The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Mount Fuji Active … 📸

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
It appears from the limited images of the 100 that Fuji changed the lugs back to something that might actually be useful.
Too bad they made this change. No biggy though. :facesmack:
It would not work too well with the Peak Design clutch.

One probably could attach the clutch to the lug with a string,
or attach a horizontal slit first to the lug. :LOL:

Well anyway, I have my eyes on that camera! :loco: :LOL:
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Too bad they made this change. No biggy though. :facesmack:
It would not work too well with the Peak Design clutch.

One probably could attach the clutch to the lug with a string,
or attach a horizontal slit first to the lug. :LOL:

Well anyway, I have my eyes on that camera! :loco: :LOL:
Of course it will work, K-H ! It will actually really work ... :banghead:
The lugs will come with these triangle shaped split rings like the ones on your Olympus and Sony cameras.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Of course it will work, K-H ! It will actually really work ... :banghead:
The lugs will come with these triangle shaped split rings like the ones on your Olympus and Sony cameras.

Why didn’t I think of that? :facesmack: :banghead: :shocked: :LOL: :salute:
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Why didn’t I think of that? :facesmack: :banghead: :shocked: :LOL: :salute:
It's because of those silly 'odd' retaining lugs we have to deal with.
The only option I see right now is some kind of (wrist) strap that attaches to the tripod mount.
It won't prevent the camera from accidentally slipping out of your hand, but at least it doesn't drop all the way down.

Somebody should come up with a solution ...
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
It's because of those silly 'odd' retaining lugs we have to deal with.
The only option I see right now is some kind of (wrist) strap that attaches to the tripod mount.
It won't prevent the camera from accidentally slipping out of your hand, but at least it doesn't drop all the way down.

Somebody should come up with a solution ...

Well Bart, the Peak Design clutch actually works very well for me. YMMV. :thumbup:
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Sakura ...



| gfx 50s | kipon l/r-gfx | leica 80/1.4 |
Bart

The 80/1.4 R has been one of my all time favorite lenses . Viewing a jpeg shows the aesthetic (fingerprint) but very hard to evaluate sharpness. I find pulling the jpeg out of the browser onto my desktop allows me to see a lot more . But tell us what you see.

What F stop did you use (the 80/1.4 is one of those lenses that has lower contrast wide-open and a glow from lack of corrections ..but at f5.6 matches newer Leica lenses for micro contrast and sharpness). A larger sensor will surely magnify this aspect and affect the overall rendering .

Did you find the 80/1.4 provides adequate coverage of the larger sensor .
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Bart

The 80/1.4 R has been one of my all time favorite lenses . Viewing a jpeg shows the aesthetic (fingerprint) but very hard to evaluate sharpness. I find pulling the jpeg out of the browser onto my desktop allows me to see a lot more . But tell us what you see.

What F stop did you use (the 80/1.4 is one of those lenses that has lower contrast wide-open and a glow from lack of corrections ..but at f5.6 matches newer Leica lenses for micro contrast and sharpness). A larger sensor will surely magnify this aspect and affect the overall rendering .

Did you find the 80/1.4 provides adequate coverage of the larger sensor .
Hi there Roger,

this was my first time outing with the 80/1.4 on the GFX and with the weather not too favourable (windy, cloudy with an occasional sunny spell) I hesitate to draw conclusions yet.
The F-stop here must have been at least f/5.6 but more likely f/8 (1/125 s | ISO 160).

I was shooting in 'film emulation' bracketing mode so I've got three sets of the same image (3x JPG, 3x RAF, 3x different image count).
Here is the second original RAF image converted to JPG:



As for adequate sensor coverage: you'll notice in the corners there's only a hint of vignetting, but easily correctable in C1P (+1,5).

Kind regards.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
fresh ...



| gfx 50s | kipon l/r-gfx | leica 80/1.4 | iso 200 | 1/125 s |
Great image Bart. I like this one, lighting, colors, composition! Thanks.
Based on your images I just ordered the Kipon adapter for my Leica R lenses!
It should arrive next week! :thumbs: :salute:


Here is an image shown in the Xpan 65:24 format.



GFX 50S • GF120 Macro

However, I didn't use the in camera 65:24 format, but instead formatted it in C1Pro like this.



As you can see, for the 65:24 selection I didn't pick the middle of the full image, but instead chose mainly from the upper part of the full 4:3 image.

AFAIK had I used the in camera 65:24 format, the GFX 50S would have placed the 65:24 section in the middle of the full frame, no? Please, correct me if I am wrong! Thanks.

Anyway it would be useful if placement of the 65:24 section vertically in the full camera frame were under user control. Why? Sometimes it makes sense to hold the camera absolutely level in X- and Y-direction and have the subject of interest in the upper or lower part shown in the 65:24 subframe. Another reason for overall framing could be a better exposure. etc. ...
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Great image Bart. I like this one, lighting, colors, composition! Thanks.
Based on your images I just ordered the Kipon adapter for my Leica R lenses!
It should arrive next week! :thumbs: :salute:
So far I have found the 80/1.4 and 100/2.8 doing well.
The 21-35 is okayish from 35 till 28/24, at 21 it shows unrecoverable vignetting, so you have to crop.
Also the 60/2.8 is not providing adequate sensor coverage.
Yet to try: 35-70/4, 70-210/4 and 350/4.8

However, I didn't use the in camera 65:24 format, but instead formatted it in C1Pro like this.

As you can see, for the 65:24 selection I didn't pick the middle of the full image, but instead chose mainly from the upper part of the full 4:3 image.

AFAIK had I used the in camera 65:24 format, the GFX 50S would have placed the 65:24 section in the middle of the full frame, no? Please, correct me if I am wrong! Thanks.
Yep, I guess that’s the case, but I can’t see how this should work otherwise.

Anyway it would be useful if placement of the 65:24 section vertically in the full camera frame were under user control. Why? Sometimes it makes sense to hold the camera absolutely level in X- and Y-direction and have the subject of interest in the upper or lower part shown in the 65:24 subframe. Another reason for overall framing could be a better exposure. etc. ...
I don’t quite understand why you want this. The selected mask will show you ‘exactly’ what you will capture in the JPG, although I’m not sure how this will work for the exposure.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
So far I have found the 80/1.4 and 100/2.8 doing well.
The 21-35 is okayish from 35 till 28/24, at 21 it shows unrecoverable vignetting, so you have to crop.
Also the 60/2.8 is not providing adequate sensor coverage.
Yet to try: 35-70/4, 70-210/4 and 350/4.8



Yep, I guess that’s the case, but I can’t see how this should work otherwise.



I don’t quite understand why you want this. The selected mask will show you ‘exactly’ what you will capture in the JPG, although I’m not sure how this will work for the exposure.
Thanks Bart.

ad 1.) Use of a wheel to move the sub-frame up or down. :LOL:

ad 2.) To avoid perspective distortion, e.g. from a fisheye lens.
:facesmack:
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Played with a scoop of ice cream this morning. This is the result of 4-drops from the Stopshot Studio using 3-seperate syphons/valves. The 1st dropped 1-drop of red, the second dropped 2-drops of a combination of red and green while the 3rd dropped 1-drop of red. Processed in Captureone Pro before heading to PSCC for some slight work. The major lifting was done in C1.
 

Attachments

Knorp

Well-known member
Thanks Bart.

ad 1.) Use of a wheel to move the sub-frame up or down. :LOL:

ad 2.) To avoid perspective distortion, e.g. from a fisheye lens.
:facesmack:
Okay, you could have a point here, K-H.
Question is how good is your Japanese ... :grin:
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Thanks Bart.

ad 1.) Use of a wheel to move the sub-frame up or down. :LOL:

ad 2.) To avoid perspective distortion, e.g. from a fisheye lens.
:facesmack:
KH - the aspect ratio one chooses to 'shoot in' is seen 'live' in the viewfinder as you compose and delivered in a jpeg file as per the aspect ratio and what you see and shoot in the viewfinder when you make the shot. At the same time a raw file is made using full chip size in raw. In order to get both you need to arrange for the camera to shoot a raw and Jpeg file at capture time. When I shoot in a crop I compose in the crop because that is what I 'see' through the viewfinder - this is the benefit of the selective aspect ratio feature in many cameras - otherwise any crop one wishes to use is done after the fact in post processing - it all depends on one's preferences for composing.

I may be missing something - but I don't understand what you are saying with regards to distortion of wide angle lenses - the more one composes and shoots in non horizontal and tilt relative to subject matter - the more distortion one generates with any lens whilst shooting - of course accentuated with wides- but this has nothing to do with the aspect ratio crop one chooses to produce a Jpeg or raw.

I am speaking here when using 'native' Fuji lenses - pp will have to be more involved with non native lenses of course since Fuji doesn't provide the necessary metadata in camera information for the raw processing to include correction for distortion/chromatic aberration and vignetting associated with each lens.

atb
Pete
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
KH - the aspect ratio one chooses to 'shoot in' is seen 'live' in the viewfinder as you compose and delivered in a jpeg file as per the aspect ratio and what you see and shoot in the viewfinder when you make the shot. At the same time a raw file is made using full chip size in raw. In order to get both you need to arrange for the camera to shoot a raw and Jpeg file at capture time. When I shoot in a crop I compose in the crop because that is what I 'see' through the viewfinder - this is the benefit of the selective aspect ratio feature in many cameras - otherwise any crop one wishes to use is done after the fact in post processing - it all depends on one's preferences for composing.

I may be missing something - but I don't understand what you are saying with regards to distortion of wide angle lenses - the more one composes and shoots in non horizontal and tilt relative to subject matter - the more distortion one generates with any lens whilst shooting - of course accentuated with wides- but this has nothing to do with the aspect ratio crop one chooses to produce a Jpeg or raw.

I am speaking here when using 'native' Fuji lenses - pp will have to be more involved with non native lenses of course since Fuji doesn't provide the necessary metadata in camera information for the raw processing to include correction for distortion/chromatic aberration and vignetting associated with each lens.

atb
Pete

Thanks Pete.

AFAIK one can get quite a bit of Perspective Distortion (PD) from the GF23, no? :facesmack:
Was shift up or down part of the XPan system in order to avoid PD? :grin:
 

PeterA

Well-known member
Thanks Pete.

AFAIK one can get quite a bit of Perspective Distortion (PD) from the GF23, no? :facesmack:
Was shift up or down part of the XPan system in order to avoid PD? :grin:
For sure one can get get 'distortion' using any lens on any camera and as I said above - accentuated when using wides. There are two types of distortion I concern myself with when composing a shot - the distortion one gets by how one points /positions a camera relative to subject/composition and secondly the distortion one gets from the type of lens one is using irrespective of how one points /positions the camera relative to subject composition.

these two combine to provide an overall amount of distortion in any type of shot.

Fortunately Fuji lenses ( and a major reason why I am buying into the system) - are designed to shoot with low distortion ie they are relatively flat field lenses and Fuji's corrections are excellent corner to corner. Remeber that focus and recompose wont work well with these lenses- better to use the appropriate focus point via joytsick in viewfinder.

So my main concern when composing is actually having the camera as horisontal as I can with as little tilt as I can manage relative to subject - this is always less than perfect in hand held situations and why people use tripods and leveling bases for work which requires more exactitude eg architectural shots or shots with important horisontal or vertical lines. Shift and tilt for studio or precise work is about not only getting focus right but also correcting for as much parralax error as possible when making shot - I got tired of the constraints of tech camera shooting years ago - and these days prefer the freedom of handheld shooting or for special occasions actually using a tripod - a lot can be achieved using pp tools available these days but for specialist shooting - one will never be able to replace the benefits of tilt/swing rise and fall.

I am keeping my eye out for Alpa developing a Fuji mount as they have for XID - especially when the 100MP comes out next year.

atb
Pete
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
For sure one can get get 'distortion' using any lens on any camera and as I said above - accentuated when using wides. There are two types of distortion I concern myself with when composing a shot - the distortion one gets by how one points /positions a camera relative to subject/composition and secondly the distortion one gets from the type of lens one is using irrespective of how one points /positions the camera relative to subject composition.

these two combine to provide an overall amount of distortion in any type of shot.

Fortunately Fuji lenses ( and a major reason why I am buying into the system) - are designed to shoot with low distortion ie they are relatively flat field lenses and Fuji's corrections are excellent corner to corner. Remeber that focus and recompose wont work well with these lenses- better to use the appropriate focus point via joytsick in viewfinder.

So my main concern when composing is actually having the camera as horisontal as I can with as little tilt as I can manage relative to subject - this is always less than perfect in hand held situations and why people use tripods and leveling bases for work which requires more exactitude eg architectural shots or shots with important horisontal or vertical lines. Shift and tilt for studio or precise work is about not only getting focus right but also correcting for as much parralax error as possible when making shot - I got tired of the constraints of tech camera shooting years ago - and these days prefer the freedom of handheld shooting or for special occasions actually using a tripod - a lot can be achieved using pp tools available these days but for specialist shooting - one will never be able to replace the benefits of tilt/swing rise and fall.

I am keeping my eye out for Alpa developing a Fuji mount as they have for XID - especially when the 100MP comes out next year.

atb
Pete

Thanks Pete for a verbose reply that doesn't really seem to address my point. Sorry.
 
Top