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!

thoughts on architectural photography with Fujifilm GFX, image circle and lenses

kimyeesan

Member
+1 !

get a second hand Arca RM3D or Alpa or Cambo and a refurbished IQ150

or get a D810 (or wait for the D820 ) and 19 PC-E + 45 PC-E + 85 PC-E

The nikon solution isn't the best IQ on the planet but so easy to use and carry

Buying new gear to adapt stuff... so much money for with it is... and no capture one support !

Still the GFX is a really good solution if you don't need movements.
I think part of the fun of GFX is really 1 lens system that can do 2 things, street photo + Tech Cam .... I am thinking more like Contax 645 lens with a 'coming soon' electric adaptor, and adaptor on Combo Actus GFX for tech cam use... which I currently adapted to do... It's not perfect yet. but it's quite fun. Lightest weight possible...
 

chrismuc

Member
I think part of the fun of GFX is really 1 lens system that can do 2 things, street photo + Tech Cam .... I am thinking more like Contax 645 lens with a 'coming soon' electric adaptor, and adaptor on Combo Actus GFX for tech cam use... which I currently adapted to do... It's not perfect yet. but it's quite fun. Lightest weight possible...
+1

Enclosed the result of testing the image circles of various lenses and the usable shift ranges depending on the sensor size.

For covering 12mm sidewards shift on a 36x24mm sensor, an image circle of at least 65mm is required.

For high sharpness demand, the two Canon TSE lenses only provide sharp image circles of 58 resp. 62mm acc. my tests, means at full 12mm shift the corners are not top sharp.

But: The total image circle is much larger (73mm for the 17mm lens, 75mm for the 24mm lens). This means if there is anyhow only 'sky' in the image corner and one accepts reduced sharpness towards the shifted corners, the lenses are just fine (and the Nikon 19/24 PC and Samyang 24 PC aren't any better).

Moving to the 44x33mm sensor of the GFX (or an Actus with a IQ150 back), the two lenses won't show vignetting even at full shift (all tests at f11), just the corner sharpness is degrading.
IMO for many applications perfectly usable.

And acc. my experience there is no additional 'smearing' towards the image corners due to protection glass or the micro-lenses like some testers or user argue. They IMO compare the same shift amount on the GFX with on the Sony A7 or Canon 5D and that comparing apples with peaches because the same shift on the GFX means a much larger angle of view and therefore of course more degraded corner sharpness.

The three other Zeiss Contax and Zeiss Hasselblad lenses perform with Mirex shift adapters wonderfully up to the full 16mm shift on the GFX.
 

Attachments

Hi Chris,
Thanks so much for that information, is really helpful! I feel like there seems to be a lot of conflicting information regarding this subject, so am glad that you feel that the GFX is still very capable when using larger IC lenses with movements...

So you think that the "issues" that people have reported with such lenses and the GFX are merely the issues you encounter when running into the edges of a lens' image circle (smearing, softness etc etc)?

Would it be fair to say that the slightly longer lenses on the GFX that give a roughly equivalent FOV on the Sony A7RII (say the Contax 645 35mm on the GFX compared to the Canon 24mm TS-E II on the A7RII) measure up similarly with regards to the aforementioned issues (softness, smearing etc etc)? Probably not exactly the same FOV but sorta in the same ballpark...

Another example, would the Canon 24mm TS-E II on the GFX be comparable with such issues as say the Canon 17mm TS-E on the Sony A7RII?



With the Mirex Contax 645 - Canon Eos adapter you are using (and then a Canon Eos - GFX adapter), are you able to get a full 16mm of movement with it? And you are finding that even within this range you are getting sharp results on the edge of frame? If so, that is really impressive! What is the rough focal length equivalent of this combo when compared to the full frame A7RII?

One last one, with the chart you have provided, I did not understand the "negative" values that you provided? How is this possible? Are they a mistake or am I totally missing something?

Thanks so much in advance and thanks so much once again for all your very valuable information! Much appreciated!
 

chrismuc

Member
Smearing towards the image corners and color cast mainly happen with symmetrical wide angle lenses and sensors of digital cameras with thick protection glass (basically all digital cameras and digital backs apart from digital Leica M which were and are intended to be as compatible as possible to their older wide angle lenses which were designed for film).

Medium and large format wide angle lenses for all kind of film cameras without mirror box (rangefinder cameras, technical cameras) mostly also are such symmetrical designs, so they won't work well very with digital sensors. Enclosed section views of the two Schneider 24 and 35 mm lenses.

Rodenstock designed 'partial asymmetrical' (= 'partial retrofocus') type of medium format wide angle lenses which are positioned already a bit further away from the sensor and therefore work a bit better with shift movements and digital sensors but still shift is limited. Enclosed section views of the two Rodenstock 23 and 32 mm lenses.

Most suitable are any kind of 'real asymmetric' (= 'real retrofocus') type of wide angle lenses, simply any wide angle lens that was designed for a mirror reflex camera. Such kind of lens provides a large distance between the last lens element and the sensor and withit the rays of light emitting from the back lens towards the sensor edges and corners (especially when shifted) are less much angled than with the two former lens types, therefore no smearing and barely any color cast issues occur. Enclosed section views of the two Canon 17 and 24 mm TSE lenses and the Contax 645 35 mm lens.

(sensor size shown is 40mm height of a 54x40mm sensor)

Currently I don't have all my three cameras (Sony A7RII, Fuji GFX, Alpa FPS IQ180) on hand to do and publish a direct comparison test with the mentioned retrofocus lenses, but from my practical usage I don't see any of the cameras behaving worse than another if one compares image sections of same field of view angles (means less shift movements for larger sensors).

Enclosed also a slightly revised version of my shift movement xls sheet, the first one had a few equation mistakes (sorry).

The sharp image circle of the TSE 17 is 58 mm, the image circle of the Fuji GFX 44x33 mm sensor is 55 mm, that means the lens covers that sensor and still allows slight shift movements keeping sharp corners. In my first sheet I showed a negative shift value which would tell that the last mm towards the image corners are already not perfectly sharp without shift, but that's not the case. It is the case using the TSE 17 with 54x40mm 60/ 80/ 100 MP sensors.

Enclosed also a link to an uncropped full resolution sample picture:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18437364/Guangzhou/[email protected]+5mm-shift.jpg

Fuji GFX + Fotodiox Canon EF adapter + Canon EF 24f3.5 TSE (II), vertically with 5-6mm shift upwards.

The aperture was pre-set to f11 and I tried in lifeview to set the focus point in order to achieve sharpness from the bikes only a few meters in front of the camera until the skyscrapers at 'infinity' distance. According to my xls list, the TSE 24 should allow 5-6mm shift with still 'sharp' corners, if you check the top left corner, it's looks quite fine.
I mean we are talking here about a 20mm equivalent fov lens with shift on a 44x33mm medium format camera, I think it works cool;-)

A few words about the protection glass in front of the sensor of the Fuji GFX. Fuji has choosen a completely new solution, different to any other digital camera or digital back on the market: The protection glass is not glued directly on the sensor but it is positioned about 9mm in front of the sensor. This particular innovative postion has several advantages compared to a normal sensor-glass stack

1. Fuji was able to add ultrasonic cleaning by vibrating the glass instead the sensor. So Fuji is the only manufacturer to be able to offer that feature with this 44x33mm Sony sensor while all others (Phase One, Hasselblad, Pentax) aren't.

2. In case of scratching that glass by accident, only the (cheap) glass has to be replaced, not the (expensive) glass including the sensor it is normally glued to.

3. Dust on the protection glass is nearly invisible due to the distance to the sensor, the images by the Fuji GFX are much less prone to dust spots due to the distance and the ultrasonic cleaning.

Fuji of course incorporated the special position of the protection glass in the calculations af their newly designed GF lenses. It was unclear if that protection glass position has any negative effect on the image quality when using alternative lenses that were designed for film (no protection glass at all) or 'conventional' digital cameras.

Using the two super-wide-angle shift TSE lenses which were designed for a 'conventional' digital sensor-glass-stack and the Contax 645 35f3.5 and Hasselblad CF 50f4 FLE/ CF 100f3.5/ CF 180f4 lenses which were designed for film, I don't see any smearing effects towards the image corners, even fully shifted (apart from expected softness if shifted outside the usable image circle). That means, IMO the special protection glass position has no (or no worse) effect on image quality than a glass glued to the sensor.
 

Attachments

Amazing! Cannot thank you enough for taking the time to provide such an insight into this system... :)

Just wanted to clarify a previous point, to make sure that I am reading things correctly

"When using the Contax 645 35mm lens with the Mirex Contax 645 - Canon Eos adapter (and then a Canon Eos - GFX adapter), you are able to get a full 16mm of front rise with it? And you are finding that even within this range you are getting sharp results on the edge of frame? If so, that is really impressive! What is the rough focal length equivalent of this combo when compared to the full frame A7RII?"


Once again, thanks so much!
 

chrismuc

Member
Amazing! Cannot thank you enough for taking the time to provide such an insight into this system... :)

Just wanted to clarify a previous point, to make sure that I am reading things correctly

"When using the Contax 645 35mm lens with the Mirex Contax 645 - Canon Eos adapter (and then a Canon Eos - GFX adapter), you are able to get a full 16mm of front rise with it? And you are finding that even within this range you are getting sharp results on the edge of frame? If so, that is really impressive! What is the rough focal length equivalent of this combo when compared to the full frame A7RII?"


Once again, thanks so much!
Ur welcome.
A 35 mm lens with the Fuji GFX has a FOV of about a 28 mm lens used with 36x24 mm sensor.
You can read the max. shift values from my list:
GFX camera horizontal allows max. 13mm shift left/right and 16mm up/down with sharp corners. But the image circle would be sufficient for using the full 16mm shift left/right provided by the Mirex shift adapter.

Enclosed a sample I think with full 16mm shift upwards.
You can check the upper right corner sharpness at the crop.
 

Attachments

gero

New member
Chris, this is very useful information; is it really 9mm distance from the cover glass to the sensor or .9mm?

I was wondering if you had a symmetrical wide angle lens available (medium format or, one from a 35mm rangefinder camera) to try and see how well or bad the GFX camera is with this wide angle lenses.

Thank you for all the information.
 

chrismuc

Member
Chris, this is very useful information; is it really 9mm distance from the cover glass to the sensor or .9mm?

I was wondering if you had a symmetrical wide angle lens available (medium format or, one from a 35mm rangefinder camera) to try and see how well or bad the GFX camera is with this wide angle lenses.

Thank you for all the information.
Ur welcome, Gero.
It's really about 9mm, see graphics attached.
I only own the Mamiya 7 43 and 65 mm lenses which are rather symmetrical designs and provide excellent corner to corner sharpness on 6x7 film. The 65 was ok with FPS and IQ180 54x40mm sensor, the 43 had rather strong smearing towards the corners and color cast. So the 65 should be ok on the GFX, the 43 I must check, also I guess, the 43 back barrel already would interfere with the protection glass. Of course both need mount adaption and only can work because I removed back barrel parts and the electrical leaf shutter.

(I had Contax G 16, 21, 28 lenses but these already did not work well with an APS-C Sony camera, so I gave up on them and sold them, for Leica M I only have 50 and above.)
 

Attachments

Last edited:

gero

New member
Thank you Chris. I still have a doubt: would it be possible to take the infrared filter off? (It looks to be "detachable")? And use infrared filters in front of the lenses (a la M8 style)? I would mostly use these camera (and lenses) for black and white.

I want to use my collection of 35mm rangefinder wide angle lenses (and this "GXF altered") for a different purpose (than Architectural) which is more forgiving to "not perfect images". My use would be more like a type of street Photography. (Also, no antialiasing needed for me)

I would not have protection for the sensor; but I am willing to be very careful and assume the risk.

Thanks again
 
Chris, I want to ask you about the Canon TS-E lenses you were testing (and listed in the tables).

For 17 and 24mm, there are two versions – the old one with smaller image circle, and the newer ones designated version II, with considerably larger image circles. A very important difference from the standpoint of use on GFX/HD1!

Since you didn't record "II" in the tables, am I correct in thinking you were testing Ver. I, not Ver. II? Or did I miss something in your commentary that mentioned which you were testing?

Kirk
 

chrismuc

Member
Chris, I want to ask you about the Canon TS-E lenses you were testing (and listed in the tables).

For 17 and 24mm, there are two versions – the old one with smaller image circle, and the newer ones designated version II, with considerably larger image circles. A very important difference from the standpoint of use on GFX/HD1!

Since you didn't record "II" in the tables, am I correct in thinking you were testing Ver. I, not Ver. II? Or did I miss something in your commentary that mentioned which you were testing?

Kirk
Hi Kirk,
there are two versions of TSE 24 and I am referring to the second, sorry I did not mark it.
There is only one version of the TSE 17. It was released together with the TSE 24f3.5 L II, so it is also a rather 'recent' design.
Looking forward the new TSE 50/90/135 TS lenses which also should be very suitable on the GFX.
And I am looking forward to Steel's Canon EF - Fuji GF AF-adapter for all that lenses:)
Chris
 
Hi Chris,

on the Mirex website I could not find a shift adapter for Contax 645. I would be quite interested. Did I miss it? Or is it a special edition they only make if you ask directly? Do you use one for a Canon or for a Sony body?

I look for a way to use the Contax 645 35mm on my 5DsR. I own the PC-Distagon 35mm which is great in sharpness, but when fully shifted (especially in vertical orientation) I start to see color shifts in my 5DsR images (which I do not with the TS-Es, but the last lens element of the PC-Distagon is quite a bit closer to the sensor than on the TS-Es). With the Contax 645 lenses it is further away from the sensor, so I expect that there are no problems with that. Or did you experience color shifts when using the Contax 645 35mm fully lens shifted?

The new Canon TS-Es are great, they fill some gaps. I hope very much that they are as good as I expect. But for my architectural work I definitely need something in the 28 to 35mm range.

Best regards -
Marc
 

chrismuc

Member
Hi Chris,

on the Mirex website I could not find a shift adapter for Contax 645. I would be quite interested. Did I miss it? Or is it a special edition they only make if you ask directly? Do you use one for a Canon or for a Sony body?

I look for a way to use the Contax 645 35mm on my 5DsR. I own the PC-Distagon 35mm which is great in sharpness, but when fully shifted (especially in vertical orientation) I start to see color shifts in my 5DsR images (which I do not with the TS-Es, but the last lens element of the PC-Distagon is quite a bit closer to the sensor than on the TS-Es). With the Contax 645 lenses it is further away from the sensor, so I expect that there are no problems with that. Or did you experience color shifts when using the Contax 645 35mm fully lens shifted?

The new Canon TS-Es are great, they fill some gaps. I hope very much that they are as good as I expect. But for my architectural work I definitely need something in the 28 to 35mm range.

Best regards -
Marc
Mirex produces the Contax 645 - Canon EF shift adapter only on request. But I heard that currently he seems not willing to produce them. A pity ... no other source for such an adapter.

The Contax 645 35f3.5 has a larger image circle than the Contax CY 35f2.8 PC. It therefore allows more shift. The 645 version also shows some CA but only towards the end of the image circle and it can be removed pretty well by ACR. I never saw color cast issues shifted.

Strange and a pity that Canon does not offer a 35mm TSE lens to fill the gap between the 24 and the 50.
 
Hi Chris,
thank you for your feedback. What a pity Mirex doesn't make that adapter any more. The focal lengths between 28 and 35mm seem to be the only serious gap in the lineup of available shift lenses right now.
Marc


Mirex produces the Contax 645 - Canon EF shift adapter only on request. But I heard that currently he seems not willing to produce them. A pity ... no other source for such an adapter.

The Contax 645 35f3.5 has a larger image circle than the Contax CY 35f2.8 PC. It therefore allows more shift. The 645 version also shows some CA but only towards the end of the image circle and it can be removed pretty well by ACR. I never saw color cast issues shifted.

Strange and a pity that Canon does not offer a 35mm TSE lens to fill the gap between the 24 and the 50.
 
Hi Chris,
thank you for your feedback. What a pity Mirex doesn't make that adapter any more. The focal lengths between 28 and 35mm seem to be the only serious gap in the lineup of available shift lenses right now.
Marc
Hi Marc,
I recently contacted Mirex about the C645 adapter you are talking about and it is correct that they no longer have any in stock and have no plans to in the future.. There was simply not enough demand.. I was even close to getting one made by them scouring the factory for parts for me... but to no avail :(
This probably does not help you out with a Canon SLR but all I can think of is to attach one to a viewcamera and use it in "aperture preset" mode with a Sony A7 camera... A bit of a pain anyway I guess.

Or better, is that I saw on the Facebook GFX page that Kipon was looking to make a "shift" Eos-GFX adapter.... From there, a straight Fotodiox C645-Eos adapter should work...

Also, to change the aperture should be achievable with Steel Chen's C645-GFX Autofocus adapter :)

Quite a few adapters but probably the route i am looking to go down.. That is until a view camera comes out that has an electronic lens board for C645 lenses and takes the GFX as the rear camera//

As mentioned, doesn't help you out in your current setup but that is all I can think of...
 
Hi Marc,
I recently contacted Mirex about the C645 adapter you are talking about and it is correct that they no longer have any in stock and have no plans to in the future.. There was simply not enough demand.. I was even close to getting one made by them scouring the factory for parts for me... but to no avail :(
This probably does not help you out with a Canon SLR but all I can think of is to attach one to a viewcamera and use it in "aperture preset" mode with a Sony A7 camera... A bit of a pain anyway I guess.

Or better, is that I saw on the Facebook GFX page that Kipon was looking to make a "shift" Eos-GFX adapter.... From there, a straight Fotodiox C645-Eos adapter should work...

Also, to change the aperture should be achievable with Steel Chen's C645-GFX Autofocus adapter :)

Quite a few adapters but probably the route i am looking to go down.. That is until a view camera comes out that has an electronic lens board for C645 lenses and takes the GFX as the rear camera//

As mentioned, doesn't help you out in your current setup but that is all I can think of...
Thanks,

I did not know about the Kipon plans. Would be very good to have that. Not perfect because of adapter stacking and because of the lack of direct aperture control. But for me it would be worth it.
Fringer makes a Contax 645 - Fuji electronic adapter. Would be amazing if he offered a shift version too. That would be the perfect solution.

Marc
 
Top