Jump to content

Small lenses wanted for GFX cameras besides 50/3.5


algrove
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have told my local dealer I want the 50/3.5 once out, but I feel there still is a large gap between the current 45mm and 23mm prime lenses. Perhaps a small 30mm would be optimal since it equates to a 24mm lens on FF cameras.  I have tended to use 24mm lenses on many different systems with success including the XT-2 where the 16/1.4 was a much appreciated lens and is a 24mm FF equivalent lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Hi there,

I own Fuji GFX50S and 63mm f2.8 lense. I found this combination is very good for my photography. However not for portrait, since GF 110mm f2 would be the choice. Since this lense is relatively expensive, I have tried to adopt Canon and Nikon FF lenses by Adapter. Some of wide aperture FF lenses (f1.4 - f1.8) I found work just fine in Fuji GFX and resulted in good quality and bokeh pictures and very minimal vingetting. My question is, other than Autofocus capability of the native Fuji GF lenses, what is the main difference would it make if, let say, we use native Fuji GF 110mm f2 lense compared to adapted 85mm f1.4 FF lense. Does anybody have experience or could provide answers to this. Sharing your experience and answers are highly appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I own the 50R with the 32-64 (Amazing) and the 45 2.8 (even more amazing).  I just started using my older Minolta lenses such as my 58 1.4, and especially my 135 2.8 (which on the 50r makes it a 105mm lens) and so far I must say it's pretty decent.  Are the images GFX quality?  Heck no, but it's not too shabby.  

I have/had been using my Minolta glass on my X-E1, and all my subsequent cameras.  I honestly didn't think it would work on the 50r well at all, but it's not bad.

Once I've done further testing I'll report back.

J

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

Small and very light is coming in November in Switzerland GF 35-70. Albeit with no aperture ring, so I have to see if that feels good in my hand and performs as well as the 30mm. If so I shall be buying the zoom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Posts

    • Thank you for your suggestion, but 70 is too tele for me, I did some shots regularly at 50, 55, 60 on my 16-80.
    • When considering the 55-200 also have a look at the 70-300. There's not much difference between f4.8 and f5.6 at the long end and the 70-300 is certainly a faster focusing lens. I'd buy the 55-200 only when it is a great second-hand deal. There's only €100 difference between the two lenses when purchased new. In that case I'd go for the 70-300, but that's just me... 😉 Best Fujifilm Telephoto Zoom Lens 2021 | Photography Blog
    • Thank you! This is great news. Fujinon XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 R LM OIS has got nice price, and its aperture in the range of 55-80mm is a little faster than on Fujinon XF 16-80mm f4 R OIS WR that I own, but at 200mm it's f4.8 which I can't tell is usable. I bought 16-80 for indoor sports but also for general purposes like landscape and architecture to complement my 35mm f1.4. For indoor sports, I used it in the range of 50-80mm so far, and I needed some more zoom, but I also know that at some other gyms that I've been before even the 35mm was fine when I could place myself near the court. Not sure if 55-200 is ideal solution for sports either, but it's much cheaper and lighter than 50-140. Heck I think even f2.8 is too small aperture for indoor sports. If I don't go for 50-140, I would most likely go for 55-200.
    • The push function on the rear-dials of the 'earlier' X cameras is quite prone to defects. I believe it was solved in the X-H1 and the X-T3 thereafter, but X-E3's have the earlier internal design. The push function could 'stick' in one function or between functions causing the rotate function not to work properly. If that happens, internal cleaning or replacing is the only option. Something that (most of) you can't do yourself.
×
×
  • Create New...