Steve Hendrix
Well-known member
This may be helpful.
Steve Hendrix/CI
Steve Hendrix/CI
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!
FUJIFILM GFX 50R question
- Thread starter Greg Haag
- Start date
rdeloe
Well-known member
It's not like this isn't complicated as can be, especially when you don't have access to the equipment to try it out! No worries at all.
Yes, the G-mount inner diameter is 65mm. But that only gets you part way in there. I'd estimate about 1 cm. The rest of the distance down to the sensor itself is given up to a rectangular baffle.
One also has to take into consideration the diameter of whatever you're using to mount the GFX to whatever attaches to the camera. The diameter of the adapter I'm using to provide a mount for the board I built has an inner diameter of 56mm, which creates a choke point before you even get down to the throat of the GFX camera itself.
I've simply avoided any lenses that had to be inside the sensor cavity. For that reason, it's retrofocus for wider than 60mm on my setup. That has yet to present a barrier to me making the photographs I want to make. But I can see how it would be a problem for someone who uses ultra-wide lenses.
rdeloe
Well-known member
That's a very helpful table Steve. Thanks for sharing.
Unless one does some custom work!
Maybe could mount a camera mounting plate directly onto the GFX body and machine away the G-mount for a wider cavity?
Maybe not worth now but when there will be a GFX 100R inexpensive enough!
Chris Beards
New member
Interesting thread, is anyone successfully using the 50R on a Tech Cam with longer lenses (55mm and above) without LCC issues. I am thinking about replacing my P45+ with the Fuji on my Linhof Techno.
rdeloe
Well-known member
You bet. I haven't seen lens cast issues with anything 60mm or longer. It's really only the shorter symmetrical designs that are the problem.
I'm mostly using retrofocus lenses now for the convenience and consistency in results. They're all fine at every focal length. The exception is 120mm where I'm still using my delightful Rodenstock Rodagon-WA 120mm f/5.6. Even though I have a very good 120mm retrofocus prime (the SMC Pentax-A 645 120mm f/4 Macro), I prefer my Rodie 120 because it's just about as sharp as the Pentax at all distances (including infinity), and it has a huge image circle.
rdeloe
Well-known member
The Sinar F2 is a great camera for 4x5, but 4x5 film seems to be much more forgiving of minor misalignments. I don't think you will be happy. I tried it with my Toyo D45M, which is an excellent old view camera, very sturdy and precise. It wasn't capable of keeping everything as perfectly aligned as is needed for a 33x44mm sensor.
Update: Sometimes it's not that hard to jury-rig a way to try it for yourself. There's nothing like the empirical answer...
Last edited:
Chris Beards
New member
Rdeloe, thanks for you thoughts. As I mainly use longer lenses I might give the Fuji a go as I could also use it off a tripod. Regarding the Sinar, I think it could have the precision needed for the digital with longer lenses as the cameras were so well made (I have an F1) No good for short focal lengths as the bellows would be too thick, however one might get away with bag bellows. Someone on here must have tried this for real.
rdeloe
Well-known member
Being able to use the Fuji off a tripod was part of my rationale too. I mostly work from a tripod, where a Toyo VX23D serves as my "adapter" for the Fuji and lenses. However, having the ability to use the Fuji off tripod with a Fuji GF lens is handy from time-to-time.
As for a Sinar F2 working with a digital back, I'm of the opinion that one should find out by trying. My philosophy is, "If it works, it works". Apart from the expense of buying or renting a GFX 50R, the next largest expense may well be the cost of fabricating a board to mount the camera. If one has access to a skilled machinist, that doesn't have to be very expensive.
To use a GFX 50R on my Toyo VX23D, I had a machinist cut a Fotodiox Pentax 645 to GFX adapter; this left me with the mount ring and 6.5mm of the tube. He then milled a 1.5mm rim into the edge of the tube on the side that mounts to the board. The milled rim of the mount part fit snugly into a hole in an aluminum plate. Four screws held it tight to the board. With this design, the milled rim carries the weight of the camera; the screws simply hold it all together.
I eventually replaced the aluminum plate with a 3D-printed plastic board. It took a couple tries to get a design that is sturdy enough, but 3D printing is a viable option too if one has access to the proper printer and filaments.
I own an X1D II and 5 XCD lenses, but have shot extensively on a friend's GFX 50R. The lack of C1 compatibility on the Hasselblad is a massive downside, and really, the only reasons to choose the Hasselblad over the Fuji are the leaf shutter lenses and the form factor/design. I was dead-set on the leaf shutter lenses, and still prefer the Hasselblad ergonomics, but everything else about the X1D II has been a bit disappointing, when comparing to the Fuji- the X1D II is still much less stable (locks up every few hundred frames on the latest firmware), AF on the 50R is still better (not vastly better, but noticeably so), and the total cost of ownership on the Fuji is so much lower. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the 50R for anyone who doesn't do much tethering (the tether cable is in a really awkward position).