Thanks Neil, its an absolutely lovely lens. I put this video together a few weeks ago and have since taken it with me to Greenland and Iceland, and really loved using it
I just got mine last week and already got some first test shots which are very nice. I am looking forward to really test it in Brittany soon. Thanks for your review and the great images.
I recently worked on a architectural project for a client and was blown away by the sheer detail and resolve of this len. I can even sprinkle it in for Portraits when In super tight situations. It's definitely my personal favorite outside of the 45-100.
As soon as this lens was on the shelves, I ordered it and I am very happy.I sold my GF-23mm and I am not missing it.Yes the 23mm lens is slightly better than GF-20-35mm but the versatility of this lens IMO better value than slightly better quality.
couldn't of said it better Andy......I''ve been shooting GFX since the gfx50r came out ... as a primary landscape photographer I've been waiting for this lense .Got it Last December and my creativity is off the roof finding comps to shoot with it 🙂
Love your review, especially the sample images, several of which show well what can be done with an ultra wide lens. Most other reviewers just pack more into the frame, or pack more of themselves into the video. Subscribed.
Another great real-world review Andy, thank you. Fujifilm loaned me one late last year for a blog post I was writing for them, to use with the 50r. Certainly a fabulous lens but I think personally I would struggle to justify the cost. For that kind of focal length I’m currently using a Samyang 24mm tilt-shift in Canon-fit with an adapter, which I find surprisingly sharp, plus the tilt fixes the depth of field problem for wide angle landscapes when you want foreground elements close to the camera. £700 new. It’s just a bit big and heavy when combined with the adapter. Of course, the 100Mp sensor might reveal a bigger gap in performance than my 50Mp one does. I’ve also had an X-H2 on loan and am actually considering maybe going back to the smaller sensor. I shoot mostly night-sky landscapes and the availability of faster lenses in crop-sensor format is attractive. In your experience, is there an XF Mount ultra-wide (either prime or zoom) that comes close to the GF20-35 in resolving power?
It's hard to compare the resolving power of lenses across systems as even a lesser lens has more detail on the GFX 100S than the best I've used on the X System, but as you're using the 50mp camera it may be different. The Viltrox 13mm f1,4 is the best lens of used for night skies on the X System, its really very good and performs well with the new 40mp sensor. You could also have a look at the Laowa 19mm f2.8 for the GFX system. It's very sharp in the centre, but I'm not sure the aperture rating is entirely accurate. While it is brighter in the centre than the 20-35mm f4, it does't feel one stop brighter, and it vignettes in the corners wide open. I've recently been using if for aurora and been quite happy with it
@@AndyMumford Hi Andy, thanks for taking the time to respond so comprehensively. I wasn't aware of the Laowa 19mm. Just watched the DPR review and they echo your findings on the vignetting. I've certainly heard good reports about the Viltrox. When I borrowed the X-H2 my Samyang 12mm f/2 was struggling to keep up with the 40Mp sensor, even when set at f/2.8, so I'm not sure I saw the new sensor at its best. All said and done though, I think I might give myself some time to fall back in love with the 50R!
Complete and very accurate as usual. I confess I have been shlepping the 45-100 that is an excellent lens but a bit heavy. I should take another look at the 35-70 which is much lighter. I am getting old after all…..
Thanks so much, its an amazing place and one I actually recorded a video about. unfortunately the card in my DJI Pocket 2 (which I use to record vlogs) got corrupted and I couldn’t save the data, so I couldn’t make the video. I’ll be back there in June though, so I’ll just make it again..its a fascinating place
this is a very good addition to the gfx system, stunning images by the way. With all your experience with different formats, taking everything into account, what do you think is the best one for landscape photography?
Thanks for the comment, glad you enjoyed the video. In terms of absolute image quality the GFX is probably the best landscape camera I’ve ever used, but the lens lineup is limited and it lacks longer telephoto lenses. It’s also heavy, which makes it less comfortable to carry large distances hiking. It really comes down to what you need
On GFX, in my experience, the limit of sharpness in regard to aperture is going above f22… at around f22 diffraction, although minor on GFX, sets in… the best performance of any GF lens is typically around f8, as it is with most any other system
Good morning! Thank you for that very informative video. I am wondering how you do the focus bracketing? Are you using the bracketing function or are you taking 3 pictures (foreground, midground, distance). If you are using the BKT function - what are your settings? Maybe this would be a theme for a video ? 🙄
I do the focus bracketing manually by shooting images with focus points at different points in teh image (usually, foreground, mid ground and background), and then blend them either in PS, Luminar or Helicon Focus
Hi Andy. so a good line up would be a 20-35mm F4, 100-200mm, but would you go for the 35-70 or the 40-100mm lens to go in between those two. ? i couldnt find a good gfx lens review website where i can find out what the better lenses are for the 100s. you have any good advice on that ? my focus is studio portraits and more and more landscape. checked out your workshops and they look full.
For me, I like the 35-70 instead of the 45-100mm. Basically, it's not a range I use all that often (I've always preferred wide or tele images to the mid range), and so I prefer the lightness and compactness of the 35-70 over the better quality, but MUCH bigger and heavier 45-100. If you're shooting in studio and it's a range you use a lot, then the 45-100 is the better lens, but as soon as you have to carry all that stuff up mountain trails, then I'd recommend the 35-70, which is an excellent lens for the size and price. As for the workshops, for this year they are all full, but there are still a few places open on some of the workshops for next year
Thanks for this Andy, very useful. I’m thinking of going up from the excellent x series but have some concerns about dof in Mf. If I understand correctly, it’s best to shot at f 8-11 to avoid diffraction so for pretty much anything with foreground interest you are focus staking? Also, the fact that the 23 f4 prime goes up to f32 (compared to f 22 in this zoom) is of absolutely no advantage at all? Also, my other big concern is how much of the lovely width is lost when Lightroom corrects for edge distortion. So many questions to consider before laying out a lot of money. Thank you.
Thanks for the comment. With the GFX you're typically shooting at f11 to f16 as diffraction kicks in much higher with a larger sensor (hence some of the lenses going to f32). The larger sensor also has less depth of field at equivalent apertures to APS-C, and that's even before you take into account the smaller aperture you're using, so you will have to focus stack pretty much everything you shoot wide angle with the foreground less than 2 meters away. However, you lose absolutely no width at all with correction for edge distortion. Lightroom simple reads the distortion correction that's managed in the lens, so what you see through the viewfinder is what you get in Lightroom.
You should change to capture one w the gfx100s I did after using Lightroom since it came out. Made a huge difference in speed and editing. The images look better straight out of raw.
I've been using C1 for a few years and actually have a video about it on the channel. While it makes a difference with the X Series cameras because it has better RAW conversion of the X Trans sensor, the GFX has a conventional bayer array so there's no real gain, it's just the images have more contrast and saturation out of the camera. Personally, I prefer my RAW images as flat as possible as a starting point for editing so Lightroom works better for me. I also find Lightroom's masking capabilities better than C1, but it's really personal preference
Thanks a lot, Andy for this video. With this lens, Fuji finally arrived at a focal length comparable to the mainstream lower range of full-frame cameras. They are still far from the full-frame standard on the long end, as well as from the full-frame standard in terms of lens speed. Do you happen to know why this is? Are there technical limitations for medium-frame lenses? Weight? Cost? Lack of competition?
Thanks for the comment. To be honest, pretty much every zoom lens I’ve ever used on any system; APS-C, full frame and medium format has performed better at one end of the zoom range to the other. Its a while since I’ve used full frame, but the Nikon 17-35mm f2.8, the 16-35mm f4, the 70-200mm f2.8 and f4 were certainly like that, so in that respect the 20-35mm is no different. I think it’s simply the physics of having moving glass have the same performance throughout it’s movement range is astonishingly challenging. The Fuji 16-55mm on APS-C is one of the few lenses I’ve used that appears to be every bit as good throughout it’s range. With the lack of faster apertures, I’m pretty sure that’s due to Fuji’s desire to keep the size and weight of the lenses down. Getting light and sharpness into the corner of a sensor this large would require really large pieces of glass, and it looks as though Fuji have pitched the GFX system more towards a style of shooting where fast apertures aren’t so important.
I don't have one with me to compare, but I think the 23mm is slightly sharper. This lens is really sharp though, and the flexibility of the zoom make it a better choice in my opinion
Thanks for the video. I have the GF 20-35mm and the 35-70mm. What would you recommend for a longer telephoto for landscape photography that can also be king to your back on a long hike?
Thanks for the comment. For the GFX your best bet for a telephoto is the 100-200mm. That's what I use. It does often feel a little too short, but it's still a more flexible lens than the 250mm
@@AndyMumford Thanks for your prompt response. Your videos are thoughtful, clear and exactly on point. Hope to join you in a workshop in the near future.
Hi Andy! I'm thinking about jumping to the GFX system for my landscape work and keeping my X system only for wildlife. What are your thoughts to run the 20-35 and 45-100 as a landscape kit. do you feel this 2 lens setup isn't as ideal as a 20-35,35-70, and 100-200?
Personally, I think the 45-100 is too short. It's a great lens, but with just those two you lack reach, which for me would mean I wouldn't have a lens for about 50% of me shots. The 100-200mm is an essential lens for me, so given that I prefer the lighter 35-70 for the mid range, as it's the focal range I use the least
I’d love to see a video featuring some of the less talked about features of the camera. Stuff no one mentions in video but would be important to know to a potential purchaser. Like does it offer zebra mode? Does the manual focus have preview magnification options? Is the manual focus highlighted? Does it have in camera focus bracketing? Does the camera have a sensor shake for cleaning assistance? How quickly does the battery drain? Do they make L brackets that big?
Thanks for the comment. I think the problem with any reviewing any camera is that there are so many features that you’re always going to leave so much out unless th review goes on for over an hour. And from the comments it’s clear that everyone has different priorities and different things they care about and want to know, so in my reviews I tend to focus on the stuff that matters to me from a practical point of view, and for sure, that means missing a lot of stuff out. However, some of the things you mentioned I’ve talked about in previous reviews and they are now so standard that I no longer mention them. Zebra stripes, preview magnification (click the rear dial to enter the mode and then use the same dial to zoom in), focus peaking (manual focus highlighting, which is available in 4 colours) have been in every Fuji camera for generations now. Sensor shake for cleaning has also been around for a while. Focus bracketing does exist in all Fuji cameras too, but its not something i ever use as I prefer to do it manually. It is something to look at more in depth in the future though. In all the videos I comment on battery life, both on the listed specs and on my experience of using it in the field, and as for L brackets, it’s often the case that when the review comes out the camera is so new that L brackets haven’t hit the market yet. It usually takes a couple of months after launch for them to become available. There are L brackets available for the GFX, I have them on all my cameras, but usually take them off when I do the product shots. However I often leave them on when I show clips of the camera in use, and I’m pretty sure there are some of those shots ofthe GFX in this video.
@@AndyMumford thanks for your reply. I’ve watched probably 20 videos on the gfx100s and haven’t seen anything of the things I mentioned. So I’ll be sure to check out your other videos for sure. This video was a wonderful production. I appreciate the effort you put into it. I feel like in camera focus bracketing for the medium format cameras should be a priority of Fuji, since the depth of field is so shallow.
Does it exhibit a lot of focus breathing that would cause issues with focus stacking? The 23mm has a little bit of focus breathing but it’s still managable without having to sacrifice a lot of the frame.
There’s a little breathing because it’s pretty much impossible not to have it at these focal lengths, but not really very much and I’ve not had any problems focus blending images
Great!! This is a superb addition. And I plan to sell my 23mm. I much prefer the 32-64 to the 35-70, but use it bc I shoot with the Canon 100-400 on GFX 100s. I find it does vignette a bit but is superior to the Fuji 100-200. And focuses to less than 1 meter. The reach makes it viable for wildlife and very long views. I’m hoping Fuji comes out with a 100 series camera with 50S controls. Basically I just want an all manual /analog control camera. As always your reviews are succinct and informative. This lens is a great addition. With a 1.4 extender I have a 3 lens medium format set up equiv from 16mm to 450mm. The canon 100-400 is 1380 grams, heavy but more useful than 100-200 Fuji. At last a system superior in every way to Pentax 67! And only a 53 year wait.
Hey Joseph, newcomer to the GFX world here myself. I'm very interested in your approach using the 100-400 on the 100s. Any chance you'd be willing to share a few sample images showing the vignetting with the 100-400, as well as some with the 1.4x? My email is in my channel bio if this is something you'd consider. Have a good one!
No sure how I would share. I have been using fx 100-400 for birds. Typically I cropped those. Like wise the canon et 100-400. I use the Fringer adaptor with f stop ring. Auto focus is excellent but not with 1.4 adaptor. The canon to my rough estimate is as sharp as the Fuji 100-200 and seems a bit better than the FX 100-400. The fact that is focuses to 36 inches means I can do macro close ups of things at my feet. And low to the ground shots have superbe bokeh. Let me know how I can share images.
@@borromine Those in the DPReview forums say the vignette is only slight in the tip of the corners, and can easily be fixed in post IF THE REAR BAFFLE IS PULLED OUT by pulling on it with just two fingers.
Great Review Andy but I have a question. If Fujifilm can engineer a super wide angle zoom for medium format that takes an 82mm filters why can't they design something similar for the X series where we don't need a goofy & massive specialty filter holder for 150mm filters for the 8-16mm?
Thanks for the comment, glad you enjoyed the review. I think the issue is with the 8-16mm is that it’s both incredibly wide (12mm equivalent as opposed to 16mm equivalent with this lens) and also has a fast maximum aperture. The 20-35mm is closer to the 10-24mm in range and aperture performance. I do think that Fuji’s lens design for the GFX has shown some incredible engineering though. This lens, the 35-70mm and the 100-200mm are really quite light for a medium format lens
If you look at the 23 f4 and this 20-35 f4 side by side, it's pretty clear that the older lens was still designed under the old "it's for a medium format body, it'll be glued to a tripod anyway so who cares how big it is" paradigm. More recent releases, especially the 35-70 and the 50 f3.5, were clearly conceived of with portability as a significant concern.
The GF compatible 17 mm f4 Zero D (manual focus only) lens does not display keystone effects! It’s supposedly classifiable as rectilinear… I’m not 100% convinced that it is strictly so.
I see in the description that you are using kase revolution filters? Have you tried them on this lens? I’m wondering what to get to not have any vignetting. Thanks
What a coincidence, I just had the first opportunity to take my copy of the 20-35 out this weekend myself! With the picture of the church, don't you think the gravestones could've just been ever so slightly OOF, even at f9? It looked a little bit like it to me, but in a rendered video it's hard to tell.
It is a lovely lens. I don’t have that image with me here to check (I’m travelling at the moment) but it is possible that their isn’t focus from front to back. f9 on medium format doesn’t give the best depth of field, although the lens does perform well in terms of sharpness around that aperture
@@AndyMumford Add to that the fact that this particular image was taken at 32mm, so even less DOF than if at (say) 20mm. Loved the video Andy. Great work as always!
Hallo, eine sehr schöne Brennweite für Landschaft und Detail, aber der Preis ist mit fast 2800€ ganz schön hoch. Hatte das Laowa 17mm an der 50r und bin sehr Enttäuscht vom Glas.
Absolutely stunning images Andy.
Thanks so much, glad you enjoyed the video
Gorgeous thank you for not obsessing over charts and doing a practical application review much appreciated.
Thanks for the comment, glad you enjoyed the review
Thank you for that interesting review! Your pictures are stunning, love your style!
Thanks so much for the comment, really glad you enjoyed the video
My favourite lens! Great review Andy :) and stunning images!
It is a lovely lens
Thanks - this was super useful!
Thanks for the comment, really glad it was useful
This video made me long for a home tour. Great eye for interior design Andy (also, great video as always)
Haha, thanks so much. The apartment comes down a lot to my wife’s excellent taste
A fantastic review! Looks like an absolutely beautiful lens! The images you used as the examples are really wonderful!
Cheers.
Thanks Neil, its an absolutely lovely lens. I put this video together a few weeks ago and have since taken it with me to Greenland and Iceland, and really loved using it
I just got mine last week and already got some first test shots which are very nice. I am looking forward to really test it in Brittany soon. Thanks for your review and the great images.
Thanks for your comment, glad you found the review useful. Enjoy the lens
I recently worked on a architectural project for a client and was blown away by the sheer detail and resolve of this len. I can even sprinkle it in for Portraits when In super tight situations. It's definitely my personal favorite outside of the 45-100.
It's a really lovely lens, I've really enjoyed using it
As soon as this lens was on the shelves, I ordered it and I am very happy.I sold my GF-23mm and I am not missing it.Yes the 23mm lens is slightly better than GF-20-35mm but the versatility of this lens IMO better value than slightly better quality.
Thanks for the comment, I agree 100%
couldn't of said it better Andy......I''ve been shooting GFX since the gfx50r came out ... as a primary landscape photographer I've been waiting for this lense .Got it Last December and my creativity is off the roof finding comps to shoot with it 🙂
Glad to hear it. I’ve just returned from Greenland and Iceland shooting with it, and it was fantastic
best lens ever !!
i love it !! 🤩
It’s absolutely brilliant
Love your review, especially the sample images, several of which show well what can be done with an ultra wide lens. Most other reviewers just pack more into the frame, or pack more of themselves into the video. Subscribed.
Thanks so much for the comment, glad you found the video useful
LR T+S or more correctly - perspective control - is awesome for fixing parallax/verticals etc.
A nice sharp detailed lens!
Yep, it’s excellent
Great in-depth review Rn im saving up for the fuji XT-5 can't wait to start using GFX lenses
Thanks so much for the comment, glad you enjoyed the video. The X-T5 is a lovely camera, you’ll love it
Remember that you can’t use GFX lenses on an XT5 …. Just X series lenses
@@grantnewton5705I use Micro-Four-Thirds ultra-wide lens on my large-format which has a A4 size sensor
Another great real-world review Andy, thank you. Fujifilm loaned me one late last year for a blog post I was writing for them, to use with the 50r. Certainly a fabulous lens but I think personally I would struggle to justify the cost. For that kind of focal length I’m currently using a Samyang 24mm tilt-shift in Canon-fit with an adapter, which I find surprisingly sharp, plus the tilt fixes the depth of field problem for wide angle landscapes when you want foreground elements close to the camera. £700 new. It’s just a bit big and heavy when combined with the adapter. Of course, the 100Mp sensor might reveal a bigger gap in performance than my 50Mp one does.
I’ve also had an X-H2 on loan and am actually considering maybe going back to the smaller sensor. I shoot mostly night-sky landscapes and the availability of faster lenses in crop-sensor format is attractive. In your experience, is there an XF Mount ultra-wide (either prime or zoom) that comes close to the GF20-35 in resolving power?
It's hard to compare the resolving power of lenses across systems as even a lesser lens has more detail on the GFX 100S than the best I've used on the X System, but as you're using the 50mp camera it may be different. The Viltrox 13mm f1,4 is the best lens of used for night skies on the X System, its really very good and performs well with the new 40mp sensor. You could also have a look at the Laowa 19mm f2.8 for the GFX system. It's very sharp in the centre, but I'm not sure the aperture rating is entirely accurate. While it is brighter in the centre than the 20-35mm f4, it does't feel one stop brighter, and it vignettes in the corners wide open. I've recently been using if for aurora and been quite happy with it
@@AndyMumford Hi Andy, thanks for taking the time to respond so comprehensively. I wasn't aware of the Laowa 19mm. Just watched the DPR review and they echo your findings on the vignetting. I've certainly heard good reports about the Viltrox. When I borrowed the X-H2 my Samyang 12mm f/2 was struggling to keep up with the 40Mp sensor, even when set at f/2.8, so I'm not sure I saw the new sensor at its best. All said and done though, I think I might give myself some time to fall back in love with the 50R!
Complete and very accurate as usual. I confess I have been shlepping the 45-100 that is an excellent lens but a bit heavy. I should take another look at the 35-70 which is much lighter. I am getting old after all…..
Thanks so much for the comment Ico. That 45-100 is lovely, but it's a massive lens
Great Video
Thanks so much, glad it was useful
The photos at Kolmanskop are lovely, I've never seen an abandoned house become like that before.
Thanks so much, its an amazing place and one I actually recorded a video about. unfortunately the card in my DJI Pocket 2 (which I use to record vlogs) got corrupted and I couldn’t save the data, so I couldn’t make the video. I’ll be back there in June though, so I’ll just make it again..its a fascinating place
@@AndyMumford I'm sorry for your data loss. I hope your next trip will be goes smoothly, I can't wait! 😄
Please do the XF 16-80 next please :D I don't have a GFX but I would never turn down a gear video hehe. Cheers Andy!
Thanks for the comment, the 16-80 review is in the works
this is a very good addition to the gfx system, stunning images by the way. With all your experience with different formats, taking everything into account, what do you think is the best one for landscape photography?
Thanks for the comment, glad you enjoyed the video. In terms of absolute image quality the GFX is probably the best landscape camera I’ve ever used, but the lens lineup is limited and it lacks longer telephoto lenses. It’s also heavy, which makes it less comfortable to carry large distances hiking. It really comes down to what you need
On GFX, in my experience, the limit of sharpness in regard to aperture is going above f22… at around f22 diffraction, although minor on GFX, sets in… the best performance of any GF lens is typically around f8, as it is with most any other system
Good morning! Thank you for that very informative video. I am wondering how you do the focus bracketing? Are you using the bracketing function or are you taking 3 pictures (foreground, midground, distance). If you are using the BKT function - what are your settings? Maybe this would be a theme for a video ? 🙄
I do the focus bracketing manually by shooting images with focus points at different points in teh image (usually, foreground, mid ground and background), and then blend them either in PS, Luminar or Helicon Focus
Hi Andy. so a good line up would be a 20-35mm F4, 100-200mm, but would you go for the 35-70 or the 40-100mm lens to go in between those two. ?
i couldnt find a good gfx lens review website where i can find out what the better lenses are for the 100s. you have any good advice on that ? my focus is studio portraits and more and more landscape. checked out your workshops and they look full.
For me, I like the 35-70 instead of the 45-100mm. Basically, it's not a range I use all that often (I've always preferred wide or tele images to the mid range), and so I prefer the lightness and compactness of the 35-70 over the better quality, but MUCH bigger and heavier 45-100. If you're shooting in studio and it's a range you use a lot, then the 45-100 is the better lens, but as soon as you have to carry all that stuff up mountain trails, then I'd recommend the 35-70, which is an excellent lens for the size and price.
As for the workshops, for this year they are all full, but there are still a few places open on some of the workshops for next year
Thanks for this Andy, very useful. I’m thinking of going up from the excellent x series but have some concerns about dof in Mf. If I understand correctly, it’s best to shot at f 8-11 to avoid diffraction so for pretty much anything with foreground interest you are focus staking? Also, the fact that the 23 f4 prime goes up to f32 (compared to f 22 in this zoom) is of absolutely no advantage at all? Also, my other big concern is how much of the lovely width is lost when Lightroom corrects for edge distortion. So many questions to consider before laying out a lot of money. Thank you.
Thanks for the comment. With the GFX you're typically shooting at f11 to f16 as diffraction kicks in much higher with a larger sensor (hence some of the lenses going to f32). The larger sensor also has less depth of field at equivalent apertures to APS-C, and that's even before you take into account the smaller aperture you're using, so you will have to focus stack pretty much everything you shoot wide angle with the foreground less than 2 meters away.
However, you lose absolutely no width at all with correction for edge distortion. Lightroom simple reads the distortion correction that's managed in the lens, so what you see through the viewfinder is what you get in Lightroom.
@@AndyMumford Many thanks Andy, very helpful.
if you're okay with square images, the minolta zoom 24-35mm f3.5 is a fantastic alternative.
Thanks for the comment
You should change to capture one w the gfx100s
I did after using Lightroom since it came out. Made a huge difference in speed and editing. The images look better straight out of raw.
I've been using C1 for a few years and actually have a video about it on the channel. While it makes a difference with the X Series cameras because it has better RAW conversion of the X Trans sensor, the GFX has a conventional bayer array so there's no real gain, it's just the images have more contrast and saturation out of the camera. Personally, I prefer my RAW images as flat as possible as a starting point for editing so Lightroom works better for me. I also find Lightroom's masking capabilities better than C1, but it's really personal preference
Thanks a lot, Andy for this video. With this lens, Fuji finally arrived at a focal length comparable to the mainstream lower range of full-frame cameras. They are still far from the full-frame standard on the long end, as well as from the full-frame standard in terms of lens speed. Do you happen to know why this is? Are there technical limitations for medium-frame lenses? Weight? Cost? Lack of competition?
Thanks for the comment. To be honest, pretty much every zoom lens I’ve ever used on any system; APS-C, full frame and medium format has performed better at one end of the zoom range to the other. Its a while since I’ve used full frame, but the Nikon 17-35mm f2.8, the 16-35mm f4, the 70-200mm f2.8 and f4 were certainly like that, so in that respect the 20-35mm is no different. I think it’s simply the physics of having moving glass have the same performance throughout it’s movement range is astonishingly challenging. The Fuji 16-55mm on APS-C is one of the few lenses I’ve used that appears to be every bit as good throughout it’s range.
With the lack of faster apertures, I’m pretty sure that’s due to Fuji’s desire to keep the size and weight of the lenses down. Getting light and sharpness into the corner of a sensor this large would require really large pieces of glass, and it looks as though Fuji have pitched the GFX system more towards a style of shooting where fast apertures aren’t so important.
Another great video. I would like to know difference between 23mm and 20-35? Why anyone consider 23mm over 20-35?
I don't have one with me to compare, but I think the 23mm is slightly sharper. This lens is really sharp though, and the flexibility of the zoom make it a better choice in my opinion
Thanks for the video. I have the GF 20-35mm and the 35-70mm. What would you recommend for a longer telephoto for landscape photography that can also be king to your back on a long hike?
Thanks for the comment. For the GFX your best bet for a telephoto is the 100-200mm. That's what I use. It does often feel a little too short, but it's still a more flexible lens than the 250mm
@@AndyMumford Thanks for your prompt response. Your videos are thoughtful, clear and exactly on point. Hope to join you in a workshop in the near future.
Hi Andy! I'm thinking about jumping to the GFX system for my landscape work and keeping my X system only for wildlife. What are your thoughts to run the 20-35 and 45-100 as a landscape kit. do you feel this 2 lens setup isn't as ideal as a 20-35,35-70, and 100-200?
Personally, I think the 45-100 is too short. It's a great lens, but with just those two you lack reach, which for me would mean I wouldn't have a lens for about 50% of me shots. The 100-200mm is an essential lens for me, so given that I prefer the lighter 35-70 for the mid range, as it's the focal range I use the least
I’d love to see a video featuring some of the less talked about features of the camera. Stuff no one mentions in video but would be important to know to a potential purchaser.
Like does it offer zebra mode? Does the manual focus have preview magnification options? Is the manual focus highlighted? Does it have in camera focus bracketing? Does the camera have a sensor shake for cleaning assistance? How quickly does the battery drain? Do they make L brackets that big?
Thanks for the comment. I think the problem with any reviewing any camera is that there are so many features that you’re always going to leave so much out unless th review goes on for over an hour. And from the comments it’s clear that everyone has different priorities and different things they care about and want to know, so in my reviews I tend to focus on the stuff that matters to me from a practical point of view, and for sure, that means missing a lot of stuff out. However, some of the things you mentioned I’ve talked about in previous reviews and they are now so standard that I no longer mention them. Zebra stripes, preview magnification (click the rear dial to enter the mode and then use the same dial to zoom in), focus peaking (manual focus highlighting, which is available in 4 colours) have been in every Fuji camera for generations now. Sensor shake for cleaning has also been around for a while. Focus bracketing does exist in all Fuji cameras too, but its not something i ever use as I prefer to do it manually. It is something to look at more in depth in the future though. In all the videos I comment on battery life, both on the listed specs and on my experience of using it in the field, and as for L brackets, it’s often the case that when the review comes out the camera is so new that L brackets haven’t hit the market yet. It usually takes a couple of months after launch for them to become available. There are L brackets available for the GFX, I have them on all my cameras, but usually take them off when I do the product shots. However I often leave them on when I show clips of the camera in use, and I’m pretty sure there are some of those shots ofthe GFX in this video.
@@AndyMumford thanks for your reply. I’ve watched probably 20 videos on the gfx100s and haven’t seen anything of the things I mentioned. So I’ll be sure to check out your other videos for sure. This video was a wonderful production. I appreciate the effort you put into it.
I feel like in camera focus bracketing for the medium format cameras should be a priority of Fuji, since the depth of field is so shallow.
Does it exhibit a lot of focus breathing that would cause issues with focus stacking? The 23mm has a little bit of focus breathing but it’s still managable without having to sacrifice a lot of the frame.
There’s a little breathing because it’s pretty much impossible not to have it at these focal lengths, but not really very much and I’ve not had any problems focus blending images
Great!! This is a superb addition. And I plan to sell my 23mm. I much prefer the 32-64 to the 35-70, but use it bc I shoot with the Canon 100-400 on GFX 100s. I find it does vignette a bit but is superior to the Fuji 100-200. And focuses to less than 1 meter. The reach makes it viable for wildlife and very long views.
I’m hoping Fuji comes out with a 100 series camera with 50S controls. Basically I just want an all manual /analog control camera.
As always your reviews are succinct and informative.
This lens is a great addition.
With a 1.4 extender I have a 3 lens medium format set up equiv from 16mm to 450mm. The canon 100-400 is 1380 grams, heavy but more useful than 100-200 Fuji.
At last a system superior in every way to Pentax 67! And only a 53 year wait.
Hey Joseph, newcomer to the GFX world here myself. I'm very interested in your approach using the 100-400 on the 100s. Any chance you'd be willing to share a few sample images showing the vignetting with the 100-400, as well as some with the 1.4x? My email is in my channel bio if this is something you'd consider. Have a good one!
I’ve never really looked at adaptors and lenses from other brands, but with the lack of reach in the GFX system it is tempting
No sure how I would share. I have been using fx 100-400 for birds. Typically I cropped those. Like wise the canon et 100-400. I use the Fringer adaptor with f stop ring. Auto focus is excellent but not with 1.4 adaptor. The canon to my rough estimate is as sharp as the Fuji 100-200 and seems a bit better than the FX 100-400. The fact that is focuses to 36 inches means I can do macro close ups of things at my feet. And low to the ground shots have superbe bokeh. Let me know how I can share images.
@@borromine Those in the DPReview forums say the vignette is only slight in the tip of the corners, and can easily be fixed in post IF THE REAR BAFFLE IS PULLED OUT by pulling on it with just two fingers.
@@jefffenske1958 thanks for advice will try it.
Great Review Andy but I have a question. If Fujifilm can engineer a super wide angle zoom for medium format that takes an 82mm filters why can't they design something similar for the X series where we don't need a goofy & massive specialty filter holder for 150mm filters for the 8-16mm?
Because it’s a lot easier to design wide angle lenses for larger sensors.
Thanks for the comment, glad you enjoyed the review. I think the issue is with the 8-16mm is that it’s both incredibly wide (12mm equivalent as opposed to 16mm equivalent with this lens) and also has a fast maximum aperture. The 20-35mm is closer to the 10-24mm in range and aperture performance. I do think that Fuji’s lens design for the GFX has shown some incredible engineering though. This lens, the 35-70mm and the 100-200mm are really quite light for a medium format lens
If you look at the 23 f4 and this 20-35 f4 side by side, it's pretty clear that the older lens was still designed under the old "it's for a medium format body, it'll be glued to a tripod anyway so who cares how big it is" paradigm. More recent releases, especially the 35-70 and the 50 f3.5, were clearly conceived of with portability as a significant concern.
Will you consider just taking this lens for a full trip on the GF 100s and another body for another tele zoom from the X series and that's it??
Not really. If I'm taking the GFX then I'm not taking just one lens.
The GF compatible 17 mm f4 Zero D (manual focus only) lens does not display keystone effects! It’s supposedly classifiable as rectilinear… I’m not 100% convinced that it is strictly so.
I see in the description that you are using kase revolution filters? Have you tried them on this lens? I’m wondering what to get to not have any vignetting. Thanks
Yep, I use 82mm Kase filters on this lens and they’re fine
@@AndyMumford awesome thank you for the reply :) love your work
Great video ! Means I don’t need the GF 23 ?
Thanks for the comment. Yeah, personally I think this negates the need for the 23mm
What a coincidence, I just had the first opportunity to take my copy of the 20-35 out this weekend myself!
With the picture of the church, don't you think the gravestones could've just been ever so slightly OOF, even at f9? It looked a little bit like it to me, but in a rendered video it's hard to tell.
It is a lovely lens. I don’t have that image with me here to check (I’m travelling at the moment) but it is possible that their isn’t focus from front to back. f9 on medium format doesn’t give the best depth of field, although the lens does perform well in terms of sharpness around that aperture
@@AndyMumford Add to that the fact that this particular image was taken at 32mm, so even less DOF than if at (say) 20mm. Loved the video Andy. Great work as always!
I live in Lofoten.
It's a beautiful place
Andy: which one can you say it is its sweet spot?
Depends on the focal length really, f8 is pretty sharp throughout the zoom range
Hallo, eine sehr schöne Brennweite für Landschaft und Detail, aber der Preis ist mit fast 2800€ ganz schön hoch. Hatte das Laowa 17mm an der 50r und bin sehr Enttäuscht vom Glas.
👏👏👏🤘😘
🙏