Fuji GFX 50S/50R with 55mm Rodenstock/Sinar lens

[rdeloe]

I'm using a Fuji GFX 50R on the back of a Toyo VX23D. I understand that shorter focal length lenses designed for view/tech cameras will not work due to lens cast problems when shifting (even if they physically fit in front of the sensor). Therefore, I've given up on most of them... except I hold out a faint hope that a Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 55/4.5 or its Sinar variant will still allow shifts without lens cast issues.

I've found lots of threads on getDPI and other sites that hint that the Rodie 55mm won't work on a GFX sensor, but nothing definitive. So this post is seeking a definitive answer. Is anyone actually using the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 55/4.5 on a Fuji GFX 50S or 50R, and if so, how does it do when shifting?

If the answer is that it doesn't work, then I'm going to go with either the SMC Pentax 67 55mm f/4 or the Mamiya C 50mm f/4 shift (depending on which one performs better -- to be determined once I round up the necessary adapters). However, these are both huge big lenses -- so not my first choice.

 

[Boinger]

I dont think so because you wont be able to reach infinity focus with the 55 due to the camera body.

 

[rdeloe]

That part will be OK I believe. The Rodie 55 has a flange focal length of 67.6mm and the length of the rear barrel is 32mm. The sensor is 26.7mm inside the camera body, and the total depth of my mount is 7mm. The end result is the rear of the lens will be 1.9mm from the face of the camera board when focused at infinity. That's very close, but it works.

So the issue for me is really just will it shift without turning the image to crap due to lens cast.

 

[Doppler9000]

According to Rod Klukas, Arca Swiss USA, the 55 Grandagon works well on the GFX with the Universalis, with lots of movement. The lens will work, optically, if you can get it to fit mechanically.

 

[rdeloe]

That is very good to know. Thanks. Now here's hoping that I did the math right and I really do have those 1.9mm to spare.

According to Rod Klukas, Arca Swiss USA, the 55 Grandagon works well on the GFX with the Universalis, with lots of movement. The lens will work, optically, if you can get it to fit mechanically.

 

[TheDude]

the issue for me is really just will it shift without turning the image to crap due to lens cast.

My understanding is that the GFX50S/50R uses the well-known (older) IMX161 which is a front-illuminated sensor. Hence, color casts/anomalies are to be expected with any shifting or stitching.
The Digaron lenses are designed for a longer focal length (retro-focus design) in order to address this, and therefore, should do better than the older Apo-Sironar digital (or analog) lenses.
Hope this helps.

 

[rdeloe]

I'll know for sure soon! One is on its way. I'll report back when I have some actual experiences to share. Personally I'm hoping Rod Klukas is right!

My understanding is that the GFX50S/50R uses the well-known (older) IMX161 which is a front-illuminated sensor. Hence, color casts/anomalies are to be expected with any shifting or stitching.
The Digaron lenses are designed for a longer focal length (retro-focus design) in order to address this, and therefore, should do better than the older Apo-Sironar digital (or analog) lenses.
Hope this helps.

 

[rdeloe]

I'm sorry to report that the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 55mm f/4.5 does not work well on a Fuji GFX 50R. It shows quite strong lens cast when shifted. It's apparent with shifts as little as 5mm. At shifts of 20mm, 1/3 of the image (in landscape orientation) has a strong purplish cast.

This is a real shame because otherwise it's a terrific lens. On my 50R it's already good over the whole frame wide open, and outstanding at f/8. I'd use it without hesitation in most situations at f/16. Unfortunately, I bought it for shifting, and that's one thing it does not do well on my camera.

 

[TheDude]

I'm sorry to report that the Rodenstock Apo-Grandagon 55mm f/4.5 does not work well on a Fuji GFX 50R. It shows quite strong lens cast when shifted....This is a real shame because otherwise it's a terrific lens.

Have you tried to correct this in post processing using a color calibration image.

 

[rdeloe]

No, I haven't. Had I no other alternatives, I'd likely do that. However, the Pentax 67 55/4 is stellar on the GFX 50R so I'm probably going to go that route rather than having to use colour calibration images. Another reason I'm going the P67 route is that on my setup (Fuji GFX 50R on the back of a Toyo VX23D) I'm right at the very edge of what's physically possible using the Rodenstock lens. Even on a 24mm recessed board, the rear of the Rodenstock 55/4.5 was just a few mm away from the camera mounting plate. With some movements the lens and the camera frame interfered with each other.

Have you tried to correct this in post processing using a color calibration image.

 

[anyone]

The LCC is quite easy to do and also likely to save you some other work in post-processing. I guess everyone working with movements on a digital camera is doing it. After the shot (it will be anyways tripod mounted when you think of shifting) just take another one through a milk-white plastic surface. In post, create a LCC profile and apply it to the picture - done (2 seconds ). Pro: also all your sensor dust is gone. Only with long exposures this can be a little annoying.

 

[rdeloe]

Thanks for the encouragement. I'm going to see how I get on with the P67 55/4. If that doesn't work out for some reason, it's good to know there's another option. It's only this lens too; my Schneider Apo-Digitar 80 N is fine shifted.

The LCC is quite easy to do and also likely to save you some other work in post-processing. I guess everyone working with movements on a digital camera is doing it. After the shot (it will be anyways tripod mounted when you think of shifting) just take another one through a milk-white plastic surface. In post, create a LCC profile and apply it to the picture - done (2 seconds ). Pro: also all your sensor dust is gone. Only with long exposures this can be a little annoying.

 

[archivue]

in this focal length, the canon 50 TS-E is really really good !

 

[drevil]

in this focal length, the canon 50 TS-E is really really good !

i second that

 

[rdeloe]

I have heard great things about the 50mm Canon T/S lens. However, my first choice was a lens that works on my Toyo VX23D. I also find T/S lenses limiting now that I'm using a digital view camera that gives me a full range of movements on front and back standard.

The SMC Pentax 67 55mm/4 (latest edition) that I tried was a very nice lens. But it's large and heavy, and at the time I was making the decision I couldn't get it to fit on the lens board I was using. It also wasn't quite as flat across the field as I wanted when shifting.

In case anyone is curious, this is where I've landed instead.

* At 45mm, I am using the SMC Pentax 67 45mm f/4. It's tiny relative to its 55mm cousin (but nothing for the Pentax 67 is actually "tiny"...). It's not as sharp as the 55/4 (or my SMC Pentax-A 645 35mm f/3.5). However, it is a good performer and I don't hesitate to use it. I had a brainstorm and figured out how to mount it directly to a custom board for the VX23D. This involved pulling the lens mount screws, fitting the lens to a board with a hole that matched the lens mount, and replacing the original screws with longer M1.7 screws. Here's what it looks like on the board and on the camera: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qW0PT-a0CwJ_n9yaQqU8xFxU4lm6Xp44 and https://drive.google.com/open?id=161uDqvqrJqEwY3Ldh1ykbjpoB0megYlU This is entirely reversible.

* At 60mm I'm using a tiny wide angle enlarging lens. There are three 60mm enlarging lenses that had a wide angle design so that people could enlarge 6x6cm negatives on short column enlargers. These were made by Schneider Kreuznach, Rodenstock and Hoya (for various other brands). I've tested all three side-by-side and prefer the Hoya variant for a variety of reasons. Here's an example of what 15mm of rise looks like with this lens at f/16 (full resolution JPEG so you can dive into the details): https://drive.google.com/open?id=1om1keIhedjD2qOQChOcXXt9ql7bgm_Oc Diffraction is reducing resolution a bit by f/16, but I needed the depth of field to get everything I wanted in focus; f/11 is sharper still. It's a test shot so you'll have to ignore the inconveniently-parked car! The RAW file from this lens has fairly low contrast, and with 15mm of rise there's about 0.5 to 0.75 stop of light falloff at the top (all of which is easily corrected). This picture was adjusted. In my view, 15mm of rise is pushing it with this lens; look at the top corners and you'll see some softness because I'm at the very edge of the image circle. A 12mm rise is good over the whole image.

Retrofocus lenses are still the only way to go with focal lengths wider than 60mm on my GFX 50R plus Toyo VX23D setup. However, for longer focal lengths I'm impressed by how selected good quality enlarger lenses perform. My only "proper" lens for this camera is an SK Apo Digitar 80mm f/4. Amazingly though, while it's clearly sharper and has better contrast than the enlarger lenses I'm using, it's not vastly better. This is quite surprising to me because conventional wisdom is that enlarger lenses are unsuited for this kind of use. That's not the case.