[TDvN57]

Three takes on the same shot. Very gloomy late afternoon at Rydal Water. A few light rain showers came through, taking away any contrast.

GFX100s GF32 - 64

Full colour



Converted in Silver Efex



And then I reduced the opacity of the Silver Efex to 60%

I like the first one, full colour.

[texandrews]

Three takes on the same shot. Very gloomy late afternoon at Rydal Water. A few light rain showers came through, taking away any contrast.

GFX100s GF32 - 64

Full colour



Converted in Silver Efex



And then I reduced the opacity of the Silver Efex to 60%

Here I like the first one. The Fuji's seemingly more saturated colors (based on what I've been seeing you post here) really help in a shot like this. Normally I'd like the B&W

[SFTphotography]

Here I like the first one. The Fuji's seemingly more saturated colors (based on what I've been seeing you post here) really help in a shot like this. Normally I'd like the B&W

I've just spent the afternoon editing some GFX100's files taken with a 32-64 and 23mm hired by a photographer I know and trust well. You can see the guys work at LongLensPhotography Fine Art Landscape Photography and he is one of the best landscape photographers in the world.


I use DXO photolab 4 - now if you use the lens sharpen tool you have to turn it down from the default options - not so with the GFX100's on with either lens. I posted this on another forum and I will here as it sums up what I thought about the files.

The extra 50mp over the 645z is nice - I thought it would have more detail actually given the jump in MP's - it is there but not to the extent I would have expected. I don't feel short on pixels with the 645z but this is very good indeed. 100mp is the goal here, I can understand the want to move on to 100mp.

The Pluses.

I couldn't see PDAF banding or stripping. I was expecting to be able to see it. This is an non issue. Same will apply to the Sony A7RiV. I've made noise about this in the past. Totally ignore me, non issue - use with confidence. You will absolutely not have this problem with this camera.

No sensor dirt and I could see at least two lens changes with his time with it. None at all. These are very well sealed indeed and vastly superior to any other camera system I've seen in this regard. My Nikons all sucked dirt in, even with the 645z the odd one get through the sealed 28-45 and the other lenses are in the dust sucker category.

Colours and dynamic range. In practice just as good as my 645z. These are nice clean files entirely worthy of a body costing £5500. Is it £1900 better than a 645z. Dunno, the pictures he took were from the Clifton bridge and I don't have a direct comparison to compare it too. But £1900 is not a lot of money these days. There is nothing garish about the colours from the Fuji. If they come out like that it's down to the processing, not the camera.

The 23mm lens was sharp everywhere and will offer a wider field of view over the widest lens in my set up. That lens is good and worthy of its relatively modest price tag. This is a very good lens and offers something that you just cannot get on a 645z system. Whether you would want something that gives a field of view this wide is another matter entirely.

Downers.


The 32-64 is an actual piece of s***. Dreadful at 50mm in the sides - actually unusable and worse than some budget full frame lenses. I would say this is a really lowsy lens. It is not remotely in the same league as the 28-45 from Pentax - not remotely in the same price bracket and it shows. You are better with a lens that costs £5000 that actually is perfect rather than one that costs £2200 which is utterly hopeless. It was not even in the same league as my old Nikon 16-35 which I would rank as pretty lousy. I've now seen two sets of sample images taken with two separate copies to know that this lens is a pile of complete and total crap. I imagine this how crappy lenses like 17-40 L performs. It is a pile of junk made for crap amateurs who have all the gear and no idea.

Hot pixels - there seemed to be a massive number of them in a 60 sec exposure - certainly in the 100's. Even on a 1/25th sec exposure I spotted several. This is a rental camera so it could be shagged from poor use or a feature of having the sensor always on if you are using the EVF - a bit like using live view on a DSLR constantly. That is not something you should do with a DSLR but the number of hot pixels on a 60s exposure was well into the 100's and I spotted 2 on an exposure at 1/25th. I would rank this as concerning but maybe a feature of a used and abused rental camera used by clueless amateurs rather than a seasoned professional who looks after their gear.

I've yet to see 45-100 sample images and 100-200 sample images but thoughts would be just to buy the expensive primes on this system given just how awful the 32-64 is and how good the 23 is.

I won't be defecting anytime soon and never ever if Pentax make a 100mp version of the 645z.

[barondla]

I've just spent the afternoon editing some GFX100's files taken with a 32-64 and 23mm hired by a photographer I know and trust well. You can see the guys work at LongLensPhotography Fine Art Landscape Photography and he is one of the best landscape photographers in the world.


I use DXO photolab 4 - now if you use the lens sharpen tool you have to turn it down from the default options - not so with the GFX100's on with either lens. I posted this on another forum and I will here as it sums up what I thought about the files.

The extra 50mp over the 645z is nice - I thought it would have more detail actually given the jump in MP's - it is there but not to the extent I would have expected. I don't feel short on pixels with the 645z but this is very good indeed. 100mp is the goal here, I can understand the want to move on to 100mp.

The Pluses.

I couldn't see PDAF banding or stripping. I was expecting to be able to see it. This is an non issue. Same will apply to the Sony A7RiV. I've made noise about this in the past. Totally ignore me, non issue - use with confidence. You will absolutely not have this problem with this camera.

No sensor dirt and I could see at least two lens changes with his time with it. None at all. These are very well sealed indeed and vastly superior to any other camera system I've seen in this regard. My Nikons all sucked dirt in, even with the 645z the odd one get through the sealed 28-45 and the other lenses are in the dust sucker category.

Colours and dynamic range. In practice just as good as my 645z. These are nice clean files entirely worthy of a body costing £5500. Is it £1900 better than a 645z. Dunno, the pictures he took were from the Clifton bridge and I don't have a direct comparison to compare it too. But £1900 is not a lot of money these days. There is nothing garish about the colours from the Fuji. If they come out like that it's down to the processing, not the camera.

The 23mm lens was sharp everywhere and will offer a wider field of view over the widest lens in my set up. That lens is good and worthy of its relatively modest price tag. This is a very good lens and offers something that you just cannot get on a 645z system. Whether you would want something that gives a field of view this wide is another matter entirely.

Downers.


The 32-64 is an actual piece of s***. Dreadful at 50mm in the sides - actually unusable and worse than some budget full frame lenses. I would say this is a really lowsy lens. It is not remotely in the same league as the 28-45 from Pentax - not remotely in the same price bracket and it shows. You are better with a lens that costs £5000 that actually is perfect rather than one that costs £2200 which is utterly hopeless. It was not even in the same league as my old Nikon 16-35 which I would rank as pretty lousy. I've now seen two sets of sample images taken with two separate copies to know that this lens is a pile of complete and total crap. I imagine this how crappy lenses like 17-40 L performs. It is a pile of junk made for crap amateurs who have all the gear and no idea.

Hot pixels - there seemed to be a massive number of them in a 60 sec exposure - certainly in the 100's. Even on a 1/25th sec exposure I spotted several. This is a rental camera so it could be shagged from poor use or a feature of having the sensor always on if you are using the EVF - a bit like using live view on a DSLR constantly. That is not something you should do with a DSLR but the number of hot pixels on a 60s exposure was well into the 100's and I spotted 2 on an exposure at 1/25th. I would rank this as concerning but maybe a feature of a used and abused rental camera used by clueless amateurs rather than a seasoned professional who looks after their gear.

I've yet to see 45-100 sample images and 100-200 sample images but thoughts would be just to buy the expensive primes on this system given just how awful the 32-64 is and how good the 23 is.

I won't be defecting anytime soon and never ever if Pentax make a 100mp version of the 645z.

Glad to know "Velvia colors" aren't forced upon the photographer. Darn harsh assessment of the Fuji 32-64. It may not equal a Pentax 28-45, but there must be some decent photo uses for it.

Thanks,
barondla

[Aaron28]

previous meet n greet wind down at the river.......revived pentax 6x7 that i have worked on the past few months believe it to be in working order now.....smc tak 90/2.8LS
shanghai gp3 100........local process....epson v600 via silverfast8

[SFTphotography]

Glad to know "Velvia colors" aren't forced upon the photographer. Darn harsh assessment of the Fuji 32-64. It may not equal a Pentax 28-45, but there must be some decent photo uses for it.

Thanks,
barondla

TBH the colours (using DXO as the RAW converter are more neutral). The ones of the Pentax cast red so I always have to bring the red tone curve black point in a little, or the green white point tone curve in a little to line it all up. That's how you neutralise colour, make sure the R, G and B curves start and/or end in the same place as each other. With the GFX 100's they pretty much all did - not seen that with the 645z. Now that might be how DXO decodes the 645z PEFs and an LR user might tell an entirely different tale.


The lens copy I saw was a total turd. A POS of the highest order.


Don't take my word for it
Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 R LM WR sample gallery: Digital Photography Review

Image 4/32 - ok wide open but check the smearing. Top right, and left side...yuck.

Image 8/32 - trees RHS...
Image 20/32 - bottom left.

Some might get lucky and get a good copy but I would file this lens under the absolute worst lens I have ever seen performance wise given a) the shape of the sensor b) the price point. This isn't a cheap kit lens at £300, or indeed a super fast zoom with a long focal range. It should be better than this. A lot better.


Now...the 23mm on the otherhand was exquisite. If you want to shoot wide angle it pains me to say this, get a GFX100s and the 23mm. Deeply impressive.

[SFTphotography]

Probably not the right place for this post but has anyone seen the sample images from the Phase One 150mp.

Pentax have to make a full frame 150mp 645z and release some newer glass. They just actually have to. This is amazing and if they could do the body at £10000 or so I will be first in line to buy it

[kaseki]

645Z with 45-85; 400; per exif.
"yellow is also an option (when the clouds clear)"
"contemplation"
"cultivated wild flowers"

Regards

[TDvN57]

Probably not the right place for this post but has anyone seen the sample images from the Phase One 150mp.

Pentax have to make a full frame 150mp 645z and release some newer glass. They just actually have to. This is amazing and if they could do the body at £10000 or so I will be first in line to buy it

If you are used to the Pentax ergonomics, then I think you will be rather disappointed with the PhaseOne

[SFTphotography]

Some Woodland stuff. All with the 45-85 and 645z


Whilst I enjoyed exploring this little bit of forest near Loch Chon these style of pictures will never hold the appeal of the big vista style shot, or detail mountain shot. However this was what the weather conditions offered with a thick fog killing the plan for golden light reflections at Loch Ard or Loch Chon.

[itshimitis]

A few from yesterday on Pembrey Beach, South Wales. There is a huge tidal range (2nd highest in the world) here which has resulted in a lot of wrecks in times gone by. There are over 300, and 4/5 ones that are very visible. I am keeping an eye on the tide tables as this would be perfect in a tide receding from high tide with water retreating through the wrecks

Fuji GFX100s GF 32 - 64 Converted in Silver Efex:

1.



2.



3.

[TonyW]

.....Darn harsh assessment of the Fuji 32-64. It may not equal a Pentax 28-45, but there must be some decent photo uses for it.

Thanks,
barondla

Yes, particularly as it goes against every review I have seen where it gets high praise. Our own itshimitis seems to like his!

Still every manufacturer can produce a ‘Friday dog’ and perhaps the photographers that produced those images should be informed so they can ask Fuji to check their lens samples.

Unless comprehensive testing done side by side under exactly the same conditions P 28-48 and F 32-64 then the best that can be hoped for is a highly subjective opinion

[itshimitis]

Yes, particularly as it goes against every review I have seen where it gets high praise. Our own itshimitis seems to like his!

Still every manufacturer can produce a ‘Friday dog’ and perhaps the photographers that produced those images should be informed so they can ask Fuji to check their lens samples.

Unless comprehensive testing done side by side under exactly the same conditions P 28-48 and F 32-64 then the best that can be hoped for is a highly subjective opinion

My copy of the 23 isn't as good as the 32 - 64 which is sharp. My 23 smears a little on the edges, but this is something I have seen in many ultra wide lenses in the past. I've heard that there are issues with field curvature on the 32 - 64, but there are also on some of the Pentax 645 lenses - I believe that the original FA35 had an issue with this. I've heard reports of some copy differences on some of the Fuji lenses. But in my experience, the 32 - 64 is a very strong lens - probably the sharpest lens overall. I've been holding mine too low to the ground when using it when taking my son out, and have some surface scratches which I will look into getting Fuji to look at - as a Fuji Professional Member, I get 2 free cleans of any equipment and discounts on non warranty work. It doesn't effect the lens optically - though can't help with flare.

My only issue is that I have to be careful shooting into the sun, as the lenses do flare a lot more than the Pentax.

[sculptor666]

a recent queen snake from maryland

[SFTphotography]

My copy of the 23 isn't as good as the 32 - 64 which is sharp. My 23 smears a little on the edges, but this is something I have seen in many ultra wide lenses in the past. I've heard that there are issues with field curvature on the 32 - 64, but there are also on some of the Pentax 645 lenses - I believe that the original FA35 had an issue with this. I've heard reports of some copy differences on some of the Fuji lenses. But in my experience, the 32 - 64 is a very strong lens - probably the sharpest lens overall. I've been holding mine too low to the ground when using it when taking my son out, and have some surface scratches which I will look into getting Fuji to look at - as a Fuji Professional Member, I get 2 free cleans of any equipment and discounts on non warranty work. It doesn't effect the lens optically - though can't help with flare.

My only issue is that I have to be careful shooting into the sun, as the lenses do flare a lot more than the Pentax.

There must be QC issues or something to have so much variance. The 23 images I saw were stellar, the lens perfect right into the sides - not a hint of smearing or anything. Wide lenses are often worse for this but this was as good as it got tbh.