Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 40 of 40

Thread: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

  1. #1
    New Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like

    thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    hello guys, here's some thoughts while considering the Fujifilm GFX system base as a architectural and interior photographer. i am still on the 5D3, have tried 5DSR and seen the files of D800 and A7RII, but wish for a step further upgrade.

    i believe the primary problems for Canon are; dynamic range, details, Canon's lack of a 35mm shift and 45mm shift is terrible. i have researched, and based on your comments and numbers, here's a dream system which i thought might be useful, please share your thoughts too:

    focal length on 24x36 - focal length on 33x44 / image circle / comments

    Canon - need to carry a Canon to stop down, unless there's an adapter to connect the brains

    17mm - 13mm / 67.2mm / will not get clean 12mm shift, but excellent, gets darker on the corners, based on ALPA's FPS pdf
    24mm - 18mm / 67.2mm / might not get 12mm shift, but excellent, gets darker on the corners, based on ALPA's FPS pdf and Yee Kim's Flickr images:
    http://www.alpa.ch/_files/20131006_ALPA_FPS_low-rez.pdf
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/kimyee...7644820175716/

    Schneider PC TS - ultimate set up imho my images are primary created on the 24-50mm range so the 28mm and 50mm on 33x44 are the most important. need adapter to connect, but needs no electric connections.

    28mm - 22mm / 72mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift, but not any meticulous review around.
    50mm - 39mm / 79.2mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift
    120mm - 94mm / 153mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift

    Hartblei
    40mm - 31mm / no data / should be excellent too in theory for 12mm shift

    //

    i know there's also paths of going for Contax 645 lens, which also needs adapter to stop down, the 35mm is excellent (ref. Yee Kim's Flickr), also the Pentax 55mm and 120mm using Stephen's shift adapter, or Cambo which is really big. ultimately i wish it could be a small, good looking :p system.

    what do you think?

    han

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    77
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    I could talk about this subject former because I shoot architecture/interiors for a living and am a gear head nerd at the same time. One thing I have learned over the years is that there are very few options out there for us that tend to check all the boxes, keeping in mind that I am considering taste and gear bias as well. I've tried it all though really, no joke. DSLRS, Mirrorless, adapters with tilt/shift lenses, tilt/shift adapters, tech cameras, view cameras...

    Not to belittle resolution, but the king of all attributes sensor wise for my work is dynamic range. End of story. Well, there goes the Canon options. The thing that hurts here is that Canon makes some of the most excellent tilt/shift lenses. I always felt the 17mm was bit too wide for architectural, but I am sure it would be fine for real estate work, maybe even preferred since many agents actually think that cavernous look is great. The 24mm TS-E II is stellar! They have a 45mm and 90mm, and from my experience they were both solid, with the 90mm having the better optics.

    So then I adapted these to the Sony A7 series cameras, which gave me the best of the lenses with great sensors and dynamic range. But this was not without issues, as movements would cause reflections from the inside of the adapter, even the latest/greatest. Flocking helped with this, but nothing ever brought it back to how things worked native. Then there was the occasional electronics hiccup that would cause me a headache as I would lose control of my aperture control. Ugh!!! I gave up on this setup.

    Okay, I am getting way off topic, so I am going to try to reel it in.

    Of the options you listed, all of which I considered back when I thought I might want a GFX (No longer an issue for me) I think the best bet is the Schneider 28mm PC TS. Keep in mind that this is just a guess though as it is only based on conjecture. I really like the fact that there are no electronics involved in that option, and that is a major factor for me. Adapter performance, I guess we will have to wait to see. But that is an expensive experiment to volunteer for in my opinion.

    Speaking of money, my suggestion for an architectural setup of this expense is to skip the GFX. Currently I shoot on a Cambo WRS5000 with a Phase One IQ3100. This is obviously way more expensive, but I have also used the IQ150, which is the same as sensor as the GFX and worked very well for me, considering the live view and the gobs of dynamic range. Don't forget Capture One support, LCC, and the insanely lovely large format lenses. Even this setup configured sparingly would likely cost a little more than what you are trying to do, but it will flat out WORK.

    I still shoot 35mm format as well, and have been trying out the Nikon 19mm PC-E on a D810. I am also going to try it on an SL with a Novoflex smart adapter, the thought of which rubs me the wrong way because of my adapter experiences, but I am a red dot junkie, so I have to try it. The 19mm is great by the way, and I much prefer it over the 17mm, but it is still a bit wide in my opinion.
    www.dna-image.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Given that 50MP 44x33 is already 3 years old, I would be inclined to pick the A7R-II route (cheap to upgrade once A7R-III is announced).

    You could achieve 14mm wide angle with 5mm shift with a setup like this: Canon 11-24 coupled with A7R-II via Arca Mf2

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    Given that 50MP 44x33 is already 3 years old, I would be inclined to pick the A7R-II route (cheap to upgrade once A7R-III is announced).

    You could achieve 14mm wide angle with 5mm shift with a setup like this: Canon 11-24 coupled with A7R-II via Arca Mf2
    Hi Voidshatter.
    I have read a lot about this combination. But I have never seen an image with the shifted 11-24mm. I always suspected sharpness in the shifted corners is not what I look for, but maybe I am wrong. Is it on par with the Ts-E 24 II or the TS-E 17? If you could share images I would be thankful.
    Another question: how do you correct that lens for distortion? Do you notify focal length and shifts? Is the distortion of the simple kind where you don't need a profile? Otherwise I would not know how to get straight lines straight.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Photoshop's Adaptive Wide Angle tool will get the lines straight.
    Last edited by NoBob; 2nd March 2017 at 02:58.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoBob View Post
    Photoshop's Adaptive Wide Angle plugin will get the lines straight.
    Are you sure that will work when the lens was shifted?

  7. #7
    Senior Member ErikKaffehr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Nyköping Sweden
    Posts
    1,178
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Hi,

    Chris Barret uses the 11-24 Canon for architecture, why not ask him?

    cb at christopherbarrett dot net

    Best regards
    Erik




    Quote Originally Posted by marc aurel View Post
    Hi Voidshatter.
    I have read a lot about this combination. But I have never seen an image with the shifted 11-24mm. I always suspected sharpness in the shifted corners is not what I look for, but maybe I am wrong. Is it on par with the Ts-E 24 II or the TS-E 17? If you could share images I would be thankful.
    Another question: how do you correct that lens for distortion? Do you notify focal length and shifts? Is the distortion of the simple kind where you don't need a profile? Otherwise I would not know how to get straight lines straight.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Sure, just be clever where you place the guides - vertical, horizontal or arbitrary - to staighten out uneven distortion. Doesn't matter if lens was shifted or not.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by marc aurel View Post
    Hi Voidshatter.
    I have read a lot about this combination. But I have never seen an image with the shifted 11-24mm. I always suspected sharpness in the shifted corners is not what I look for, but maybe I am wrong. Is it on par with the Ts-E 24 II or the TS-E 17? If you could share images I would be thankful.
    Another question: how do you correct that lens for distortion? Do you notify focal length and shifts? Is the distortion of the simple kind where you don't need a profile? Otherwise I would not know how to get straight lines straight.
    I have no experience with it. Based on talks I was told by others that the 11-24mm lens doesn't have much distortion, and is sharper than the 17mm TS-E.

    As for my own tests, I can only confirm that the Rodenstock 23mm HR is sharper than the Canon 17mm TS-E, but not up to a margin to justify the cost difference. I prefer to shoot with the Rodenstock 23mm HR because it's easygoing for traditional filters. Distortion is corrected by Capture One if the amount of shift is recorded, but distortion is negligible most of the time.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by NoBob View Post
    Sure, just be clever where you place the guides - vertical, horizontal or arbitrary - to staighten out uneven distortion. Doesn't matter if lens was shifted or not.
    I am not sure if understand correctly. But your description sounds more like correcting for converging verticals, not distortion (in the sense of barrel or moustache distortion). Or have I misunderstood you?
    Do you or anybody else here in the forum actually use this setup and can confirm by first hand experience that distortion on a shifted 11-24mm lens can be corrected?

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    759
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by marc aurel View Post
    I am not sure if understand correctly. But your description sounds more like correcting for converging verticals, not distortion (in the sense of barrel or moustache distortion). Or have I misunderstood you?
    Do you or anybody else here in the forum actually use this setup and can confirm by first hand experience that distortion on a shifted 11-24mm lens can be corrected?
    As for the Rodenstock case, if I take a note of how much has been shifted while I shoot, I could use Capture One's built-in profiles to correct the distortion after I enter the shift data manually. It will automatically calculate which part of image circle of the lens was captured by the image and what kind of distortion needs to be corrected. This function is for distortion correction, not perspective keystone correction.

    The Canon 11-24mm's profile is also inside Capture One, but I'm not sure whether it works for shift or not.

    Name:  301.jpg
Views: 2967
Size:  169.2 KB
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    597
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    There is the Cambo ACTUS-GFX.

    Specifications
    Size L / W / H:
    152 x 115 x 171 mm
    Weight:
    1150 g
    Front Tilt:
    19 ° (+10/-9)
    Rear Shift Vertical:
    27mm (12/15)
    Rear Shift Horizontal:
    40mm (20/20)
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by voidshatter View Post
    I have no experience with it. Based on talks I was told by others that the 11-24mm lens doesn't have much distortion, and is sharper than the 17mm TS-E.

    As for my own tests, I can only confirm that the Rodenstock 23mm HR is sharper than the Canon 17mm TS-E, but not up to a margin to justify the cost difference. I prefer to shoot with the Rodenstock 23mm HR because it's easygoing for traditional filters. Distortion is corrected by Capture One if the amount of shift is recorded, but distortion is negligible most of the time.
    I use both with Sony A7rII: 11-24 on HCam and 17 mm- 24 mm II with metabones.
    They both have their advantages.
    11-24 allows me work without changing the lens, also use of 14 mm and 20 shifted.
    I think I use 20 mm more than other, in some situations 24 mm is simply not wide enough, - (I like more 28-50 mm look- I dont like to stich). 14 mm shifted give me possibilty that no other system can, absolutly outstanding.
    The courners at 11, 12, 14 mm are not as good, I wish it would be like at 16-17-20. I think at 20 mm this lens is at its best: 15 mm movements are possible and really good. The focusing must be done at app 11, sometimes it is not easy, I do then different shots. The focusing wit 24-17 shift lenses is at wide aperture afcourse much better, also distortion of the 24 is absolutly great. at the 11-24 the distortion is not so good like at 24 mm II but still very good ( dont forget it is a zoom lens) . is 11-24 better at the cournes than 17 mm? I dont know, my 17 mm is a very good copy ( my first was poor), I would say they are both very close.
    Chromatic aberation are pretty strong on 11-14, this is maybe the biggest weakness of this lens, anyway you need Capture one for it.
    I also use 40 mm IF Hartblei on Nikon 800 and 50 mm Mamiya shift.
    I can imagine the 40 mm will be great on Fuji, but the lens allows only 10 mm movements, the mamiya have big image circle, better distortion, but it is not so sharp and have low contrast- post is needed.
    I dont believe that it will happen but I would really like when Fuji would make a shift lens for the GFX.
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Liverpool, UK
    Posts
    57
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    I work with the Sony A7r and the 24mm ts-e on a metabones and Pentax 645 lenses on with a shift adapter. There are some quirks to the Metabones and the Canon glass but I can live with those. The Pentax glass I find is great, the 75 and 120 are a bit prone to flare, coming from the adapter, but hopefully my next go at flocking will fix that, but its easy enough to prevent by shading the lens anyway. I'm happy working round all of those issues. It's not like using the TS-e was completely free from flare issues on the 5dmkII anyway!

    I've rented many a copy of the 17mm TS-e and found they all varied in quality. The first few where great, the last one I picked up was awful at the edges shifted past a few mm.

    I'm interested in the Fuji, more for the dynamic range than the 50mpx, though that won't hurt. The actus looks great ( I tried one with the Sony), though I understand it won't give infinity with the EF glass on the Fuji version!
    Probably pic up a Fotodiox adapter and give a GFX a go, when Calumet offer them for hire, add the cost of rental to jobs maybe.

    Certainly looks to have some great potential. I want to try the P645 28-45 and 25mm with it.
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    91
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    You can place two, three or more guides along a distorted line to straighten it out.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by ErikKaffehr View Post
    Hi,

    Chris Barret uses the 11-24 Canon for architecture, why not ask him?

    cb at christopherbarrett dot net

    Best regards
    Erik
    Hi Erik,
    thanks for that hint. I did that.
    And thanks to the others for their answers.
    Best regards -
    Marc

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Shanghai
    Posts
    163
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by haihan View Post
    hello guys, here's some thoughts while considering the Fujifilm GFX system base as a architectural and interior photographer. i am still on the 5D3, have tried 5DSR and seen the files of D800 and A7RII, but wish for a step further upgrade.

    i believe the primary problems for Canon are; dynamic range, details, Canon's lack of a 35mm shift and 45mm shift is terrible. i have researched, and based on your comments and numbers, here's a dream system which i thought might be useful, please share your thoughts too:

    focal length on 24x36 - focal length on 33x44 / image circle / comments

    Canon - need to carry a Canon to stop down, unless there's an adapter to connect the brains

    17mm - 13mm / 67.2mm / will not get clean 12mm shift, but excellent, gets darker on the corners, based on ALPA's FPS pdf
    24mm - 18mm / 67.2mm / might not get 12mm shift, but excellent, gets darker on the corners, based on ALPA's FPS pdf and Yee Kim's Flickr images:
    http://www.alpa.ch/_files/20131006_ALPA_FPS_low-rez.pdf
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/kimyee...7644820175716/

    Schneider PC TS - ultimate set up imho my images are primary created on the 24-50mm range so the 28mm and 50mm on 33x44 are the most important. need adapter to connect, but needs no electric connections.

    28mm - 22mm / 72mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift, but not any meticulous review around.
    50mm - 39mm / 79.2mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift
    120mm - 94mm / 153mm / definitely great, in theory for 12mm shift

    Hartblei
    40mm - 31mm / no data / should be excellent too in theory for 12mm shift

    //

    i know there's also paths of going for Contax 645 lens, which also needs adapter to stop down, the 35mm is excellent (ref. Yee Kim's Flickr), also the Pentax 55mm and 120mm using Stephen's shift adapter, or Cambo which is really big. ultimately i wish it could be a small, good looking system.

    what do you think?

    han
    Well, I have been using the TS-E 17 on my Malaysia trip this time. I can get about 12mm shift, but with some very strange vignette and cut off at left right corner (when shifted to the max on left, you get vignette on the right... and cut off from image circle on the right.)


    3 images stitched


    1 image, composed with 65:24.

    This is the main reason that I go for the GFX, because of this XPAN crop ratio...

    Other shots I did with the TS-E 17 was:


    I have also acquire the Cambo Actus GFX, and use it with assortment of Enlarging lens as well as Contax 645 and SK Digital 28mm f/2.8 L.

    The SK Digital 28mm will give slight movement cause the image circle is about 60mm or so. The Contax 645 has some pretty good shift capability, but it has some CA as well which is easily fix. Those enlarging lens is very fun, and the widest you can go is about 60mm WA rodenstock, that lens covers 6x7 so it's more than enough for GFX.


    SK Digital 28mm f/2.8L


    Rodenstock APO Rodagon 80mm f/4, 3 image stitch


    Contax 645 Distagon 35mm f/3.5
    Last edited by kimyeesan; 10th May 2017 at 04:55.
    Thanks 3 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 7 Member(s) liked this post

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    230
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Hi Kimyeesan,
    All sample from tse that i've seen were pretty poor in image quality ... with strong smearing and sharpness falloff ... what do you feel/think ?
    Did you find any good dadapted lenses which are playing well?
    Would you be kind enough to share some raw or full size jpeg?
    thanks




    Quote Originally Posted by kimyeesan View Post
    Well, I have been using the TS-E 17 on my Malaysia trip this time. I can get about 12mm shift, but with some very strange vignette and cut off at left right corner (when shifted to the max on left, you get vignette on the right... and cut off from image circle on the right.)


    3 images stitched


    1 image, composed with 65:24.

    This is the main reason that I go for the GFX, because of this XPAN crop ratio...

    Other shots I did with the TS-E 17 was:


    I have also acquire the Cambo Actus GFX, and use it with assortment of Enlarging lens as well as Contax 645 and SK Digital 28mm f/2.8 L.

    The SK Digital 28mm will give slight movement cause the image circle is about 60mm or so. The Contax 645 has some pretty good shift capability, but it has some CA as well which is easily fix. Those enlarging lens is very fun, and the widest you can go is about 60mm WA rodenstock, that lens covers 6x7 so it's more than enough for GFX.


    SK Digital 28mm f/2.8L


    Rodenstock APO Rodagon 80mm f/4, 3 image stitch


    Contax 645 Distagon 35mm f/3.5
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Marseille, FRANCE
    Posts
    956
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by dnercesian View Post
    Speaking of money, my suggestion for an architectural setup of this expense is to skip the GFX.
    +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.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Shanghai
    Posts
    163
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by daf View Post
    Hi Kimyeesan,
    All sample from tse that i've seen were pretty poor in image quality ... with strong smearing and sharpness falloff ... what do you feel/think ?
    Did you find any good dadapted lenses which are playing well?
    Would you be kind enough to share some raw or full size jpeg?
    thanks
    Well, when you are playing with TSE17, you are really just wanting that FoV, not really for extreme IQ. So I don't really mind. That photo of the Shanghai Tower can only be taken with TSE17 with full shift in 1 shots... So, I think if you really want that view, you have to use it.

    You can look at full rez image at my flickr page:
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/kimyeesan/

  21. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Shanghai
    Posts
    163
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by archivue View Post
    +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...
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  22. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by kimyeesan View Post
    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.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	shift-ranges.jpg 
Views:	37 
Size:	24.7 KB 
ID:	126859  
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    enclosed two sample pics, both with TSE17 @ f11 with GFX

    first 12mm up
    second pano +/- 12 sidewards

    (shifted corners not perfectly sharp but usable)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF0220.jpg 
Views:	72 
Size:	625.1 KB 
ID:	126860   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF9740+42.jpg 
Views:	172 
Size:	507.8 KB 
ID:	126861  
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 4 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    230
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Thanks..

  25. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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!

  26. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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/...B5mm-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.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF0531-C24.jpg 
Views:	65 
Size:	822.2 KB 
ID:	127059   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	shift-ranges.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	275.2 KB 
ID:	127060   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	wide-anle-lenses.jpg 
Views:	44 
Size:	170.2 KB 
ID:	127061  
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  27. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    another sample:
    GFX + Hasselblad CF 100f3.5 w/ Mirex shift adapter (shift + 16mm)

    100% crop of shifted section

    works great
    the lens has pretty no distortion even at full shift
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF0529-CF100.jpg 
Views:	37 
Size:	513.3 KB 
ID:	127067   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF0529-CF100-crop.jpg 
Views:	43 
Size:	330.8 KB 
ID:	127069  
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  28. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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!

  29. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by wallpaperviking View Post
    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.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF9763c.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	493.1 KB 
ID:	127131   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	m_DSF9763c-crop.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	338.8 KB 
ID:	127130  

  30. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    That is great to hear! Thanks so much once again!

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    525
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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.

  32. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by gero View Post
    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.)
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	GFX-sectionview.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	117.8 KB 
ID:	127209   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	M7-FPS-09.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	285.2 KB 
ID:	127208   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screen Shot 2014-05-09 at 07.42.25.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	21.8 KB 
ID:	127207  
    Last edited by chrismuc; 23rd May 2017 at 22:23.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  33. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    525
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    782
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by thompsonkirk View Post
    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
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  36. #36
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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

  37. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Munich/Guangzhou
    Posts
    138
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by marc aurel View Post
    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.

  38. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    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


    Quote Originally Posted by chrismuc View Post
    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.

  39. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by marc aurel View Post
    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...

  40. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: thoughts on architectural with GFX, image circle and lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by wallpaperviking View Post
    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •