FUJIFILM GFX 50S, 50R, 100, etc. ... Peculiarities

[Pelorus]

For those who may not have seen this, it gives some insight into the development of the GFX100

 

[MGrayson]

Hi All,

I suspect this lens is going right back to B&H. GF 250/4 on GFX 100 As I turn the aperture ring between 5.6 and 16, the reported apertures to the camera are very weird. Here's the sequence of 1/3 stop clicks from 5.6:
5.6
5.6
5.0
5.0 (should be 8)
4.0
4.0
13 (should be 11)
13
14
16

Worse, the camera shoots at the weird number, not where the ring is set.

Anyone seen this before? I'm updated to latest firmware on camera and lens. Doesn't happen with other lenses.

More minor problem - the rear control wheel is very hard to turn without pushing it in and activating its button, i.e., magnified view. Is this a common difficulty?

Thanks,

Matt

 

[k-hawinkler]

Matt, thanks. Is the camera or the lens or both at fault? :banghead:

 

[MGrayson]

Matt, thanks. Is the camera or the lens or both at fault? :banghead:

I don't see this behavior with other lenses, so I'm guessing it's the lens.

M

 

[ron787]

Hi All,

I suspect this lens is going right back to B&H. GF 250/4 on GFX 100 As I turn the aperture ring between 5.6 and 16, the reported apertures to the camera are very weird. Here's the sequence of 1/3 stop clicks from 5.6:
5.6
5.6
5.0
5.0 (should be 8)
4.0
4.0
13 (should be 11)
13
14
16

Worse, the camera shoots at the weird number, not where the ring is set.

Anyone seen this before? I'm updated to latest firmware on camera and lens. Doesn't happen with other lenses.

More minor problem - the rear control wheel is very hard to turn without pushing it in and activating its button, i.e., magnified view. Is this a common difficulty?

Thanks,

Matt

In regards to the control wheel, yes, it is, IMO, a design flaw. Unless I use my fingernail to turn it there is a tendency for it to click inward, and not provide the desired function.

 

[Don Libby]

Just received the 100 a couple of hours ago and must say I'm impressed. I was originally put off on the size when it was first announced however actually getting it in my hands I feel better.

Yes, it is large (I'd compare it to when I shot a Canon 1DsII). As large as it is it still feels comfortable in my hands.

I've updated all the lenses as well as the latest firmware for the body without any issue.

I've got most of the LCD screens set as I'd like knowing that I'll change them if needed.

I don't miss not having actual buttons as I rarely used them on the 50s instead using the front and rear wheels.

I like the top LCD screen which is something I liked on the Phase XF.

I like the little screen in the rear and have that set to show the histogram.

I'm sure there will be a learning curve of some sort however the menu appear to be similar to the 50.

We're currently in the Jackson Hole area shooting the past week and will begin tomorrow with the 100. Looking forward to seeing what this beast can do with wildlife and landscape.

Almost forgot to add a comment on the burst speed - I believe I'll be able to almost keep up with Sandy's A7r IV.

Don

 

[Pelorus]

Matt, are you able to try that lens on a different GFX body? Either another 100 or one of the 50 bodies? Might narrow the issue down.

I don't see this behavior with other lenses, so I'm guessing it's the lens.

M

 

[Rand47]

Matt, are you able to try that lens on a different GFX body? Either another 100 or one of the 50 bodies? Might narrow the issue down.

Matt, Also... though I suspect you've already tried this, but just in case... try cleaning the lens contacts. Perhaps contaminated in some way during packaging?

It does sound like a wonky lens, though. Hope you get it sorted / exchanged quickly.

Rand

 

[MGrayson]

Matt, Also... though I suspect you've already tried this, but just in case... try cleaning the lens contacts. Perhaps contaminated in some way during packaging?

It does sound like a wonky lens, though. Hope you get it sorted / exchanged quickly.

Rand

Even if that worked, I would wonder what *else* went wrong in its assembly. The AF ring is also looser than on my other GF lenses.

Matt, are you able to try that lens on a different GFX body? Either another 100 or one of the 50 bodies? Might narrow the issue down.

No, onely the one. My GAS isn't THAT bad... yet... :ROTFL:

Thanks guys,

Matt

BTW, the 250mm is a seriously awesome piece of glass: so sharp, the AF isn't good enough and only magnified assisted MF will do. Ditto the 100-200/5.6. I thought it was an ok, not great, lens until I manually focused it.

 

[k-hawinkler]

Being in NYC, Matt hopefully you shouldn't have too much trouble getting your setup tested and exchanged, no? :facesmack:

 

[MGrayson]

Being in NYC, Matt hopefully you shouldn't have too much trouble getting your setup tested and exchanged, no? :facesmack:

Tomorrow morning: Walk into B&H. Explain the problem. Get a new copy on the spot or for next day delivery. They have always taken my word for it on returns. I might bring the camera body along to demonstrate. Oh, another symptom - wiggling the aperture ring can cause big jumps in the reported f-stop. It really is a wonky lens.

 

[MGrayson]

As predicted: lens replaced by B&H. New copy optically and operationally great. :thumbs:

Matt

 

[algrove]

Just received the 100 a couple of hours ago and must say I'm impressed. I was originally put off on the size when it was first announced however actually getting it in my hands I feel better.

Yes, it is large (I'd compare it to when I shot a Canon 1DsII). As large as it is it still feels comfortable in my hands.

I've updated all the lenses as well as the latest firmware for the body without any issue.

I've got most of the LCD screens set as I'd like knowing that I'll change them if needed.

I don't miss not having actual buttons as I rarely used them on the 50s instead using the front and rear wheels.

I like the top LCD screen which is something I liked on the Phase XF.

I like the little screen in the rear and have that set to show the histogram.

I'm sure there will be a learning curve of some sort however the menu appear to be similar to the 50.

We're currently in the Jackson Hole area shooting the past week and will begin tomorrow with the 100. Looking forward to seeing what this beast can do with wildlife and landscape.

Almost forgot to add a comment on the burst speed - I believe I'll be able to almost keep up with Sandy's A7r IV.

Don

Thanks Don.

It will be interesting to compare high ISO capabilities between the 100 and the A7rIV mainly with respect to banding which some are talking about where the 100 is worse than the Sony. I refer to Jim Kasson's thoughts, but must carefully read his actual analysis. Digiloyd makes banding complaints.

BR,
Lou

 

[MGrayson]

Techart EF-GFX adapter. It almost works on the GFX100. It communicates aperture properly. I didn’t check AF as I would use it with the 24 TS-E.

But (you knew there was a but), IS is jumpy, weird, and worse than useless (yes, I registered the lens/adapter just in case). Now the weird part. If I turn the adapter past vertical, the IS works, but the lens aperture is no longer recognized.

I’ll wait until the bugs get worked out before jumping back in. I’d worry about my camera, but every other lens, save the first 250/4, works perfectly.

Matt

 

[k-hawinkler]

The Bluebirds are Back (October - February)

Fuji GFX 50S + Fujinon GF250 mm F4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4X WR TC @ 350.0 mm (277.0 mm in 35mm), f/5.6, 0.001s (1/1000).

 

[k-hawinkler]

Woodhouse's Scrub-Jay (Blue Jay :grin:)

Fuji GFX 50S + Fujinon GF250 mm F4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4X WR TC @ 350.0 mm (277.0 mm in 35mm), f/5.6, 0.001s (1/1000).

 

[k-hawinkler]

Northern Flicker

Fuji GFX 50S + Fujinon GF250 mm F4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4X WR TC @ 350.0 mm (277.0 mm in 35mm), f/5.6, 0.001s (1/1000).

 

[k-hawinkler]

Getting Along ...

Peaceably :clap:

 

[k-hawinkler]

If we compare a
Sony A9, 5.90 µm + 400 mm lens with a
Fuji 50S, 5.31 µm + 1.4x TC + 250 mm lens we find
(400/350) * (5.31/5.90) = 1.03, so about 3% more detail or resolution for this A9 system.

And if we compare a
Sony A9, 5.90 µm + 400 mm lens without or with a + 1.4x TC with the
Fuji GFX 100, 3.75 µm + 250 mm lens without or with a + 1.4x TC we find
(400/250) * (3.75/5.90) = 1.02, so about 2% more detail or resolution for this A9 system.
(560/350) * (3.75/5.90) = 1.02, so about 2% more detail or resolution for this A9 system.

The subject image size we get is linear with respect to lens focal length and the inverse of the camera pixel pitch.

So in terms of detail or resolution captured, replacing the 50S with the GFX 100, is about the same as adding a1.4x TC to the 50S.

Similarly the A9 + 400 mm lens resolves about the same detail as the 50S + 250 mm lens and with a 1.4x TC.
For the same lenses mentioned above, A9 and GFX 100 compare detail resolution wise both without or with a 1.4x TC each.

I find it reassuring that the two systems considered here, Sony A9, and Fuji 50S, GFX 100, potentially can extract the same level of detail from a scene.

For static scenes I would give the nod to Fuji

Fuji GFX 50S + Fujinon GF250mm F4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4X WR TC @ 350 mm (277 mm in 35mm), f/5.6, 0.002s (1/500), ISO 320.

and for dynamic scenes to Sony, in particular for dimly lit scenes like these.

Fuji GFX 50S + Fujinon GF250mm F4 R LM OIS WR + 1.4X WR TC @ 350 mm (277 mm in 35mm), f/5.6, 0.002s (1/500), ISO 1600.

 

[PeterA]

Really interesting and worthwhile statement of logic and rationale behind choosing an excellent long telephoto and putting it on the right body.

Of course - if we standardise focal lengths between the two - the results are different yes?