Fuji GFX vs SL

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

cool point..but so many people use leica R lenses on RED cameras instead of RED/cooke lenses...just to get that "look"

e.g.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?143651-Leica-M-Survival-Guide-(Dragon-and-Weapon)&highlight=leica

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?164022-Red-Epic-W-8K-Leica-R-lenses-Kyndal-quot-Famous-quot-Music-Video

Edited January 5, 2019 by frame-it

[BernardC]

3 hours ago, frame-it said:

cool point..but so many people use leica R lenses on RED cameras instead of RED/cooke lenses...just to get that "look"

Not just on RED, on all cinema cameras.

It's actually quite funny that most people on photo forums want to know how to get their images "sharper," while people on professional cinematography forums want to get their images softer and more "cinematic."

 

Back to the earlier discussion. I see two points of view that aren't contradictory about using Leica lenses on medium format sensors:

• "The center quite good but to the borders they lost their sharpness and of course they had strong vignetting"
• "you can simply crop the image approximately 2 mm each side and still have a larger image than FF"

These are saying the exact same thing: Leica lenses cover a slightly bigger image circle than the 43mm of a 24x36mm image. However, they aren't sharp outside of that circle, and they may not be sharp even within that circle when using a third-party camera (as many Sony users found out years ago).

At this point you are just discussing what style of images you prefer. One wants to be able to reproduce fine detail out to the edge of the image, and the other prefers a "center-spot" look: sharp in the middle, and progressively fading-out to a blur.

 

There's room for both looks, no need to argue which one is best.

The only additional point I want to make is that, if the center-sharp look is your thing, there's no point using Leica lenses to achieve that. Almost any 35mm-format lens sold in the last 90 years will get that look on the GFX. It seems like the only reason why this thread is in a Leica-specific forum is because of the "expensive toys" aspect. The topic would be more informative in a general photography forum, or in a Fuji forum, where people can also discuss Zuikos and Rokkors and Nikkors.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Brian C in Az]

6 hours ago, thighslapper said:

I really can't understand the compulsion (and this applies all thread categories) to try and use lenses on a body for which they were never intended ..... and then being surprised by the deficiencies and issues that result. Ok, sometimes they work well and may be a financial necessity, but buying a very expensive camera body and then not getting the appropriately designed lenses to use on it strikes me as daft. 

Even using R and M lenses on the SL .... for which compatibility was designed, give a sub-optimal experience and some compromises. Presumably L Mount Sigma and Panasonic lenses will be designed to function optimally on the SL as well as the other available L mount bodies. 

Nothing against MF, Fuji or Hasselblad, but trying to shoehorn Leica (or other) lenses onto them strikes me as a bit counterproductive in the pursuit of higher quality images ...... which is the whole point of changing format, isn't it ? 

Part of the compulsion is that I and others have some very very good Leica R lenses that were virtually new when film was essentially abandoned by the photography industry. The nearest film store is over 50 miles away. The selection is extremely limited. Processing isn't nearly as cheap as digital.Etc. Etc.

Leica basically screwed every R owner and left us out of the digital loop. Other brand bodies were tried, initially with limited success. Many R owners such as myself waited a long time for Leica to finally offer us a factory solution to use our lenses on a native digital body. The SL is that body. Even the name, SL, implies that it is the SLR replacement. I do not think Leica chose that name by accident.

I don't see how using an R lens on the SL is sub-optimal in experience. I don't like, never have liked, AF. I tried the SL 24-90, didn't like it, sent it back. I prefer the feel and experience of the 70-180 f2.8 and 105-280 f4. I do not feel in anyway that it is a sub-optimal experience and the image quality is as good, colors are better, less post processing to get colors to give me that Leica look.

As far as using Leica lenses on other brands, that is something people who couldn't afford a Leica body but frequently found a used Leica lens at a cheap price have been doing for a long time. Most photographers admit that the Leica glass was the premier lens for 35mm. They adapted well to the APS-c and M4/3 sensors and produced beautiful images. 

Now you question why are they trying it on the GFX. Mostly because the industry created the habit of swapping lens brands via adapters. Photographers are in the habit of trying their favorite lenses on every new body. Manufacturers did not produce enough lenses nor enough variety of lenses for the photographer to simply go out and buy new native lenses; the lenses didn't exist. Look at the SL, how many lenses were available the first year? Second year? Should SL owners have to wait 4 years for a complete line up of lenses? 4 years in digital product is greater than the typical life/ usefulness of digital product. People are already complaining that the SL is outdated. It still takes great images, but as technology moves forward, many feel the SL needs a refresh/ replacement. The GFXs owners are going through the same pains. Three years after the GFXs was launched, how many native lenses are available? The GFXr has created a shortage of the new lenses, the market demand for the GFXr was greater than Fuji planned; especially after they launched the pre order bundles of body with 3 lenses for under $6000 USD.

The industry forced us to use adapters to use the lens that we want because the they did not make the lenses available in native format. Not to mention, why should I have to sell off tens of thousands of dollars worth of perfectly good (even great) R lenses? I bought them in good faith that Leica would support me by offering me a modern camera with which to use these lenses. Not a half breed digital back with it's problems. Leica left me (and others) out in the cold. 

Now they are essentially complaining(?) about us refusing to stop using adapters to mount our lenses on any body that we wish? One only has to look at the adapter industry to see that the majority of camera users will not buy a new set of lenses every time a new body is introduced. For most, it is basic finances that prevent it. For others, we don't want/ need AF, OIS, IBIS, etc. For some of us, we question "Why should we throw out perfectly good glass that renders beautiful images?"

As far as format, using R lenses on MF sensors, Why not? We gain more than we lose. The sensor rivals the SL sensor in performance; some say it exceeds the SL sensor's performance. We gain more image size. It is a more efficient use of the image circle. A square will use more of the circular image than a rectangle will use. The small amount of cropping required still nets a much larger image than you get from the SL. So again I ask, "Why not?" What are the drawbacks? None. If I want to crop the image to 36x32, I net a much larger image than 36x24 with NO LOSS in quality. If the R lenses perform on an SL than the same lens will provide the exact same image on the GFX cropped to 36x32. Maybe we can tweak that crop to 38X32 or 40x32 depending on a particular lens' image circle. 

[thighslapper]

All good and well argued points. Each to their own. 

I still think it's like buying a Maserati and using it to tow a caravan though ....... 

 

[ynp]

27 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

All good and well argued points. Each to their own. 

I still think it's like buying a Maserati and using it to tow a caravan though ....... 

 

So  the Fuji is a Maserati now 😮🤔🤪

[steveclem]

On 12/11/2018 at 11:41 PM, jrp said:

Well Fuji seems to be keen to buy market share.  Their GFX lenses are £1-2,000 and the bodies are £4-5,000.  Quite a challenge.  That said, the SL is available at a £600 discount at present.  Perhaps stocks are being cleared for the SL2, or perhaps it is not competitive at the price

 

Edited January 5, 2019 by steveclem

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

he said "a £600 discount" not £600 NET

[steveclem]

Yes. Understood. 🍷

[JeffWright]

On 1/4/2019 at 11:03 AM, ropo54 said:

Congratulations on the GFX!  Just curious as to your thoughts on the speed on AF, and ability to take the 'next' shot.  I will look for your posts on GetDPI.

Have you compared it to the S007?

Rob

Not meant for me, but I have done that comparison. Shoot landscape primarily. Dynamic range is fairly comparable between the Typ 007 and Fujifilm (I have the 50S). I'm processing in Lightroom for comparison, Fuji seems to do a better job of recovering or interpolating highlights if they get blown. I have to work a bit more on the raw files from the Fuji than either S (I owned the Typ006 and Typ007) or the SL. Ergonomics are OK on the 50S, but IMHO nothing compares to the S here. I can come pretty close to replicating my experience with the S (and SL, which I configure identically for button functions). Lenses are pretty good, that was actualy my biggest concern coming from the S system. AF is faster, and much more configurable (multipoint) than the Typ 007.  Menu systems are a bit on the bizarre side--not as simple and well organized as Leica, but better than Nikon/Canon (and it goes without saying Sony). Buttons are highly configurable, which is nice. I configured the four arrow buttons to match my 4 fast touch buttons on the S as closely as possible.

AF is good on the GFX, better than the Typ007 by quite a bit in terms of speed, accuracy and configuration options. It's not as fast as the SL, but accuracy is probably comparable. I haven't had much chance to test facial recognition part of it, as it's not one of my main things. There is a short VF blackout with each exposure, longer than the SL, but no longer than you'd see with a DLSR.

IQ wise, I really can't see any substantial difference from the GFX and the Typ 007, especially by the time I get to prints. I think the GFX primes rival the S lenses pretty well. Wide open, I think bokeh characteristics are probably better on the Leica 45 and Leica 100 than the GFX 45 and 120. I don't have the 110 lens yet, but may get it. The 32-64 is surprinsgly good, pretty much maximally sharp stopped down 1 stop.

I also compared the Leica S, Leica SL, Nikon Z7, and the GFX. I found the ergonomics on the Fuji better than the Nikon Z7 and the SL, but the S remains the best. But I have big, ape like hands, so take it with a grain of salt. One of my gripes with the Nikon ws that the buttons seem too small, especially with gloves. GFX somewhat better in that regard, but again, not as nice as the S or SL.

The EVF of the Leica SL holds up surprisingly well. The Nikon has better low light performance, but information display is otherwise much less pleasing and doesn't seem as good otherwise. Similarly, the GFX is better at very low light than the Leica SL (if you haven't tried shooting night scenes with the SL, you haven't suffered), but isn't any better at full lighting conditions. I do like the fact that the EVF is highly configurable on the GFX. Using live view clipping indicators or focus peaking on the GFX noticeably increases the noise in the EVF, which doesn't seem to be as pronounced on the SL (or the Nikon Z7).

I haven't tallied the system weight but the GFX system probably weighs half my S system when putting together comparable lenses. I've got a bad back, and that's starting to matter more as I get older.

I'm mostly looking forward to the 100 MPx GFX camera. Hopefully the lenses will be able to keep up. I personally can't justify the price difference between the S3 and the GFX bodies, and may well sell off my S system entirely. I've already parted with a couple of lenses and the Typ006--easily paying for the entire GFX system.

Edited January 5, 2019 by JeffWright

[Succisa75]

Perhaps with the L Alliance we will get lens adapters to put L amount lenses on other cameras for example the GFX series. 

I would love to try a 90 APO f2 on medium format.  The new SL lenses are so good IMHO, they would really shine on a larger sensor  

 

[ropo54]

2 hours ago, JeffWright said:

Not meant for me, but I have done that comparison.

Thanks for that comprehensive assessment. Just what I was looking for. 

Regards, Rob

Edited January 6, 2019 by ropo54

[BernardC]

12 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

Perhaps with the L Alliance we will get lens adapters to put L amount lenses on other cameras for example the GFX series. 

I would love to try a 90 APO f2 on medium format.  The new SL lenses are so good IMHO, they would really shine on a larger sensor  

 

I have noticed that absolutely no one is asking for an adapter to put the GFX lenses on L-Mount bodies, even though such an adapter would be physically possible.

[Guest JMF]

1 hour ago, BernardC said:

I have noticed that absolutely no one is asking for an adapter to put the GFX lenses on L-Mount bodies, even though such an adapter would be physically possible.

Hi ,

I have asked  about such an adapter directly to the Kipon manager Xiaoming Zhang about 2 years ago and he told me his engineers cannot make one because of the locking system of the receiving mount. I did not get any detailed explanation at the time.

I would be delighted if someone managed to make a GFX lens to L mount body adapter. 

Edited January 6, 2019 by JMF

[Brian C in Az]

On 1/5/2019 at 11:42 AM, thighslapper said:

All good and well argued points. Each to their own. 

I still think it's like buying a Maserati and using it to tow a caravan though ....... 

 

So you agree? 

Quote

The 2019 Maserati Levante places near the top of the luxury midsize SUV class. It combines authoritative engines with agile handling and a smooth ride. There's a lot to love inside

[verwackelt]

Am 6.1.2019 um 02:33 schrieb Succisa75:

…………I would love to try a 90 APO f2 on medium format.  The new SL lenses are so good IMHO, they would really shine on a larger sensor  

 

But only if their imagecircle will cover the larger sensor...
Unfortunately Leica does not provide the size of the imagecircle in their tech. specs.

[jaapv]

On 1/5/2019 at 7:42 PM, thighslapper said:

All good and well argued points. Each to their own. 

I still think it's like buying a Maserati and using it to tow a caravan though ....... 

 

really?

 

[frame-it]

On 1/6/2019 at 8:33 AM, Succisa75 said:

 

I would love to try a 90 APO f2 on medium format.  The new SL lenses are so good IMHO, they would really shine on a larger sensor  

 

will try that with my 90APO M once i get the adapter for leica M to GFX

Edited January 8, 2019 by frame-it

[caissa]

On 1/6/2019 at 2:33 AM, Succisa75 said:

Perhaps with the L Alliance we will get lens adapters to put L amount lenses on other cameras for example the GFX series. 

I would love to try a 90 APO f2 on medium format.  The new SL lenses are so good IMHO, they would really shine on a larger sensor  

 

Flange focal distance on the Fuji G is too long to adapt SL lenses. Fuji G mount 26.7 mm, while for the L-mount it is 20 mm.

For the Hasselblad it is only 18.14 mm, so theoretically possible, but the camera has no shutter ...     😈

Edited January 10, 2019 by caissa

[caissa]

To complete this speculation about adapting digital mf lenses.

Hasselblad lenses (XD) can therefore also not be adapted to GFX or SL.

GFX lenses could be adapted to the SL, but I see no reason why I would like to do that. The lens choice is (in my eyes) not attractive for the SL, maybe apart from the macro, as long as there is no L-mount macro. (But there are plenty of other more desirable macros).

Edited January 11, 2019 by caissa

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Guest JMF]

Some of us have third party "analog" MF lenses adapted to the GFX mount and using them on the SL mount bodies would be welcome.

 

Edited January 11, 2019 by JMF