Back at the beginning of March, here on FujiRumors we broke the news, that Fringer is developing an electronic smart adapter that will allow you to use Contax 645 lenses on Fujifilm GFX 50s and have autofocus and electronic aperture control.
Fringer says: “What you’ve seen is the first prototype and there are still a lot of problems to be solved. […] Although I’ll be working hard on the firmware, it would not be an easy task to make it relatively mature. Thus I can’t tell you when it will be ready for sale.”
As you can imagine, the comments over there are running hot, and Fringer is so kind to interact with the GFX community. Of course I can’t stay here now and copy and paste every comment, so feel free to join the discussions over there.
And of course I will keep you posted here on FujiRumors, with any news regarding this adapter.
The 6th episode of the GFX technologies series is now online. This time it’s about the new color chrome effect:
The development of Color Chrome Effect is derived from a reversal film: fortia. The film was introduced to the market in 2004 with the catchphrase “Higher contrast and more vivid color than Velvia“
no matter what you do in Velvia mode, it will never turn into fortia
When expressing colors such as red, orange, yellow, or yellow green in high contrast, high brightness tends to exist. If contrast and brightness both reach their peaks, there is no room for tonality. As a result, the image becomes very flat. But by analyzing the light and information received on the sensor surface, one can detect slight gradation. Color Chrome Effect uses this to create tonality while maintaining high contrast. As a result, an image is achieved without losing its depth.
Side effect: processing power is required. Even the X-Processor Pro needs about 1.0 sec. to process the Color Chrome Effect. If you are single shot user, then this is not a problem. But you cannot shoot continuously or set it to AF-C mode.
DPReview Reviewer Dan Bracaglia is right now testing the Fujifilm GFX. His full review will be out soon. But he gave us some tidbits in his talk with TWiT Netcast Network on youtube. He says:
Pretty good EVF resolution, but when you focus, you can get some shimmering and moire.
because of the not so fast lenses, the advantage of having a MF sensor is lost (FF has faster glass)
You can shoot higher ISO with less grain
it’s a specialty camera for high-resolution photography
Worth waiting a generation and wait for more lenses to come out first
Fuji has some of the nicest color science of all camera manufacturers out there
Admiringlight (one of my favorite reviewers on the web) just shared his full X-T20 review… and it’s a very positive one. As I already said, I think the X-T20 hits the sweet spot in the X-lineup, and is currently the camera with the best value for money… and not only in the Fuji world!
Here are Jordan’s Pros and Cons:
Pros
Solidly constructed body
Excellent control layout, with dedicated dials and programmable buttons
Clear, detailed and low-lag EVF
Excellent autofocus in both single shot and continuous mode, with wide AF point coverage and customizable continuous AF modes
Fully featured, with Wi-Fi connectivity, a built-in intervalometer, art filters, panorama stitching, multiple exposures and more
24 Megapixel sensor has excellent dynamic range, great detail and reasonably low noise for an APS-C sensor
8 fps burst rate with AF tracking and a deep buffer
Great manual focus aids
4K Video
Excellent rear touch screen
Can charge through the USB port
Great electronic shutter capabilities, as fast as 1/32,000 second.
Excellent value
Cons
The grip is quite small, and combined with an imperfect rear thumb grip placement makes the camera handle awkwardly with larger lenses
EVF is smaller than some of the competition
Bracketing at +/- 2 stops for 3 shots only
Buttons on the top of the camera are a bit small and mushy.
Jonas Rask pulled the trigger on the super fast (manual focus) Mitakon Speedmaster 35mm F/0.95 Mark II lens and shared his review at jonasraskphotography. Some excerpts:
the f/0.95 on the APS-C will give you a depth of field close to that of an f/1.4 lens on a 35mm full frame camera
It does have a huge advantage over the f/1.4 lenses [on Full Frame]. It will collect light as a 0.95 lens. Mitakon even writes in the packaging notes that it is a T0.95 lens. So it will really suck in the available light. – This means that you can use higher shutter speeds (one stop), or reduce ISO (one stop) to achieve the same exposure as you would with the f/1.4 mounted on a full frame camera when shooting both wide open. So at the same DOF you get less shake or less noise.
First of all I get bitingly sharp center focus from this lens if I nail focus. Its sharpness does falloff into the corners at 0.95. I would not recommend shooting corner action and landscapes with this lens wide open
So, yes. The sharpness is great if you nail focus. It is actually not hard to focus this lens at f/0.95. Mainly because the contrast between the sharp, and very narrow, focus plane and the out of focus areas is so pronounced, making the focus peaking incredibly easy to use.
The bokeh is VERY good.
I really like the look of the Mitakon for close up portraits. Shooting it wide open and using flash lights and an ND filter, renders some AMAZING looking images. – Who says you need medium format or full frame for this kind of DOF and tonality.
Episode 4 is all about the shutter. Some excerpts:
The mirror shock is a huge factor that affects image quality. If the camera was created with a mirror, we estimate as much as 30% deterioration in resolution would be inevitable. Mirror shock leaves that much of an impact, especially for a medium format system.
Although it does not leave as big of an impact as the mirror shock, there is another element that causes shock inside a camera body: a focal plane shutter.
Our shutter design is actually all about shock absorption.
shutter unit pieces are not mass-produced during the development phase, so some parts are handmade one by one. This leads to a cost that is 30 times higher than the final product.
“As much as 30 units were broken before we landed on the final shutter design,” said one designer. “In order to any make claims of 150,000 actuations or weather-resistance to -10°C, we actually needed to put it all to the test and confirm our claims.”
There are two generations X Series shutter units. The GFX shutter blades are four times bigger than that of the X Series. It also needs to move as fast as 1/4000 sec. The spring tension and shock impact is 10 times bigger as a result.
Firstly, rigid and tough metal parts are used [because] plastic is [lightweight but] not tough enough for a medium format. Carbon [is light but] is vulnerable to shock and is easy to break.
There is cushioning material within the shutter unit so that shock will not be transmitted
Episode 5 is all about Tonality and Color. Some excerpts:
The shadow tone is softer for the GFX’s PROVIA and ASTIA than for X Series cameras. A medium format camera is often used in studio with perfect lighting setups. So we had to come up with a way to reflect the subtle changes in the lighting expression.
The development of ACROS was not easy, but looking back now, it was an easier task than PROVIA and ASTIA, as we started designing from scratch. But just as ACROS proved to be popular among photographers, we knew that the new PROVIA and ASTIA would be welcomed. We had to do this.
Although we’ve made adjustments to some film simulations, the original idea behind them does not change. We believe these changes would be beneficial for photographers, rather than leaving them confused.
Images are more robust, so not only photographers benefit from these tweaks, but their editors and printers will also find them beneficial
DPReview published a controversial article about the GFX, where they basically end up saying that the GFX is not worth the money extra compared to FF cameras. In short:
Low Light noise performance: Current Full Frame systems offer faster lenses than the GFX, so you’ll get less low light noise with FF. Moreover the FF sensor technology like Sony’s back-illumited sensor allows to catch up with MF since “sensor is better able to use the light projected onto it“
Base ISO Dynamic Range: The Nikon has the ISO 64 mode. “Each pixel can hold more total charge before clipping, relative to equally-sized pixels on any other sensor in a consumer camera. That means it can tolerate a longer exposure at ISO 64, longer enough (at least 2/3 EV, or 60% more light) to capture as much total light as the 68% larger sensor in the GFX 50S exposed at its base ISO (100). […] noise performance at ISO 64 rivals many current medium format cameras their base ISOs“
Shallow Depth-of-Field: The GFX lenses are not as fast as the fastest FF lenses, so they have less shallow DOF
Resolution: Resolution-wise, they simply can’t imagine anything better than the Canon 5DS R paired with truly stellar lenses. However, they also add that “larger sensors will always tend to out-resolve smaller sensors with equivalent glass. And so this is the area where we most expect to see an advantage to the Fujifilm system, especially over time as we approach 100MP, and beyond. It’s probably easier for a F1.8 prime paired with the GFX 50S to out-resolve a F1.4 prime on a 5DS R when both systems are shot wide open, but whether that will be the case (or if Fujifilm will even make a F1.8 or brighter prime for the system) remains to be seen. I certainly don’t think it would be a cheap combination.”
… You Just Need 3 Top Full Frame Cameras to Perform like 1 Fujifilm GFX :-)
Ok, this paragraph has quite a provocative title, but it’s actually inspired by the words of DPReview itself (more below)
I’ve seen many comparisons called “unfair” (and I like unfair comparisons). But I’ve never seen this: put together the strengths of 3 different high-end Full Frame cameras (Sony A7rII, Canon 5DSr, Nikon D810) and then compare it all with one single camera, the Fujifilm GFX.
The GFX has a terrific resolution? Don’t worry, the Canon 5DSr comes close to it (really?).
The GFX has a terrific base ISO dynamic range? Don’t worry, the Nikon D810 comes close to it (got to check this out soon).
The GFX has a terrific noise performance? Don’t worry, the Sony A7rII comes close to it (hm, my ISO invariance pixel peeping says differently).
The problem is… what if you want it all in one? I’ll quote DRPreview: “if you want both the base ISO dynamic range of the D810, and the low light noise performance of an A7R II, then the GFX might be your ticket.”
And I allow myself to add, that if you want the high-resolution of the GFX, then neither the D810 nor the A7rII are for you. You have to take the Canon 5DSr… but then you lose the dynamic range and noise performance.
So, seen from another perspective, we could say you need all these 3 Full Frame cameras to perform almost like 1 Fujifilm GFX (but I doubt that, since the pixel peeping I did, shows that with a 6 stop push, the GFX spanks them all).
There would be so much more to discuss (and in part debunk) on that article, such as the lack of fast lenses. As our GFX group demonstrates day by day, you can adapt ultra fast lenses on the GFX. And Fujifilm has the 110/2 in the pipeline for this spring. But I have to make a break now after a long day… my guitar is waiting :)
Anyway, I think you guys can make up your own mind on this and read the article “Thinking about buying a Fujifilm GFX 50S? Read this first” here at dpreview.
GFX has Huge Cons and DPReview is Right!
Don’t get me wrong, the GFX has it Cons, just like any other camera. The AF-speed is not really snappy, it has no 4K, it does not have the super fast EVF refresh rate of the latest X-series cameras, it’s expensive and more.
It will shine in some areas, but create frustrations in others (good luck shooting some serious sports photography with it).
But if there is one thing you do not have to worry about the GFX, then it’s its image quality. As proven by DPReview today, it delivers an IQ, that you need 3 different Full Frame cameras with different strenghts to almost match it :).
And yet, DPReview is right. 95% of us don’t need the GFX. We can be more than happy with any modern APS-C or FF camera. But the GFX was made for the niche, for the 5%, for the people, who need (or want) the ultimate image quality and don’t want to spend a fortune for a Phase One.
Well, for those people the waiting is over. The Fujifilm GFX will give you the extra boost in your images you were looking for :)
Round 1: GFX Vs. X-T2 at billfortney: “The GFX has a ton of resolution and can be blown up to outer space and still have enormous detail, and the X-T2 holds it’s own until we start cropping or making very, very large prints on the order of feet by feet. Can you see the difference with your nose against the print, yes you can, but standing back at a reasonable distance I suspect it would be harder, though the GFX would still have the edge!”
Ein Beitrag geteilt von Dario Ayala (@darioayalaphoto) am
Award nomination with Fuji X20: Dario Ayala was just nominated for a Canadian National Newspaper Award, the highest recognition for Canadian journalists and photojournalists, for an image that he made last summer using the Fuji X20 whose line, sadly, has been discontinued. The X system gets a lot of love, but this series was a bit overlooked during its existence. See the image on instagram here and link to the nomination here.
Fujifilm GFX facebook member C. shared the image above on the group. It shows a heavily overexposed image and what seems to be an insane highlight recovery capbility of the Fujifilm GFX 50s. This image was a great opportunity to clarify what happens inside the GFX:
X-guru Rico (also GFX facebook member), looking at the image above, explained here:
“Sensor analysis shows us that the GFX stops writing gain into the RAW file beyond ISO 1600. So this ISO 6400 shot is actually a ISO 1600 shot that is 2 stops underexposed. So 2 stops of the “amazing highlight recovery” are fake. ;) Lightroom simply applied a virtual 2 stop gain on import, which is of course fully reversable. Basically shooting at ISO 6400 is like shooting with DR400% always on.
Nothing really new here, since all Fujifilm cameras with X-Trans I, X-Trans II and also the X-A1/2 and M1 worked exactly the same way. X-Trans III are different, they bake the gain into each RAW (except for ISO 51200, which is actually ISO 25600 with a 1 stop import gain).
To perform a proper test of sensor highlight recover potential, you have to expose a series of shots at base ISO 100, then try to recover and normalize each of them and see where you put your personal limit of acceptable quality.
it was always nice to have additional DR at high ISO with most EXR I and EXR II cameras. This feature is now back with the GFX, but sadly, Adobe LR/ACR fails to apply correct import amplification in most cases. Basically, everything except for ISO 100, 125, 160 and 200 is somewhat off, often by a larger margin than is acceptable. There’s also a white balance issue at higher ISO settings which affects pretty much all external RAW converters (RAWs from the in-camera converter are okay). Of course, I have documented all of this and sent it to Fujifilm, so maybe Adobe will improve GFX support in a few weeks/months with their next Lightroom update.”
Yesterday, GFX member Wei already pointed out over at the group here after the technical sensor measurements tests by Photons to Photos, that “you can’t push the sensitivity up by adopting an ISO higher than 1600. Your sensitivity stops there“
More GFX Links worth to be checked out
20 Days with GFX 50s at huseyintaskin: “Once you enlarge the photo from the computer and look it up, it creates a quality threshold that will never come out of your mind. Whatever you do, your mind is staying in that quality. […] DR is an advantage for me, I can make cinematic tones more comfortable. Each transition is very soft in these colors that you give me in these intermediate tones. It gives a rich transition result.”
Fuji GFX portrait session review at mikekobal: “Impressive sensor performance at low and high ISO settings. Fuji’s color science shines once again, jpegs out of the camera are beautiful, lots of latitude for easy tweaks, better then raw files on certain cameras!”
