FUJIFILM
First 4 pics with the 45 mm lens .
The last with the 250 mm.
(Resized pics )
First 4 pics with the 45 mm lens .
The last with the 250 mm.
(Resized pics )
Attachments
Last edited:
Sony's new full-frame cameras with compatibility of Canon, Nikon, etc. lenses!
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Looks like EXIF data have been stripped... 100% crop of the statue photo clearly shows differential focus between the column and the dome behind it. And the foreground would likely be the same. One does wonder what aperture was used, and ISO speed too. In 35mm full frame terms, this kind of effect kicks in at probably around 90mm. But it's already showing at 45mm here. This is brutal!
And speaking of which, what kind of tripod was used in the 250mm shot? In the Phase One Pagani video a couple of pages back, they're using a enormous tripod (definitely bigger than Gitzo Systematic Series 3) with an Arca Swiss Cube, and without center column. Seriously? Does 100+ mpx camera require this kind of thing? For lower resolution cameras, Gitzo Traveller Series 1 with an Acra Swiss P0 Hybrid would be ample...
All are handheld shots , its just to try things out a bit .
Also i reduced the file size in the camera , the colours are 14 bit not 16 bit
Lenses were both fully open .
The 45 mm shot was at iso 200 1/40
the 250 mm was at iso 2000 and 1/20 ( i want to see how low you can go with the SS handheld in combination with the internal stabilisation system)
the 45 mm is very sharp
200 % crop
Attachments
Last edited:
As promised RAW files 16 bit Fujifilm GFX system ( Autosalon brussels )
2 pics are with the 45 mm lens ( all pics are resized to small files / forum size unfortunately) , the 118 MB ( lossless) RAW files are much better off course )
The rest of the pics is with the 250 mm , this lens is killer
2 pics are with the 45 mm lens ( all pics are resized to small files / forum size unfortunately) , the 118 MB ( lossless) RAW files are much better off course )
The rest of the pics is with the 250 mm , this lens is killer
Last edited:
Hmmm, once again no EXIF camera data... May I ask what aperture, shutter speed and ISO these were done at? The picture with license plate TOOWILD is especially interesting—it has the kind of well defined shape of dark object that can be seen usually just in tightly controlled studio shots like this:
Autosalon Brussels is an autoshow right? To be able to get this kind of black-on-black tonality in a crowded atmosphere would be quite something. Now to be able to run the file through a raw analyzer would be most educational. Any chance one sample raw file could be put on a file hosting service like Google Drive or Dropbox?
And what's that Nissan concept car on slick tires? Would there be a full car shot you could share?
Nissan pic was shot iso 400 / 1/200 th , below pics are with the 45 mm except the first
Most of the 45 mm Mc laren pics were shot at iso 200 , 1/ 40 of a second and all wide open at F 2.8
The low light capabilities and image stabilisation work very good ( all are handheld shots )
I think its an excellent camera / lens combo.
The 250 mm gives the nice compression / detail effect
250 mm F4
Most of the 45 mm Mc laren pics were shot at iso 200 , 1/ 40 of a second and all wide open at F 2.8
The low light capabilities and image stabilisation work very good ( all are handheld shots )
I think its an excellent camera / lens combo.
The 250 mm gives the nice compression / detail effect
250 mm F4
Last edited:
Besides the colours and sharpness its the smooth transition from in focus to out of focus which looks very nice with the Fujifilm .
Plus its easy to carry around
Plus its easy to carry around
Hmm, a electric SUV drivetrain in a Formula E inspired body... Most interesting
My version of full-frame:
Well it's all relative. Back in the old days the small ? medium ? large format progression had been variously interpreted as 35mm ? 6cm×4.5cm/6×6/6×7/6×9/2"×3" ? 4×5, 2×3 ? 4×5 ? 8×10, 4×5 ? 8×10 ? 11×14/7×17 ? 12×20 etc. Back when 4×5 was the dominant view camera format, that size was the sweet spot and for good reason. Every notch up greatly increased handling effort, and going down one notch greatly dumped up the demand on technical precision.
In any case, nice setup. But is that a 250mm Fujinon though?
Word on the net is it's a killer
Differential focus sure can have a look to it. And the look intensifies as focal length goes up. Medium format digital lowers the crop factor below 1 so this got cranked up more. And increase in resolution jacks things up even more. But after a certain point, one might need to start controlling it carefully.
Recently the Flickr group for Canon TS-E lenses has seen an influx of Fuji GFX people. One of these guys posts many photos of food dishes in full rez with full EXIF. And he has food photos by native Fuji lenses under his homepage too. The comparison proves rather educational. One of the following was by the second generation Canon 90mm TS-E and the other by the Fuji 120mm macro:
Link back to the actual Flickr pages have been provided as per Flickr community guideline. But which one's which is quite obvious even here.
Which look is more convincing, folks can decide for themselves. But regardless, the full rez photos and the EXIF show just how carefully these things have to be done. And the guy has already used a shorter TS-E than the Fuji macro. The longer 135mm TS-E would jack up demand on technical precision even higher. That would be no joke at all.
I think at the end of the day, each piece of equipment provides a bundle of potentialities to the user. How much the user can get out of the equipment depends heavily on how far the users are will to push both the equipment and themselves.
Thought I would join in, since I just acquired a slightly used Fujifilm GFX100S body.
Looking at getting the newer GF20-35 lens but need to find a deal.
Been a Nikon owner for years, so curious if any of the Nikon>Fuji lens adapters is worth looking into, since I have some nice Nikon lens.
Looking at getting the newer GF20-35 lens but need to find a deal.
Been a Nikon owner for years, so curious if any of the Nikon>Fuji lens adapters is worth looking into, since I have some nice Nikon lens.
Last edited:
Capable, yes. Cheaper, take a look around eBay please
Note the I was just playing with words. Fujinon 250 that's the real killer is GF 250/4, not W 250/6.7. The W is magic in its own way because it's a tiny thing that covers 80°. Look closely above: a 250 wideangle for 8×10 in a #1 shutter! The 80° standard lens class was abandoned until the appearance of Super Symmar HM. The 120/5.6 HM is the 4×5 equivalent of the 250/6.7 W:
But it's so sharp that it has absolutely no trouble sitting in a 2×3 body. And it can also be pushed into the macro range. That way, dedicated macro lens like Nikkor AM*ED is only needed when one is well past 1×. So the Super Symmar is even more of a magic lens.
And about photo of relatives, unfortunately I no longer have a darkroom so I can't do anything on sheet film or paper negative. Digital will have to do:
No direct experience with this kind of thing but I'm not going to let that stop me from shooting my mouth off
Anyway, Flickr returns 1000+ photos when asked about "nikkor gfx":https://flickr.com/search/?text=nikkor gfx
But random sample of a handful doesn't turn up anything at full res. The food photo guy above keeps an album called GFX100S with 6k+ items. Looks like they're all in full res. And he uses all kinds of Canon lenses besides TS-E. The following could provide an idea of what's going to happens when a regular full frame lens is pressed into services on a GFX body:
But likely only in terms of corner resolution. The EXIF says the file came out of Photoshop. So vignetting could have been fixed.
To be honest, unless you're a heavy PC-E person, it's probably a little unrealistic to expect good corner performance from regular Nikon lenses on a GFX body. Now people who are into vintage looks can be vignette and melting in the corner can be desirable. But much testing is needed to dial in the specific look.
Sigh!
I still have them but only bits and pieces are in use now. In the rare case I need high macro, the bellows above is wedged between a Canon MacroPhoto lens (see up thread) and a Canon body. I can also use M lenses on Canon R mount body. But the only Leica piece that I actually use on a somewhat regular basis is the 50/1.0:
I inherited it from my dad who's been keeping it in its box for decades. It's really ironic that the arrival of mirrorless camera class has brought this piece of antique back to life. I understand using it on rangefinder M body requires each body to be calibrated to specific copy of the lens. We never did this and it's like total hit and miss. Still haven't found a really suitable subject for it, but at least the thing is under control on the technical side now.
Unfortunately i had to resize it to 600 kb , but the detail with the GFX 100S / GF 45 mm original file is amazing
Last edited: