p.85 #1 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Two casual portraits, taken with my new GF55mm F1.7 lens that arrived on the last day of 2025.
These were taken in a low, ugly artificial light - not unusual for candid and street photography.
I spent at least 2 hours working on the corrections.
Super lens "rendering" here! Love fast lenses!
Images are nice and crisp!
Dan
p.85 #4 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Danpbphoto wrote:
Super lens "rendering" here! Love fast lenses!
Images are nice and crisp!
Dan
Thank you, Dan!
I like this focal length, and it feels "organic" or natural with the four-thirds format. There is something right about this frame of view (it took me close to 2 years to get used to the 4x3 format after using the FF bodies). With the wide FLs, I still like the more narrow 3x2 and the narrower like 16x10 and 16x9.
This 55mm lens is promising to be a jack and a master of several trades.
The optical quality is beyond reproach. The only thing, I wish the auto-focus mechanism had been the same as in the GF20-35mm lens. The AF of the GF55 sounds like a horse-driven cart that hasn't been oiled. I am not going to complain, though - as long as the lens delivers.
p.85 #5 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
100sii, 500 | Wintering ducks on Cheney Lake, Anchorage, Alaska | One of my last wildlife outings of 2025 walking with family on a fairly cold, -1F day. Happy New Year 2026 all!
p.85 #7 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Two casual portraits, taken with my new GF55mm F1.7 lens that arrived on the last day of 2025.
These were taken in a low, ugly artificial light - not unusual for candid and street photography.
I spent at least 2 hours working on the corrections.
I have a lens cabinet crammed full of of premium Sony GM and Fuji GF glass. The GF 55mm f1.7 has become my favorite lens and has replaced my GM 50mm f1.2 as my “desert island” lens. The qualities of your first shot demonstrates this well. Of course, I also love the GF110mm.
p.85 #13 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
ruthenium wrote:
Two casual portraits, taken with my new GF55mm F1.7 lens that arrived on the last day of 2025.
These were taken in a low, ugly artificial light - not unusual for candid and street photography.
I spent at least 2 hours working on the corrections.
Well, the 2 hrs part isn't so great, but the images, especially the first, is very nice...
p.85 #14 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Two porches I callz it.
Both made prior to the hard and dark “Frederick Reds” that became famous in the 1800's, and are seen "au natural" in the frame's right,...The left house has very intricate brickwork and patterns that the house on the right is obscured by everything being white. The paint scheme brings that out nicely. The "off olive color" helped also.
Thanks!
Dan
p.85 #15 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
Danpbphoto wrote:
Two porches I callz it.
Both made prior to the hard and dark “Frederick Reds” that became famous in the 1800's, and are seen "au natural" in the frame's right,...The left house has very intricate brickwork and patterns that the house on the right is obscured by everything being white. The paint scheme brings that out nicely. The "off olive color" helped also.
Thanks!
Dan
GFX100s ii GF20-35mmf4 R WR
Nice. The B&W shows the brick work. I chuckled looking at the pictures noting that the doors for both house up through the 3rd level are next to each other a mirror like setup. Olive house doors on the right and white doors on the left.
p.85 #16 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
burningheart wrote:
Nice. The B&W shows the brick work. I chuckled looking at the pictures noting that the doors for both house up through the 3rd level are next to each other a mirror like setup. Olive house doors on the right and white doors on the left.
Thanks!
When I was shooting this, the pattern in the brick was more pronounced visually than the post shows here. I tried to smooth that out more but the texture got to distorted to keep.
Thanks "bh"! Oh...also notice the arches get less as the floors go up. Very interesting.......the house on the left is connected, not really, to the upstairs by a nice ornate brick scalloped wall. and shuttered windows..
Dan
p.85 #19 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
I've been following the discussion about the DR modes on Fuji cameras, on the previous pages. I used to believe that the DR setting did not affect raw files, but I started suspecting that I was wrong, and decided to try it out, when the sun showed up for a few minutes.
Here is one image at DR 100 and one at DR 400. Both are shot raw, with the same ISO and f-stop. My camera was set to A and chose a slightly shorter shutter time for the DR 400 image. The images are developed in Lightroom, and when I pull the Highlights slider all the way back to -100 the DR 400 image retains much more highlight information.
My camera is an X-H2S - I hope I'm not committing a huge sin by posting in the GF thread. If it's considered bad form, please accept my apologies and delete this post.
p.85 #20 · Fuji GFX Image Thread - all cameras and lenses
To me, the question to investigate (if this hasn't been investigated) is not whether DR200 and DR400 modes can capture more highlights than DR100. The intent of DR200 and DR400 is unambiguous - to resort to more conservative metering - basically, to underexpose. Furthermore, when one happens to shoot with DR100 at ISO 100, the fact that switching to DR200 and DR400 necessitates changing the base ISO from 80 to 160 and 320, respectively - immediately and irrevocably means the loss of 1 and 2 stops of dynamic range in the shadows, respectively. I cannot think of any "magic" under the hood that could make an ISO 160 image have the same dynamic range as an ISO 80 image (when using the same camera).
An argument that was made earlier in this thread is whether an experienced photogrpaher might be better off using the conventional exposure compensation to preserve and capture highlights instead of resorting to DR200 or DR400. There must have been some thinking, some reasoning at Fujifilm behind developing the DR200 and DR400 settings. It is this reasoning that isn't immediately clear. Was the intent simply to provide ways of capturing extra-bright highlights to those less experienced photographers who aren't comfortable using exposure compensation? Or, does something different and sophisticated happen "under the hood" that the trivial exposure compensation cannot do?
The final outstanding question that I am wondering about (and should find time to test) is whether DR200 and DR400 actually operate when the ISO is already above 320 with DR100. I mentioned this before that with DR100 and ISO 500, switching to DR200 or DR400 does nothing to the shutter speed or the ISO or the aperture. In the normal world, this means that the exposure remains unchanged and DR200/400 should have no effect. This must be tested, if this hasn't been tested.
