M10 vs Fuji GFX 50R
- Thread starter pmu
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 42
- Views 5K
nightfly
Well-known
I have a GFX R and a M9.
I don't see any point in using smaller lenses on such a large body in crop mode, personally.
You can't really get around the size of the body, so it makes sense to just use the very good Fuji glass and take advantage of the entire sensor, auto focus and all the bells and whistles.
They are just very different cameras, even if complementary. I think the smaller pancake lens (I currently have the 63) would be the way to go if you wanted to lose bulk.
I don't see any point in using smaller lenses on such a large body in crop mode, personally.
You can't really get around the size of the body, so it makes sense to just use the very good Fuji glass and take advantage of the entire sensor, auto focus and all the bells and whistles.
They are just very different cameras, even if complementary. I think the smaller pancake lens (I currently have the 63) would be the way to go if you wanted to lose bulk.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Yes, generally true, although some lenses have hoods (remove them when possible...) or internal anti reflection shielding that cause vignetting.
G
Godfrey
somewhat colored
The point of why I do this with my 907x is that I have a ton of Leica lenses and only a few Hasselblad lenses. For instance, in close up use, the vignetting with R60 lens disappears and it images beautifully ... the lens plus adapter cost me about $700 vs the Hasselblad 120 Macro at $4000 or so. It's just a matter of maximizing use of what I have, when appropriate to the task.
I wouldn't go out buying Leica lenses specifically to use on the Hassy or the GFX-R. 🙂
G
nlubis
Well-known
I own a M 246 and a GFX 50R.
I agree will all that has been said above. It's two camera that can be complementary if you find your photography works that way. Personally, have tried 35mm lenses (not leica) and found it only suitable for specific uses/ocassions and moods. Mostly for practical reasons, because either I don't own the equivalent focal length lens or trying out larger aperture. For examples, I had fun with the 'xpan' crop with my 85 lens, got a really wide angle of view from a tilt/shift lens - almost no movement left to be had though. But all has it limitations/requirments to be optimal. Adapting a medium format lens has been somewhat satisfactory as well (albeit manual focus challenges).
From a gestalt, I still can't get away from what an M and M lens gives me. Maybe because my eyesight is not so great w/ the EVF manual focus, or the focus w/ an M has been with me way longer that EVF? But that aside, as someone noted above, the size is very different and apparent.
For the Fuji, I've come to accept the system with their native lenses gives the best output and experience. Most times, adapting lenses adds to either a compromise or added workflow.
I've recently gotten the 50mm, and yes it's smaller and it does makes a difference.
I agree will all that has been said above. It's two camera that can be complementary if you find your photography works that way. Personally, have tried 35mm lenses (not leica) and found it only suitable for specific uses/ocassions and moods. Mostly for practical reasons, because either I don't own the equivalent focal length lens or trying out larger aperture. For examples, I had fun with the 'xpan' crop with my 85 lens, got a really wide angle of view from a tilt/shift lens - almost no movement left to be had though. But all has it limitations/requirments to be optimal. Adapting a medium format lens has been somewhat satisfactory as well (albeit manual focus challenges).
From a gestalt, I still can't get away from what an M and M lens gives me. Maybe because my eyesight is not so great w/ the EVF manual focus, or the focus w/ an M has been with me way longer that EVF? But that aside, as someone noted above, the size is very different and apparent.
For the Fuji, I've come to accept the system with their native lenses gives the best output and experience. Most times, adapting lenses adds to either a compromise or added workflow.
I've recently gotten the 50mm, and yes it's smaller and it does makes a difference.
nightfly
Well-known
How are you finding the 50mm on the GFX R?
nlubis
Well-known
It's fairly new. But I like it, a better walk around lens IMO. I have the 45mm which I will compare and decide which to keep.
selahsean
Member
Leica M10 vs 50r
Leica M10 vs 50r
Had the M10 and sold it for the 50r and still have all my Leica M glass. In terms of using 35mm mode on the Leica glass it's fine but not as good as the correction you get with the built in profiles from the M10. Some glass works better than others...my 35mm pre ASPH summilux doesn't look as good on the 50r in 35mm mode.
I think in general you're going to find lenses either from other medium format systems or in native mounts that will perform better and make using the Leica glass redundant or less than optimal. For me the Canon Dream lens I had converted to M mount and the Voigtlander 75mm F1.5 are both lenses that are well worth using on the 50r. The Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 is also great but I prefer the Fuji 45. I suspect that when Fuji releases the 80mm F1.7 that the Voigtlander 75mm will find a new home.
Overall I'm happier with the 50r than I was with the M10, but I did end up keepin an M9 monochrom for those times where I really want the digital rangefinder experience and the monochrom gives me something I can't as easily get with other digital cameras.
Leica M10 vs 50r
Had the M10 and sold it for the 50r and still have all my Leica M glass. In terms of using 35mm mode on the Leica glass it's fine but not as good as the correction you get with the built in profiles from the M10. Some glass works better than others...my 35mm pre ASPH summilux doesn't look as good on the 50r in 35mm mode.
I think in general you're going to find lenses either from other medium format systems or in native mounts that will perform better and make using the Leica glass redundant or less than optimal. For me the Canon Dream lens I had converted to M mount and the Voigtlander 75mm F1.5 are both lenses that are well worth using on the 50r. The Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 is also great but I prefer the Fuji 45. I suspect that when Fuji releases the 80mm F1.7 that the Voigtlander 75mm will find a new home.
Overall I'm happier with the 50r than I was with the M10, but I did end up keepin an M9 monochrom for those times where I really want the digital rangefinder experience and the monochrom gives me something I can't as easily get with other digital cameras.
pmu
Well-known
Thanks for your comments. I decided to ditch the idea to get M glass for my GFX (even if I found a fantastic deal on 50mm cron). I like GFX as it is and if I need to have a Leica later, I will just save and get one.
selahsean
Member
Pretty sure the 50r is 14bit and the GFX 100 is the 16bit sensor. The other key difference that wasn't mentioned is how the sensors in Leica are designed for Leica and in particular Leica wide angle lenses have performed poorly on full frame sensors from Sony and others. My limited experience trying Leica 35mm and wider lenses on the 50r suggests the same issues (corner smearing and color shifting) that make it somewhat impractical for serious use.
jsrockit
Moderator
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
Because of the length adapters add that puts the weight of the lens further out, my general belief is that adapted lenses balance best on bodies with central viewfinder placement. Yet even with the most compact native lenses, the GFX 50R is about as comfortable to grip as a shoe box. I much prefer the ergonomics of the GFX 50S.
nightfly
Well-known
They did blow it on the grip on the GFX R. If I keep mine I'm getting an accessory grip.
But I put an M grip on my Leica's too, so I can't say it's a fault unique to Fuji.
But I put an M grip on my Leica's too, so I can't say it's a fault unique to Fuji.
nlubis
Well-known
I have a RRS L bracket and grip. Yes it helps but also makes it larger and eliminates the compactness of it. It really helps with larger lenses, especially adapted medium format lenses.
jsrockit
Moderator
They didn’t blow anything... this is completely subjective. Some people like big grips and some people don’t. They made two gfx-50 models for a reason.
Eric T
Well-known
I bought a GFX 50r a couple of weeks ago. The sensor is just incredible - particularly at high ISO - I don't see any noise at 6400. That allows me set the shutter speed so high that I don't worry about the lack of image stabilization.
The Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5 is the only GF lens I have now but Canon EF lenses work well on this camera. I an using the Fotodiox electronic adapter. The Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens works very well with no crop whatsoever - great IQ. The Canon EF 70-200mm L (version 1) also works well with decreasing (and correctable) vignetting as I go higher in focal length. I am very impressed by the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 lens. No vignetting from 20-40mm at about f/5.6 or so. This has become a great wide angle lens for the GFX 50r. IQ is also great.
I am going to try Leica R lenses and an old Mir 65mm f/3.5 (Pentacon 6 mount) once the adapters arrive. The Mir lens should have no crop.
I have learned that you can't guess the vignetting on focal length alone. You just have to test them.
The IQ of this camera just blows away anything I have seen on full frame cameras from Canon, Panasonic, or Sony. Just amazing.
And the GFX 50r with the 50mm "pancake" GF lens is a great lightweight combo. I will use it often on one lens - one camera outings.
Stay well everyone.
The Fuji GF 50mm f/3.5 is the only GF lens I have now but Canon EF lenses work well on this camera. I an using the Fotodiox electronic adapter. The Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens works very well with no crop whatsoever - great IQ. The Canon EF 70-200mm L (version 1) also works well with decreasing (and correctable) vignetting as I go higher in focal length. I am very impressed by the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 lens. No vignetting from 20-40mm at about f/5.6 or so. This has become a great wide angle lens for the GFX 50r. IQ is also great.
I am going to try Leica R lenses and an old Mir 65mm f/3.5 (Pentacon 6 mount) once the adapters arrive. The Mir lens should have no crop.
I have learned that you can't guess the vignetting on focal length alone. You just have to test them.
The IQ of this camera just blows away anything I have seen on full frame cameras from Canon, Panasonic, or Sony. Just amazing.
And the GFX 50r with the 50mm "pancake" GF lens is a great lightweight combo. I will use it often on one lens - one camera outings.
Stay well everyone.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
My mistake. I thought it was a 16-bit sensor like the Hasselblad CFVII 50c. Only 14-bit? Certainly little real value to using it in 35mm FF crop mode then.
G
ASA 32
Well-known
There are TWO Fuji X forums, confusing I know, but you want one that bills itself as the Original Fuji X Forum, NOT the Ultimate Fuji X Forum. And I don't know why the url doesn't display here.... But if you search on "fuji forum" the first one that comes up is the correct one. Then navigate down to Fuji Medium Format>GFX 50S, GFX 50R>GFX50R Image Thread. I guess it's moot now, though.
pmu
Well-known
Well, I found a 50 cron V5 in mint condition (with super deal), so I will see it myself if it works on GFX or not. If not, I will just sell the lens without any loss. No harm in trying.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
A moot question at this point, but using my M lenses on 33x44 format can have some fun aspects. For example:
The first row shows the FoV with a native 21mm lens, full frame then cropped to square.
The second row shows the FoV with an adapted 43mm lens, full frame then cropped to square. I don't bother with that much since I bought the native 45mm lens shortly afterwards.
The third row shows the FoV with an adapted Voigtlander 10mm lens. Left frame is the full format capture and you can see the teeth of the lens' stubby hood well within the capture. Right frame shows a square crop to inside all the vignetting. It's a heftily wider view than the 21mm lens...
G
The first row shows the FoV with a native 21mm lens, full frame then cropped to square.
The second row shows the FoV with an adapted 43mm lens, full frame then cropped to square. I don't bother with that much since I bought the native 45mm lens shortly afterwards.
The third row shows the FoV with an adapted Voigtlander 10mm lens. Left frame is the full format capture and you can see the teeth of the lens' stubby hood well within the capture. Right frame shows a square crop to inside all the vignetting. It's a heftily wider view than the 21mm lens...
G
