p.79 #1 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
I received a demo GFX100S II from Fuji Canada, to "test-drive" with the 20-35mm F4 lens. One of the particular things that I am interested in is the IBIS for hand-held shooting.
Here are two long-exposure test shots. Both were taken with the camera in hands, although I was sitting in both cases. My immediate sense is that if I take three 1s-long exposures in the 20 to 35 mm range, then there is a good chance that one out of the three shots can be acceptably sharp.
I get that you are evaluating the IBIS. But given the excellent higher ISO performance of the Gfx, you could have bumped ISO and maintained faster shutter with better hit rate. And both of these attributes make f4 lenses more useful indoors or poor light than you would expect. I'm sure these points seem obvious but I have found the higher ISO approach in my use has produced better images. The really slow shutter relying on IBIS gets you an acceptable shot, but can look like less than perfect focus. I have wondered if some folks really unhappy with Gfx AF are relying too much on IBIS.
p.79 #2 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
SGinNorcal wrote:
I get that you are evaluating the IBIS. But given the excellent higher ISO performance of the Gfx, you could have bumped ISO and maintained faster shutter with better hit rate. And both of these attributes make f4 lenses more useful indoors or poor light than you would expect. I'm sure these points seem obvious but I have found the higher ISO approach in my use has produced better images. The really slow shutter relying on IBIS gets you an acceptable shot, but can look like less than perfect focus. I have wondered if some folks really unhappy with Gfx AF are relying too much on IBIS....Show more →
At the higher ISO, the dynamic range advantage of the GFX vs. FF is lost - then I can use my Sony A1 (or even my micro-four-thirds OM-1 II, at GFX ISO from 1600 and higher). The principal reason to pick the GFX100S II over A1 is to do most shooting at ISO 80 when the GFX collects one more stop of light vs a FF camera at base ISO 100. At the ISO even marginally above 100, the dynamic range advantage of the GFX over FF is lost.
To the above, I must add that there is yet another strong reason in favor of the GFX: the 20-35mm F4 lens is very impressive. The two FF lenses, Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM (1st version) and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 are nowhere close to the image quality I see with the GF lens.
I have not experienced any problems with the S-AF on the GFX100S II so far. No complaints in this regard.
p.79 #3 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
At the higher ISO, the dynamic range advantage of the GFX vs. FF is lost - then I can use my Sony A1 (or even my micro-four-thirds OM-1 II, at GFX ISO from 1600 and higher). The principal reason to pick the GFX100S II over A1 is to do most shooting at ISO 80 when the GFX collects one more stop of light vs a FF camera at base ISO 100. At the ISO even marginally above 100, the dynamic range advantage of the GFX over FF is lost.
To the above, I must add that there is yet another strong reason in favor of the GFX: the 20-35mm F4 lens is very impressive. The two FF lenses, Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM (1st version) and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 are nowhere close to the image quality I see with the GF lens.
I have not experienced any problems with the S-AF on the GFX100S II so far. No complaints in this regard. ...Show more →
My post was more about practical considerations when shooting with a Gfx with 20-35, indoors. I would rather be at 1600 ISO and 1/20 shutter speed than relying on IBIS at base ISO and 1 second SS. But if you would rather have fuzzy focus and all your dynamic range, go for it. The Gfx and 20-35 is a great combo that gets even more useful when you lose your fear of turning up the ISO.
p.79 #4 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
SGinNorcal wrote:
My post was more about practical considerations when shooting with a Gfx with 20-35, indoors. I would rather be at 1600 ISO and 1/20 shutter speed than relying on IBIS at base ISO and 1 second SS. But if you would rather have fuzzy focus and all your dynamic range, go for it. The Gfx and 20-35 is a great combo that gets even more useful when you lose your fear of turning up the ISO.
About practical considerations: the SS depends on the subject. For static subjects, when shooting the GFX100S II in the 20-35mm range, I have the impression that I should be able to get acceptably sharp photos with SS 1/4s without much difficulty, while with some difficulty I can probably use SS 1s (by taking several shots). Another part of the decision-making is the nature of the subject. High dynamic range can help when processing high-contrast scenes (e.g., inside of a cathedral with a dark interior and bright light coming through windows, for one trivial example); whereas a low-contrast scene doesn't require high dynamic range.
In general, one big reason to invest in a camera like the GFX100S II is to be able to collect an extra stop of light at ISO 80 vs a FF camera at base ISO 100. Otherwise, at the higher ISO, a 60MP Sony A7RV is practically as capable as the GFX100S II (and may have a better AF), unless one is dying to have 100MP and wouldn't be happy with 60.
p.79 #5 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
I received a demo GFX100S II from Fuji Canada, to "test-drive" with the 20-35mm F4 lens. One of the particular things that I am interested in is the IBIS for hand-held shooting.
Here are two long-exposure test shots. Both were taken with the camera in hands, although I was sitting in both cases. My immediate sense is that if I take three 1s-long exposures in the 20 to 35 mm range, then there is a good chance that one out of the three shots can be acceptably sharp.
I agree 100%! I am 78. I have hand tremors. Can get very whobbly" at times but an IBIS body AND lens?So far it is not showing in the files. I just got my 20-35mmGF and have yet to use it...
These are excellent Dmitri!
Dan
p.79 #6 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Danpbphoto wrote:
I agree 100%! I am 78. I have hand tremors. Can get very whobbly" at times but an IBIS body AND lens?So far it is not showing in the files. I just got my 20-35mmGF and have yet to use it...
These are excellent Dmitri!
Dan
Thank you Dan!
The GF 20-35mm lens surprised me. One of the test shots I took was in front of my home, with a view of the long driveway, the street, and the houses across the street. I set the aperture to F8 (equivalent to about 6.3 on FF). Maybe I was lucky to set the focus point in the right place, but the entire scene from the near to the far end (and from the left to the right edge) was in focus and well-resolved in detail. In the past, I did the same "test" with my Sony A1 and the two FF lenses: 16-35mm F2.8 GM ver. I and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8. The Sony lens reproducibly gave me reasonably good near and mid-frame sharpness, but a distinctly slightly softer far area. The Tamron was the opposite: the front was relatively soft, but it was sharper than the Sony zoom at the longer distances. But I have never seen such a uniform good image quality as I see with the GF 20-35mm lens. This lens alone might be, arguably, a good reason to invest in the GFX100S II, from my perspective.
p.79 #7 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Thank you Dan!
The GF 20-35mm lens surprised me. One of the test shots I took was in front of my home, with a view of the long driveway, the street, and the houses across the street. I set the aperture to F8 (equivalent to about 6.3 on FF). Maybe I was lucky to set the focus point in the right place, but the entire scene from the near to the far end (and from the left to the right edge) was in focus and well-resolved in detail. In the past, I did the same "test" with my Sony A1 and the two FF lenses: 16-35mm F2.8 GM ver. I and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8. The Sony lens reproducibly gave me reasonably good near and mid-frame sharpness, but a distinctly slightly softer far area. The Tamron was the opposite: the front was relatively soft, but it was sharper than the Sony zoom at the longer distances. But I have never seen such a uniform good image quality as I see with the GF 20-35mm lens. This lens alone might be, arguably, a good reason to invest in the GFX100S II, from my perspective....Show more →
I've found the GF 20-35 has good depth of field in the foreground, similar to my Loxia 25 on Sony. I haven't tested if it's mild field curvature, but either way, it's behavior that I value in this focal range.
p.79 #8 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
The 20-35 seems to make no compromises for being a zoom. The only challenge it has thrown me is some keystone distortion on buildings. It corrects pretty easy as long as you provide some space for cropping since fixing the keystone requires a crop to true of the edges.
p.79 #9 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Thank you Dan!
The GF 20-35mm lens surprised me. One of the test shots I took was in front of my home, with a view of the long driveway, the street, and the houses across the street. I set the aperture to F8 (equivalent to about 6.3 on FF). Maybe I was lucky to set the focus point in the right place, but the entire scene from the near to the far end (and from the left to the right edge) was in focus and well-resolved in detail. In the past, I did the same "test" with my Sony A1 and the two FF lenses: 16-35mm F2.8 GM ver. I and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8. The Sony lens reproducibly gave me reasonably good near and mid-frame sharpness, but a distinctly slightly softer far area. The Tamron was the opposite: the front was relatively soft, but it was sharper than the Sony zoom at the longer distances. But I have never seen such a uniform good image quality as I see with the GF 20-35mm lens. This lens alone might be, arguably, a good reason to invest in the GFX100S II, from my perspective....Show more →
I agree that the GF 20-35mm lens is outstanding. When I tested it against my GM 16-35mm f2.8 II (also outstanding) on the A7R5, at f4, the lenses were pretty much neck-and-neck. The GF lens was ever so slightly sharper at the short end and the Sony was a tiny bit sharper at the long end - all in all, no real difference. As a note, I find the Sony Version II to be noticeably sharper than the Version I that I had.
Of course, I would rather shoot the GF lens on my GFX100S II, with its great IBIS, ISO 80 performance and 102mp goodness. I also really like the MF aspect ratio for a lot of my shooting.
p.79 #10 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Thank you Dan!
The GF 20-35mm lens surprised me. One of the test shots I took was in front of my home, with a view of the long driveway, the street, and the houses across the street. I set the aperture to F8 (equivalent to about 6.3 on FF). Maybe I was lucky to set the focus point in the right place, but the entire scene from the near to the far end (and from the left to the right edge) was in focus and well-resolved in detail. In the past, I did the same "test" with my Sony A1 and the two FF lenses: 16-35mm F2.8 GM ver. I and Tamron 20-40mm F2.8. The Sony lens reproducibly gave me reasonably good near and mid-frame sharpness, but a distinctly slightly softer far area. The Tamron was the opposite: the front was relatively soft, but it was sharper than the Sony zoom at the longer distances. But I have never seen such a uniform good image quality as I see with the GF 20-35mm lens. This lens alone might be, arguably, a good reason to invest in the GFX100S II, from my perspective....Show more →
Well if all goes well tomorrow Dmitri, I will give "her" a go!
The Holiday Ship Show is in town! I will get out while picking up our Thanksgiving dinner with it!
Thanks!
Dan
GF45-100
p.79 #11 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
InFocus2014 wrote:
I agree that the GF 20-35mm lens is outstanding. When I tested it against my GM 16-35mm f2.8 II (also outstanding) on the A7R5, at f4, the lenses were pretty much neck-and-neck. The GF lens was ever so slightly sharper at the short end and the Sony was a tiny bit sharper at the long end - all in all, no real difference. As a note, I find the Sony Version II to be noticeably sharper than the Version I that I had.
Of course, I would rather shoot the GF lens on my GFX100S II, with its great IBIS, ISO 80 performance and 102mp goodness. I also really like the MF aspect ratio for a lot of my shooting. ...Show more →
Thank Jeff! Like I told Dmitiri..tomorrow, Thanksgiving Day, I will test it out.
I unwrapped it, dusted the lens off, and mounted her on the body less the UV filter..Nice and light compared to my other GF long lenses. Feels good in my hands.
The "Black Friday" sale at B&H was too good to pass up!
Dan
p.79 #13 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
100sii, Mitakon 65 f/1.4 | First walk, downtown Anchorage, Alaska | First impressions: not as heavy as I imagined, balances well for me on the 100sii, need to practice more on critical focus but used higher fps, no hood (I thought hood reversed and flipped?), so far very fun (in pretty flat, winter light)!
p.79 #14 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Danpbphoto wrote:
I am happy to see snow in Alaska "Double K"! The weather people down here lead you to believe Alaska gets very little snow.
Great images!
Dan
Thanks, Dan, snow was a bit late this year, but we had a few storms and cold fronts and we are back to a winter wonderland! Cheers
p.79 #16 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
I got up early and went into the town near me. They have a creek, Carroll Creek, that runs directly through the downtown and in the winter they have model ships tendered in the creek.
1st test of my new 20-35mmGF f/4 on the 100Sii
Happy Thanksgiving All!
Dan
Owner in the water....35-50mph gusts tossed these small boats all over the creek. "He" took on some water.
p.79 #17 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
kalani_kane wrote:
100sii, Mitakon 65 f/1.4 | First walk, downtown Anchorage, Alaska | First impressions: not as heavy as I imagined, balances well for me on the 100sii, need to practice more on critical focus but used higher fps, no hood (I thought hood reversed and flipped?), so far very fun (in pretty flat, winter light)!
[/url]
I get to impatient at times "Double K". That leads to crap images for me.
This is how I view Alaska...and Iowa in the late 1940's into mid 1950's.
Dan
p.79 #18 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
X posted on Medium format forum but this one belongs to Fuji and I want to share some joy with Fuji users.
I see a lot post regarding Hasselblad recently and thought about add it but I feel GFX is really fit my personal need better. Around home, I mainly adapt 58G and 80lux or Leica S 70mm, sometimes, contax 645 80mm f2. GFX is really a perfect camera for me once I give myself enough time to set it full fit my need. Its viewfinder is the best I ever used from any system minus maybe Leica S OVF.
I took advantage of US company holiday this week went to Yosemite for a two day solo trip. I brought GFX100II and 3 S glasses (70/100/180) along with GFX100RF and a Fuji Zoom lenses. This is the first time I really used S glasses on GFX with Kipon for photography oriented trip.
Have to say this is the first time I feel I used S glass without any practical limitation of S system. I constantly find myself shooting at 1/30S below to take advantage of ISO80 clean file of Fuji, IBIS allow me manual focus at 180mm without issue. CPL is fine that won't dim my viewfinder, I can shoot f8 f11 with CPL without fight with minimal shutter speed or ISO. I of course miss OVF but it is really a trade off for me. I think I am more incline to pick GFX now for serious 'hobbby' work. 100 II became my favorite Camera body ever used. I sold it first time as I was frustrated with its menu but this time, I give myself long enough time to full understand it. I have to say I love it.
Here is one image with 180S stitched, it is about 180M file The file is incredible. Web display can't do justice for this. I feel this is 2nd time 180S is usable without Tripod, the first one was with SL2. I almost never bring this lens with S system with me for any trip as I know I need at least 1/500S to guarantee a stable shot if I can focus reliable with it on S system.
?s=eyJpIjo1NDk0OTcyMzMyNSwiZSI6MTc2NDI4MTk5OCwicyI6ImZlZjllYTRjYjcxYmVhYTU1NzJjYmVjNWEyODA5MmRhMDA0ZTVlZmIiLCJ2IjoxfQ">GFX180S by ZHNL, on Flickr
?So far it is not showing in the files. I just got my 20-35mmGF and have yet to use it...
The file is incredible. Web display can't do justice for this. I feel this is 2nd time 180S is usable without Tripod, the first one was with SL2. I almost never bring this lens with S system with me for any trip as I know I need at least 1/500S to guarantee a stable shot if I can focus reliable with it on S system. 
