f2bthere

Thank you for the thoughtful feedback based on real-world use! Much appreciated.

A couple good reviews with images. Note the first one has a link to his social media with more images. https://www.bryanminear.com/dreamer-laowa-17mm/ https://jonasraskphotography.com/2019/07/31/laowa-17mm-f-4-gfx-review/

Of possible interest:

So excited this lens is finally coming out! Looks to be available for preorder from B&H and it looks like it can be ordered from Laowa direct. Not sure if anyone has one yet. If so, I would love to see your results!

Also, why no GFX 100 forum section?

Where is the GFX 100? Not that I have it (yet?), but still.... Started with the Xpro1 with the 35/1.4. Loved the lens so much it took me a while to get a second lens, but I eventually did. And then I got a few more and the Xpro2, as one does I rented a GFX 50s with the 32-64 for a weekend and lined up a bunch of studio sessions, which was fabulous. Got the GFX 50r when it came out. Sold off almost all my X gear, keeping only the Xpro2 and a few lenses, to fund the 110mm/2. I was surprised to find that I just keep using the GFX instead of the Xpro2, despite the size and weight. I often think, I could just bring a smaller and lighter camera. But the files are so great that I keep deciding it is worth lugging the heavier bag

I have seen lots of great work from the 250mm with and without the 1.4x teleconverter. The facebook page has many positive posts about this lens.

Laowa 17mm f4 Zero-D with native GFX mount is available for preorder, expected availability is mid-August. This is the rectilinear lens mentioned above with a 113-degree field of view.

True, but the Graflex 4x5 weighs less than the GFX 50s and lens. I have one. The lens is quite simple and incredibly light weight, even including the lens board it is mounted on. I have the 50r and do not consider it an unreasonable street camera, although I understand that some would prefer a smaller camera. This instagram account has almost exclusively pictures of people I didn't know (at least before I asked to take their picture) using the GFX 50r. So far they are with the 63mm and 32-64mm (There are a couple images taken with an adapted lens, but they say as much in the description). https://www.instagram.com/p/BvK1ZWKg7Mb/

It is interesting that the 8mm is for APSC but gives a full circle on FF and GFX. The Samyang/rokinon/etc 12mm fishheye is designed for FF and would be very interesting to try on the GFX! They are both stereoscopic projection, and surprisingly high quality for the price. The projection is much more useful (a bit less fishy) for general use.

Just copy text and paste in google translate...

Cambo Actus GFX is much handier than a typical view camera and might be a viable option.

Nice work!

If the program is able to use the camera engine to process the files into 16-bit TIFF files, I will be ecstatic! Fuji does seem to know best how to process their own files for optimum results. The only issue so far is that if you want to do significant post processing, you will want access to 16bit data. If Fuji supports this, it will be a huge step forward. Imagine getting the benefits of Fuji's understanding of images (very deep from decades producing lenses, cameras and film even before there was digital), combined with the well-developed film simulations while still maintaining the full bit-depth captured by the camera.

This is the lens. It has distortion. You need to apply correction. Adobe is correcting the lens flaw automagically. C1 has a lens correction feature and if it isn't built in, you can put it in yourself. In any case, it seems the statements above that C1 doesn't work with the Xpro2 are just mistaken.

I'm confused. What capture one version do you have? I am looking at a file I shot with the XPro2 on screen in C1 Pro 9.1.2.15 and it is rendered. I then set a process recipe to load it as a 16bit TIFF in Photoshop CC, which it was able to do. What am I missing?

At first it was the 35/1.4 100% (unless you count legacy lenses). I got it with the Xpro1 and, even though I intended from the start to get another lens, I think it took a year or so before I did. If I could have only one lens, it would be the 35 f1.4. Since I got the 16mm f1.4 and the 56mm APD f1.2, I tended to use the 16 the most, followed by the 56 with the XP1. The 35 saw far less use unless I wanted to travel light with only one lens. Now that the XP2 has arrived, I find my preference is the 35 with Acros when I'm just going out for fun . But this is recent enough that I would still say 16 followed by 56, which is my ideal combo for more serious efforts.

I have not stopped shooting Acros sice I got it . Shooting RAW + JPEG. A few thoughts for those who prefer RAW: Try Capture One. It does a much better job with Fuji files than Adobe. The difference is noticeable even on screen without zooming in. Download the free trial and see for yourself. TKactions plugin for Photoshop is very handy for the efficient use of luminosity masks to adjust images. You can do all the adjustments by hand (and information on the website explains how), but it's tedious. With the panel, which is useful in many ways, you can very efficiently try things out. I only wish it supported LAB. There is an add-on, which I haven't used yet (waiting on the upgrade offer), which looks very promising. The videos offered for sale which explain Luminosity masks were helpful.

The size and weight of the lens make a big difference in how handy it is to use. Some lenses are easier to focus than others. The Nikon 105mm f2.5 is great, easy to focus and balances well. In fact, it focuses pretty accurately on the EVF without magnification. I love my 85mm f1.4 lens, but it does not balance well on the camera, so it is a pain to use if not on a tripod. Which camera you are using might make a difference. Battery grip or other grip (depending on which camera you have) can also make a difference.