but the RAW file generated when set to DR200 or DR400 is different than when set to DR100. It does affect the RAW file. I have heard people claim that you could do better yourself manually keeping the camera at base ISO. I have also heard that when set the camera does do things internally. I don't know if there is a separate chip or what exactly is happening internally. However, I have seen some Dustin Abbott reviews where having DR200 or DR400 on did result in a better ability to recover highlights. Some on the internet claim that it underexposes by one or two stops, while others insist it is not underexposing. I have not experimented with this in detail, but I do use the setting although most on the internet recommend not to use it.

All the aforementioned settings exist to help in high contrast situations. Did you try any of those settings when comparing the Sony to Fujifilm?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2023 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
@stevemark
...
All the aforementioned settings exist to help in high contrast situations. Did you try any of those settings when comparing the Sony to Fujifilm?


Yes, of course, extensively, icluding the combinations mentioned. Without using them the Fuji GFX JPGs (landscape including shadow areas) were unusable (simply black "colorless" shadows). Turning on the various DRO features did change the image quite a bit, resulting at least in some color in the shadow areas (dark colors, though).

As I told before, i was working with the GFX for several days - side-by-side with the Sony A7RRII and Minolta AF lenses.


cbass wrote:
@stevemark
...
Fujifilm has similar settings for high contrast scenes. The one setting in existence from the beginning in their mirrorless cameras was the dynamic range setting: DR100, DR200, and DR400. Fujifilm later added Dynamic Range Priority in addition to dynamic range and they work in combination.
...
most on the internet recommend not to use it.


I think that says a lot. Using the manual DRO feature on the A900 is straightforward and eays (occasionally needing an adjustment of the exposure). If that's not enough, on the A900 (and only on the A900 series!!) you can adjust brightness and even the zone as well, resulting in shadows nearly as bright as the lights. Such photos look somehow like a Van Gogh painting - colorful, vivid and lucid. The image of the chapel in Dübendorf, published in a large calender, is a good example:




No way to get such an image with the Sony A7 series, let alone the Fuji GFX.

S


PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2023 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:


I think that says a lot. Using the manual DRO feature on the A900 is straightforward and eays (occasionally needing an adjustment of the exposure). If that's not enough, on the A900 (and only on the A900 series!!) you can adjust brightness and even the zone as well, resulting in shadows nearly as bright as the lights. Such photos look somehow like a Van Gogh painting - colorful, vivid and lucid. The image of the chapel in Dübendorf, published in a large calender, is a good example:

S


Well, if you read the internet says don't use the Sony DRO feature as well. Laugh 1

The image above is personally not to my taste. I think the shadows lifted that high make it very HDRish and flat, but I recognize that is a personal opinion and others may feel differently.

What I read online from a Sony manual implies that it works similar to what Fuji does, but unless I try it myself I can't have an opinion on it Does the A7 still have the DRO feature? If so, then does it work differently?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2023 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:

The image above is personally not to my taste. I think the shadows lifted that high make it very HDRish and flat, but I recognize that is a personal opinion and others may feel differently.

There are two issues - ona is the entiure chain of calibration of your computer / screen-software plus possible hardware limitations. Some years ago I have made some prety painful experiences with the (then) top-of-the-line Lenovo laptops designed specifically for graphic applications (e. g. postprocessing and DTP). while nominally the same model (>3000.-- CHF back then), three copies of the laptop gave very different outputs on the scren, even after calibration. WOW! Looking at the S/N it became obvious that they were slightly different sub-models ... well, "slightly " is an understatement.

Second thing is that the above image was specifically optimized for high quality offset printing (large calender). The output contrast of high quality offset printing is limited to about 1:50 (complete black vs complete white). That's not much. In order to get printable CMYK files, the Sony A900 JPGs (especially landscape and cityscapes) are excellent (as long as the camera was properly adjusted when taking the image).

The company that prints my calenders has one large Heidelberg machine running just for fine art printing such as faksimile books (those books printed rasterless, with up to eight colors plus real gold foil) and calendars. The printer running the machine immediately was caught by the A900 images and could discern them easily from the A7II/A7RII files ... He says the A900 files are very easy to print, and he regularly is very happy about the final result ...

cbass wrote:
What I read online from a Sony manual implies that it works similar to what Fuji does, but unless I try it myself I can't have an opinion on it Does the A7 still have the DRO feature? If so, then does it work differently?

Yes sure - it works way better (easier to operate) than the quirky DRO "system" on the GFX50. However the A900 DRO (which has its own destinated APICAL chip in addition to the image processor) allows for stronger (=sometimes too strong!) corrections. In addition to the DRO settings (and that's unique to the A900/A850) you can adjust brightness and several other properties of the JPG.

Be aware that adjusting "brightness" is not the same as adjusting "exposure", and not the same as adjusting the DRO levels. And you can adjust contrast, of course. It often is useful to increase DRO (=> shadows are made brighter) PLUS increase contrast and - sometimes - increase brightness.

Finally you can adjust the zones in the metering system, but then things get a bit complicated, to be honest Wink

S

PS The dynamic range of the 15 y old A900 sensor (about 12 EV in RAW) of course is inferior to the A7RII, GFX50 and newer FF cameras (maybe 14 EV). However the task to reduce the original dynamic range of the sensor (be it 12 EV or 14 EV or about 1:16000) to a printable 1:50, and to make the images look "reasonable" is not an easy one.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2023 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
MC Zenitar 16mm f/2.8



The build-in hood blocks part of the image circle when use the native 4:3 aspect ratio. Switch to 3:2 solves the issue.



Since the design of this lens can't handle the 100MP sensor. The TTartisan 11mm f/2.8 will be a much better choice.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 25, 2023 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Few more photos with the above set-up with aspect ration of 3:2 :

#1


#2


#3


PostPosted: Sat Nov 25, 2023 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I picked up an 85mm 1.8 AF D Nikkor. I don't like it at all on my GFX. It's got heavy vignetting at landscape settings, presumably because of the internal focus. Disappointingly, very inferior to my 85 2 AiS Nikkor.

I went back and tried my old Nikkor-H Auto 85 1.8, and even though it's not as sharp as newer lenses, there isn't any vignetting. It's pretty nice.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2023 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
vivaldibow wrote:
Thank you very much for compiling this. An excellent reference! I am actually wondering what the factors are to determine if a 35mm lens will cause vignetting on a 44x33 medium format sensor.
Focus length? Front element diameter? length of a lens barrel?


Sorry if this has already been mentioned (I didn't spot it), but the following (integer-rounded) fact is fundamental to this conversation:

• Image circle diameter required to cover 35mm 'full frame': 43mm

• Image circle diameter required to cover uncropped GFX: 55mm

Many of the better 35mm lenses achieve their excellent 'corner' (whatever that is - better: Zone C) performance simply by having big image circles, which also cover larger formats, but with inevitable compromises re: Zone D performance (a GFX corner). This often makes them weak at wide apertures, but surprisingly useable stopped down.

The step up from 35mm to 'medium format' (or the GFX version of it) isn't as big as you might imagine because GFX is a heavily 'cropped' MF, and its image ratio is squarer, fitting more efficiently into a circular image circle. Because lenses never throw rectangular image circles, irrespective of how they are subsequently cropped or masked.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2023 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:

Surprisingly, my Zeiss Jena 120mm Biometar 2.8 has some minor vignetting. I wasn't expecting that in a lens designed for Pentacon-6, however mine is Exakta-mount. It's possible the design of the mount is responsible for the vignetting. I'd like to see results from the Pentacon-6 version.


Hi,

there is no vignetting of the Biometar 120 P6 mount on gfx like seen here:

https://www.digicamclub.de/showthread.php?t=26778&p=326081

and here:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Biometar%20120mm%20%20GFX

or here with tilt shift adapter:

https://www.klicklack.de/?p=3466

or here in a comparison to the Fuji GF 4 120.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmB1vCHiJTc

One more that I once saw but I cannot remember where. The pictures of the first link are made by me. I expected the pictures to being worse than they actually got. To be honest, I believe that the guy in the video did not focus both lenses properly. Another issue may be that he did not use a lens shade on the Biometar though it is somehow a light magnet. With my pictures in the first link the magic point of achieving maximum contrast was to hold the palm of may hand over the lens some 20 cm in the front of the lens.

Edit: Here the one that I did not find before:

https://www.fuji-x-forum.de/topic/37533-euer-mittelformat-objektivpark/page/2/#comment-1025852


PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2023 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
pandreas68 wrote:
there is no vignetting of the Biometar 120 P6 mount on gfx like seen here:


Thanks. That's what I expected. The narrow Exakta mount is causing the vignetting.

Maybe I'll pick one up in P6.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2024 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Topcor 58 f/1.8 continues to impress on a GFX sensor.

This is largely a test of foreground and background blur. I left the vignetting alone as I like it, but it can be fully corrected. The lens is set to the first stop after f/1.8, which I think is f/2. There is another stop after that, which I think is f/2.4 before it gets to f/2.8.

This lens from the 1960s has no business being this sharp. Maybe it just matches well by luck. The contrast is also impressive. Some of it comes from the GFX sensor that can achieve 98% of theoretical contrast. I don't think any FF sensor can do that. Of course, the total contrast is a combination of sensor and lens, and this lens manages to perform exceptionally.

It is corner to corner sharp at f/8 and f/11. I don't bother shooting landscapes below that as usually the DOF is not sufficient and that's just bad technique, except for rare situations, IMO. However, it looks like the corners should be very good at f/4 if you look at focus peaking. I would have to test it to confirm.

I also had a Minolta 55 f/1.7 with me that also covers the GFX sensor well. However, the Minolta at f/1.7 has less fine details and less contrast. After that the next stop if f/2.8. The handling is not as nice as the Topcor and the "Minolta colors" are much duller. It's not a bad lens it just doesn't perform as well as the Topcor. I didn't test it stopped down to f/8 to see it would be suitable for landscape.



PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2024 7:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
Topcor 58 f/1.8 continues to impress on a GFX sensor.


Like 1

Looks very good!

Portrait settings often minimize or eliminate any vignetting. Infinity with the aperture closed down (landscape settings) usually shows the vignetting at it's worst.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:
cbass wrote:
Topcor 58 f/1.8 continues to impress on a GFX sensor.


Like 1

Looks very good!

Portrait settings often minimize or eliminate any vignetting. Infinity with the aperture closed down (landscape settings) usually shows the vignetting at it's worst.


I would have to do a controlled test before I put my foot in my mouth. However, vignetting is not an issue for landscape especially at traditional landscape apertures of f/8 and f/11. Soft vignetting will probably be there at f/1.8 and f/2 and probably even f/2.8, but that's expected. The pleasant surprise is the corner performance. There are FF lenses that may not vignette hard, but the corners remain smeared at any aperture beyond the FF image circle and thus the lens has no aperture suitable for landscape on the bigger sensor. This is not the case here. However, I am less concerned at using this lens for landscape over a native GFX lens but more focused for portrait use at wide apertures, although it is suitable for landscape if necessary.

Edit: I did a quick test by pointing to a clear blue sky and set to infinity. I started at f/2.8, which obviously has the most vignetting. Reduces nicely but still present at f/4. At f/5.6 very extreme corners still have a shade. Pretty much gone by f/8 and f/11 and did not test more stopped down or wider than f/2.8.

My adapter may be the cause of more vignetting than otherwise could be possible. It is custom made and instead of widening quickly it retains a narrow throat that is unnecessary and could add more vignetting than an adapter that opens up wider quicker.

As you stated the Topcors also do vignette much less at closer focus distances and the situation improves there over infinity.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 14, 2024 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Mamiya C 105-210mm f/4.5 ULD should be checked out on GFX.
On FF it's quite impressive, and can be found for very little money (especially on proxy purchase services like Buyee.jp).
They were seriously expensive lenses when new by the way. Not too heavy either.

Here are some images I made on FF:
https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjAvqAB


PostPosted: Sun Apr 14, 2024 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
The Mamiya C 105-210mm f/4.5 ULD should be checked out on GFX.
On FF it's quite impressive, and can be found for very little money (especially on proxy purchase services like Buyee.jp).
They were seriously expensive lenses when new by the way. Not too heavy either.

Here are some images I made on FF:
https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjAvqAB


That's very nice dimensional rendering. It would be interesting on how it covers. I have found that it just comes down to luck. The 35-70 lenses I have tried such as the C/Y and Leica Vario-Elmar f/4 vignette hard at 35mm but then start to clear up starting at 40-43mm and beyond. However, the C/Y 80-200 vignettes pretty much throughout the zoom range. The Yashica ML 80-200, on the other hand, vignettes much less. Sometimes I think it comes down to the production run. I have a Jupiter 37A 135 that the internet says vignettes. Mine not only does not vignette but is sharp corner to corner stopped down to f/8.

Image taken with that Jupiter but original 4:3 cropped to a panorama. Thus, you will have to take my word on the vignetting unless you want to see the uncropped version to make up your own mind.



PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2024 5:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That’s a very nice image you took with the Jupiter, and incredible that it covers such a large area while remaining sharp all over.

I expect the Mamiya to be good in this regard as well, as it is a lens for the 645 system.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2024 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
That’s a very nice image you took with the Jupiter, and incredible that it covers such a large area while remaining sharp all over.

I expect the Mamiya to be good in this regard as well, as it is a lens for the 645 system.


Then it should work well. For some reason I thought it was a FF lens.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 16, 2024 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I got a surprise when I discovered that the Mamiya 645 120mm f/4 Macro has some shadowy vignetting on the GFX - but only at landscape settings (f8 at infinity). In every other circumstance I've used it, it's just fine.

None of my other Mamiya 645 lenses vignette at all the GFX.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:
I got a surprise when I discovered that the Mamiya 645 120mm f/4 Macro has some shadowy vignetting on the GFX - but only at landscape settings (f8 at infinity). In every other circumstance I've used it, it's just fine.

None of my other Mamiya 645 lenses vignette at all the GFX.


Is it the adapter or is it the lens? I guess you wouldn't know unless you had the original camera to mount it to.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 18, 2024 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
KEO wrote:
I got a surprise when I discovered that the Mamiya 645 120mm f/4 Macro has some shadowy vignetting on the GFX - but only at landscape settings (f8 at infinity). In every other circumstance I've used it, it's just fine.

None of my other Mamiya 645 lenses vignette at all the GFX.


Is it the adapter or is it the lens? I guess you wouldn't know unless you had the original camera to mount it to.


Hmm...impossible to be 100% sure, I suppose. I don't have the original camera, no.

One other remote possibility is the lens hood, although the one I'm using is quite small.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2024 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
KEO wrote:
cbass wrote:
KEO wrote:
I got a surprise when I discovered that the Mamiya 645 120mm f/4 Macro has some shadowy vignetting on the GFX - but only at landscape settings (f8 at infinity). In every other circumstance I've used it, it's just fine.

None of my other Mamiya 645 lenses vignette at all the GFX.


Is it the adapter or is it the lens? I guess you wouldn't know unless you had the original camera to mount it to.


Hmm...impossible to be 100% sure, I suppose. I don't have the original camera, no.

One other remote possibility is the lens hood, although the one I'm using is quite small.


Easy to test.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 02, 2024 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's a test I did, comparing the vignetting of some Minolta lenses on my gfx 50r:
https://zetterstrand.com/photo_test/MinoltaROKKORlensesonFujifilmGFXVignettingtes.html


PostPosted: Sun Jun 02, 2024 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Zurbaran wrote:
Here's a test I did, comparing the vignetting of some Minolta lenses on my gfx 50r:
https://zetterstrand.com/photo_test/MinoltaROKKORlensesonFujifilmGFXVignettingtes.html


Like 1 small

Thank you. That's very helpful.

The 105 2.5 result is about what I expected. That should be a pretty nice lens to use.

The Minolta I'm most interested in is the 85mm f2 MD. There doesn't seem to be much information about it's use with GFX.

I went to a party yesterday and used my 85mm f2 AiS Nikkor for the first time in a long time. It's just so great on the GFX I see no reason to switch to anything else.

The single issue I have with it is the seven-bladed aperture. If it had two more blades it would be almost perfect.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 02, 2024 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cbass wrote:
caspert79 wrote:

Here are some images I made on FF:
https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjAvqAB



where is this picture from? Looks a like Norwegians somewhere, probably in us or canada .. ?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2024 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
alex_d wrote:


where is this picture from? Looks a like Norwegians somewhere, probably in us or canada .. ?


Around Blanding Utah. If I remember correctly, then just south of it.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 6 of 7