this is exatly the type of hybrid photography i would love to try becuase it slows you down to focus on composition and subject . stunning results . i would like to try the simpler version with a hasselblad medium format lens on my canon 1dx .
The Nikon version is a little different to use than this GFX one. Here's the video we made for the DSLR versions a while back: ruclips.net/video/go1wkN5_M4w/видео.html
What's the conversion calculation to convert mm in large format lenses to mm in medium format so that I can understand what lenses I should be considering for specific applications?
I guess you cannot use any camera movements with this adapter? Probably only digital back like PhaseOne or Hasselblad can be used with camera movements since their sensors are not recessed inside of the body of the camera?
While the auto white balance may seem like an issue, it could also make for some interesting experimental gradient photos. Overall, this seems pretty cool, I'll probably get one, once I get my hands on a gfx camera!
Because you're stitching up to three photos together, you have to either make sure your model is very still if they're halfway between two photos, or frame them in one of the photos so they don't end up in a stitch.
We can't say for sure, but anything over 200mm will give you a better shot at infinity focus. Or you can experiment with a wider lens if you have a recessed lens board that gets the lens closer into the camera body.
Was hoping I could get some lens insight from anyone. I am trying this product with my Horseman L45 with a Fujinon W. 5.6/125mm lens. I can only get really close objects in focus, anything farther than 2ft, I can't get in focus, any ideas?
Unfortunately with wider lenses you need to have the sensor right at the film plane to focus to infinity, and since you can't do that with this adapter--the adapter sets the sensor back beyond the film plane of the camera--you can only get infinity focus with longer lenses, starting at around 150-200mm.
It's two very different styles of photography. When you move your camera around and take many photos and stitch them together, you're stitching many photos together from various lens positions. With our 4x5 adapter you're capturing multiple photos of one lens's image circle that's locked down, composed and focused, so it's more like turning the camera's sensor into a large format digital back.
@@FotodioxInc both require panning either the body or the lens, and stitching the resulting images, and for anything more than a few feet away where parallax would interrupt the image, I can’t think of how these images couldn’t be capture the same way with less effort using just a lens and a tripod. Would you say there is effectively no difference between panning a camera/lens and adapting it if you place the fulcrum at the point of convergence?
@@benlemenager7388 You understand that capturing the image circle of a large format lens is different than moving a full frame lens around to different spots and stitching them together, right? One is capturing the view camera's look, getting a look similar to what you'd get with a 4x5 sheet of film in that camera, while the other is capturing a small sensor camera's look from different positions and stitching them together to create something that looks more like large format. I'm not saying one is better than the other, what I am saying is they do get you different looks. We made this adapter for people who want to breathe new life into old view cameras or who shoot film in view cameras and want a digital option too. It's not designed to replace the Brenizer method or any new kind of photo stitching with digital cameras. Think of it like putting a newer engine in a vintage car. Could you get a more efficient car if you bought a new car? Yes. But people don't restore and drive old cars for the efficiency, and it's the same with people who use older cameras and adapters.
@@FotodioxInc ah, let me just say I very do appreciate the adaption and modification of cameras and lenses and have used fotodiox for this purpose. Also as a gfx owner and operate a studio that uses the gfx platform for our work, I’m very interested in this type of adaption. I would be interested in purchasing new baffle cameras if this could prove to be a better end result than just stitching images of the same focal length using a properly aligned pan/tilt head. Do you have side by side comparisons, or a way to see the differences between using this and just stitching?
That thing with a dtent ball should be great to align those donts without even needing to look.
Great adapter as always!
this is exatly the type of hybrid photography i would love to try becuase it slows you down to focus on composition and subject . stunning results . i would like to try the simpler version with a hasselblad medium format lens on my canon 1dx .
Another cool product!
Thank you for these. I’ve always wondered how it works
Happy to help!
Thanks for the video.
I have a Nikon F mount to 4x5 inch adapter that I have not yet used. I will have to find it and try it.
The Nikon version is a little different to use than this GFX one. Here's the video we made for the DSLR versions a while back: ruclips.net/video/go1wkN5_M4w/видео.html
What's the conversion calculation to convert mm in large format lenses to mm in medium format so that I can understand what lenses I should be considering for specific applications?
I guess you cannot use any camera movements with this adapter? Probably only digital back like PhaseOne or Hasselblad can be used with camera movements since their sensors are not recessed inside of the body of the camera?
Hello, does this work with the lingo color from 1959? Thank you
While the auto white balance may seem like an issue, it could also make for some interesting experimental gradient photos.
Overall, this seems pretty cool, I'll probably get one, once I get my hands on a gfx camera!
I suppose you could get some interesting results. We also make these for select full frame cameras as well.
Will this fit my Chamonix 45N-2?
How well with this work with portraits of people? All the examples in the video are landscape shots.
Because you're stitching up to three photos together, you have to either make sure your model is very still if they're halfway between two photos, or frame them in one of the photos so they don't end up in a stitch.
@@FotodioxInc Thank you.
I have a Wista 45 field camera. Is there any focal length that would work with the adapter and GFX50R?
We can't say for sure, but anything over 200mm will give you a better shot at infinity focus. Or you can experiment with a wider lens if you have a recessed lens board that gets the lens closer into the camera body.
Was hoping I could get some lens insight from anyone. I am trying this product with my Horseman L45 with a Fujinon W. 5.6/125mm lens. I can only get really close objects in focus, anything farther than 2ft, I can't get in focus, any ideas?
Unfortunately with wider lenses you need to have the sensor right at the film plane to focus to infinity, and since you can't do that with this adapter--the adapter sets the sensor back beyond the film plane of the camera--you can only get infinity focus with longer lenses, starting at around 150-200mm.
How much of a difference is it to just pan the camera, as in a bokeh panoramic?
It's two very different styles of photography. When you move your camera around and take many photos and stitch them together, you're stitching many photos together from various lens positions. With our 4x5 adapter you're capturing multiple photos of one lens's image circle that's locked down, composed and focused, so it's more like turning the camera's sensor into a large format digital back.
@@FotodioxInc both require panning either the body or the lens, and stitching the resulting images, and for anything more than a few feet away where parallax would interrupt the image, I can’t think of how these images couldn’t be capture the same way with less effort using just a lens and a tripod. Would you say there is effectively no difference between panning a camera/lens and adapting it if you place the fulcrum at the point of convergence?
@@benlemenager7388 You understand that capturing the image circle of a large format lens is different than moving a full frame lens around to different spots and stitching them together, right? One is capturing the view camera's look, getting a look similar to what you'd get with a 4x5 sheet of film in that camera, while the other is capturing a small sensor camera's look from different positions and stitching them together to create something that looks more like large format. I'm not saying one is better than the other, what I am saying is they do get you different looks. We made this adapter for people who want to breathe new life into old view cameras or who shoot film in view cameras and want a digital option too. It's not designed to replace the Brenizer method or any new kind of photo stitching with digital cameras. Think of it like putting a newer engine in a vintage car. Could you get a more efficient car if you bought a new car? Yes. But people don't restore and drive old cars for the efficiency, and it's the same with people who use older cameras and adapters.
@@FotodioxInc ah, let me just say I very do appreciate the adaption and modification of cameras and lenses and have used fotodiox for this purpose. Also as a gfx owner and operate a studio that uses the gfx platform for our work, I’m very interested in this type of adaption. I would be interested in purchasing new baffle cameras if this could prove to be a better end result than just stitching images of the same focal length using a properly aligned pan/tilt head. Do you have side by side comparisons, or a way to see the differences between using this and just stitching?
DOES NOT PRODUCE A SHARP IMAGE.
sad.
Depends on what aperture, camera movement and focus settings you use. Depends on if you want a sharp image or not.