Have you read about Lloyd Chambers's continuing nightmare with this lens? (I think it is the 3rd sample a dud)
https://diglloyd.com/blog/2017/20170702_2202-FujifilmGFX-110f2-aseries-FaceInBoulder.html
Sounds like bad luck in the extreme. I have four GFX lenses: the 23, 63, 110, and 120. They are all very well assembled.
One would expect FujiFilm to make sure the lens was good, especially when shipping it to a respected reviewer who has been previously disappointed. This doesn't give potential new buyers confidence. I'm glad you haven't experienced problems.
Lloyd's lens could have been damaged in shipment. I think that the 110/2 is more fragile than most. When you roll the lens end to end, you can feel something heavy shift inside. That is probably the lens elements that are moved to focus the lens. I suspect that the lens uses a VCA for focusing and does not park the elements when the camera is turned off. If my guesses are right, this lens will need to be handled with care.
Jim
--
http://blog.kasson.com
In his prior experience with two other GFX 50 bodies, and also with the 63mm and 120mm lenses, he reported "erratic and highly variable auto focus," noisy focusing motors, and the need to magnify to ensure accurate focus. If this equipment is so fragile and prone to focus problems, it hardly qualifies as professional level in my view. I had been considering it as a serious upgrade candidate, but not any more. Again, I'm glad your components have worked out well for you.
I assume Lloyd Chambers (diglloyd.com link above) didn't buy his GFX and set of lenses - they were a loan from B&H.
B&H wouldn't loan anyone a brand new camera + lenses, they'd either be shop demonstration units, returned units, or perhaps open box. I suspect the GFX body he received had been returned to B&H after it had taken a tumble (maybe from a great height in bag). The returner didn't admit this, they just said the camera wasn't to their satisfaction. B&H checked it over, looked ok, so put it back on the conveyor belt of OB items (there are other scenarios, a fall from a 6m high B&H central warehouse shelf, from top of the delivery truck etc).
Then the B&H packer gets a note on his computer to send another GFX to Lloyd, they send the only returned/OB unit on the shelf - the same unit goes back to Lloyd.
The GF110mm was probably in the same scenario that took the fall. The GFX body + GF110mm 'fault' seems more likely to have occurred after it left the Fuji factory in Japan.
Ok so now Lloyd has been loaned a third GFX (probably actually the second if the above is true), this is the kind of GFX that all other GFX owners have - one that hasn't been involved in an accident. BTW this GFX is working fine for Lloyd.
He's also reviewed the GF23mm, this is what he says:
"The GF 23mm f/4 turns out to be rewarding, with a superlative performance. I have no hesitation in giving my highest recommendation to the GF 23mm f/4 —this is the lens that anchors the system in my view."
Sometimes one has to absorb things that are wrong and sort them out directly with the party involved. If someone bad mouths me (maybe unintentionally), I don't then announce that to everyone (and so magnify the situation and make it public), I have a private word with that someone [i.e. B&H or even Fuji, but more likely B&H). It's fine if LLoyd wants to report experiences immediately on his blog, but we the reader should read between the lines, not overreact, or at least wait until Lloyd has balanced his views.
The only 'negative' which I agree with him about it that the 63mm is more noisy to focus than most would like; for me this is 1 negative among 100 positives. There are many rumoured lenses to be added to the GF roadmap, the majority I expect will have quiet internal focusing linear-drive motors that users of the 23mm and 32-64mm are currently enjoying.
blog.kasson.com
