|
So, I have adapted my two special lenses for the first time on the Fuji GFX 50s II with help of the more simple Andoer EF-GFX adapter. It seems like the AF is working - albeit sluggish in relative terms - but it works. Plus that it seems the optical lens based IS in the big white Canon EF 200/2 L lens is working. But the AF doesn't seem to work in the closer range for unknown reasons.
(Also: I did not remove that dark inlay at the mount of the lens - because I couldn't get it to snap pout, so i left it as it is for the time being)
Further away - no problem.
Here the EXIF data is correct, too. But in the near field, the EXIF indicates ƒ22 - which is wrong, because i used it at wide open aperture ƒ2.0 - and it didn't want to focus.
So, most likely i will use these lenses as very special portrait lenses in the studio, when when working with the Fujifilm GFX 50s II camera (without the rotating Vertex adapter). Surely, that is slow photography, i am sure.. but so was old medium format photography too.
Or it is just me, who doesn't keep up. Who knows such things ?
Canon EF 200/2 L IS - Fuji GFX 50s II - at ƒ2.0
Canon EF 200/2 L IS - Fuji GFX 50s II - at ƒ2.0 in the center (100% screen size)
Good wide open performance
Given that i tested both lenses wide open - the performance seem to be really good. The Canon 200L is stellar in that regard. The Sigma ART 105mm is very good, too.
Slightly degrading in the outer corners/borders - but then again - remember this is at ƒ1.4 aperture. and this was a very primitive test nor tested on the exact focus (manually).
Now i assume that when stopping these lenses down a bit - their performance is top notch, and corners may clear up with the Sigma. But I'll tested that later, on a tripod, in order to get a better picture.
Overall - the best lenses I have tested so far, that hold up even at infinity (with minor or minimal post processing) are - in a (far too early) preliminary judgment. I will not do a lot of testing - these primitive test I made only to eliminate the worst performing lenses when used on Fujifilm GFX 50s II camera - to see which are the best, most promising ones.
KEEPERS
Working well at close & infinity distances:
Canon TS-E 17/4 L Tilt-Shift
Canon EF 40/2.8 pancake lens [most fun lens !!]
Canon FD 85/1.2 L (only tested in Black & white)
Sigma (EF) 105/1.4 ART
Canon EF 200/2 L IS
Note: The Canon EF 200/2.8 L is supposedly to be a great performer on the Fujifilm GFX cameras, while costs only a fraction of the 200/2 L lens !
ONLY MANUAL FOCUS / WITH TRIPOD
Sigma (EF) ART 70 mm f 2.8 Macro
AF does not work (misfocus - only manual focus) I need to test this lens further.
Canon EF 300/4 L IS
Surprise: It
appears to work well - despite that I read it was bad. AF does not work properly with the Andoer EF-GFX adapter because it puts focus wrong (AF unreliable) When using this lens with manual focus - I was surprised that the lens was sharp and without significant shading in the corners. IS appears to be working, but not with enlarged viewfinder - which makes handheld focus very difficult, also because of the short focus throw.
Good sharpness wide open, very good sharpness when stopped down. However towards borders slightly degrading, and with lots of of chromatic aberrations - yet easily corrected when i tested that. Barely any dark corners. And no, I did not remove any black innards near the lens mount.
Really a surprising lens - one I didn't have much hope for nor expectations. But it performs very nicely in terms of optical performance
Don't use profile corrections, as it distorts the corners (like with many other lenses too, when profiles via Camera RAW are used)
Canon EF 135/2 L
Works only in manual focus mode. AF does not work reliable (misfocus). Soft micro contrast at ƒ2 • Needs to be stopped down 2-3 stops in order to get excellent sharpness. Slight/light corner shading, wide open as well stopped down, but can be corrected.
Only for closer distances such as portraits;
Interesting / creative lenses
Leica Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH FLE • (only tested in Black & white)
Canon EF 50/1.2 L • (only tested in Black & white)
Leica Summilux-M 50/1.4 ASPH. • (only tested in Black & white)
Leica Summicron-M 90/2.0 • (old type from 1966) • (only tested in Black & white)
NOT working / NOT worth it:
Canon EF 35/2 IS
AF not working (misfocus), and when putting the lens into manual mode, and the Fuji GFX also in manual mode, the AF erratically works - fucking up your manual focus setting by focusing somewhere else. Therefore it is unusable (with the Andoer adapter so to speak)
Canon EF 28/1.8 USM
extreme distortions at the borders, not worth it.
Canon EF 24/1.4 L II
strong hard vignetting at infinity, wide open as well stopped down. Better sharpness when stopped down - but borders are degraded regarding sharpness.
Extremely soft corners at wide open aperture ƒ1.4 with bad sharpness. Less corner vignetting when used wide open in the close range. Can MAYBE be used in 1x1 (6x6) CROP mode... when a very bright lens is required. It looks neat but nothing out of the ordinary... questionable if it's worth it.
Funky, ugly background blur when used close, I don't think this lens is worth it.
Not tested yet:
Sigma 60-600/4.5-6.3 SPORT
Sometimes profiles introduce even more distortion
(when lenses are adapted onto Fujifilm GFX cameras with larger sensor)
I did notice, that later, in Photoshop, the profiles for the Sigma ART 105 mm f 1.4 lens actually INTRODUCED further distortion of the corners. It was actually better without profile - or at least dialing back the "distortion correction" to 0, but lifting the corners a little bit.
Yes, wide open both lenses show slightly darker corners - but easily fixed in post processing. So, two potentially wonderful performers.
Equivalent to a 160 mm ƒ 1.6 lens
The Canon EF 200mm ƒ2 L IS lens turns into 160mm lens, and the Sigma ART 105mm ƒ1.4 into a 85 mm lens. You could say, the Sigma turns into a 85mm portrait lens with the look of an aperture ƒ 1.1 lens on fullframe - when used with a Fujifilm GFX camera.
Mama mia. Those are light guns - despite their quirky AF with adapters. But hey - they work - and i can dial the aperture value. That is overall the most important aspect; to be able to control the electronic aperture values with Canon EF lenses !! It is more than i had expected.
With that, I am totally happy. (Actually, to be really honest; I am a bit overwhelmed by the now too many options...). From the beginning i didn't even consider to adapt any fullframe lenses on the Fuji. But now that some of the are really fine performers... well, I have to test a lot more than i had bargained for *LOL*
And boy, those two aforementioned lenses are truly HUGE, BULKY and HEAVY !!
Sigma Art 105mm f 1.4 - Fuji GFX 50s II - at ƒ1.4
Sigma Art 105mm f 1.4 - Fuji GFX 50s II - at ƒ1.4 (100% screen size)
Sigma Art 105mm f 1.4 - Fuji GFX 50s II - at ƒ1.4 left border (100% screen size)
However, when it comes to casual photography
I do prefer the Canon EOS R6 and Olympus OM1- and OM-5 cameras. No doubt. They are made for "faster" photography on the fly. And they work very well in that regard. They work INTUITIVE !
With the Fuji GFX 50s II i just feel utterly clumsy... especially when i have to change a setting. I feel like an elephant...
So, every tool has it's strength and weaknesses (as does the photographer, of course). But the Fuji GFX 50s II is still for me a more typical medium format camera, which needs far more attention and care in order to make good photography. Not so much "snapshot" type of photography.
The others, are better in the faster areas of photo life, and those cameras are NOT in my way. |
