The GF 30mm F3.5 R WR is a wide angle prime lens for Fujifilm's medium format GFX system, with a focal length equivalent to 24mm on full frame. It offers impressive sharpness, but not without a few compromises. Watch our review to learn more.
Are these comments moderated? I wrote a post an hour ago complaining about the rampant and pathetic Troooolling by clueless anti-Fuji, anti-GFX and anti-MF opinion posters here on these comments but I don't see it. I wonder if any of you have even sniffed GFX much less shot it. Stick to commenting on equipment you own and shoot. That's what I do. Maybe DPR blocks posts that use the word trooooooooll. But these review and news comments can't be moderated. If they were, most of these comments would be deleted immediately they are so obviously ridiculous. But they are funny, even as pathetic as they are. 😁 Thanks Chris for another good video overview. Great job. Lens ordered, even though I agree with you that I have it covered with the GF 32-64.
I wanted to check if I'm biased, so I started counting: 25 out of 40 images in this album are high dynamic range with a dark foreground in front of either bright dappled light or bright sky, often looking right into the sun. Compared to 6 out of 70 images in the Canon R6 gallery, which is vastly dominated by sun-from-side or sun-in-back images (as of today, I know images get added over time). I'm all for pushing gear to the limit on a test site but you really really really need to standardize your galleries in order to avoid giving a false impression of the gear you review and protect your reputation from accusations of bias.
Shooting into the sun > 50% of the time still creates the impression that colors tend to be washed out and flare is a common problem, even in a lens test. Just look through the comments to confirm. I'm not seeing the same ratio of challenging images across the board in other galleries, and correspondingly the forums under those galleries don't discuss flare nearly as much. As in any market, perception is reality.
If your serious about buying the camera and lens it’s a great idea to do your research, you know when you see a real pro photographers mind blowing images and you realize they were captured on a camera lens combo you had just read a review that said the combo was terrible.
I wish there had been some discussion of distortion. Hard to tell from the posted images, but we know the 32-64 suffers from uncorrectable “mustache” distortions at the wide end... as an owner of that lens, my only interest in the 30mm would be if those distortions were well controlled. Lens reviews that don’t talk about distortion are incomplete. How bout including that metric in your reviews from now on, guys?
Hahaha you may not be too wrong. As someone who enjoys the craft, it's a constant struggle to tell myself that I'm way more limited by my ability than my gear. Recently tried to take a macro shot of a flower in a vase with a perfectly good setup and to my chagrin learned that my building is constantly moving from someone's washing machine or from traffic nearby, so I have to freeze the tiny motions of the flower on its stalk by using flash if I want sharp images. Nothing to do with my gear, everything to do with my lack of knowledge...
On guy posted this whole system just doesn’t have that “Medium Format Feel or Look “ . I think it does but to a lesser degree and that’s probably because it is a smallish medium format sensor? Maybe? From what I’ve seen the photos that is , I get a feel of “normalcy “ and it’s an almost normal feel . Medium format photos usually give me that feeling that things are of normal proportion , a feeling of comfort maybe. I don’t quite get that feeling with this particular lens . I feel a little stretch from this 30mm . I think the whole larger format look and feel is being able to go wider and not have as much of the distortion that a wider lens creates. But on the same note I think the “new” super corrected and super flat , sharp across the fov takes away the 3d pop feel . This is even with the new ff lenses, we are loosing the natural feeling or organic feeling. We will get used to this and the younger people already look , see , and feel, this and it is normal to them .
I think you would be challenged to prove that there is a large format look. You're doing nothing more than repeating fanciful BS terms with "3D pop" and "organic" and "natural".
Stevo23 yes in a way I am for sure repeating that . I guess what I’m saying is I do not get that feeling from this lens and camera combo . The new 50mm f/3.5 has that feel a little more for me . Overall I don’t get that as you say BS from this system. I do love the system and if I could afford it I’d buy into this GFX 100 and the lenses
NatuRaOx2 you describe well how I feel about "real" MF. I've also been trying to figure out what it is and put words to it. There is I think an element of better photographers using MF, I've seen files pp'd to death where they start looking like apsc. So I don't think you can expect the results from random test shots.
MF can create a naturally soft and airy look barely achievable on smaller formats. Short tele lenses on smaller formats can get close but with tighter crop so the view feels less generous. Perhaps thats why you like the 50? My guess is that its mostly to do with the tolerances, optics and manufacture of the lenses. It you look at smaller and smaller sensors the images get more and more "crunched up". It can even be detected in ff apsc comparisons.
@Miki - With a Canon or Nikon full frame I can easily beat the GFX on 3D Pop using a 35/1.4 or 35/1.2. With a Fuji S5 Pro crop camera I can usually beat the GFX for pop with as little as an f/2.8 lens.
Hmm, so this lens practically from FoV and DoF perspective is the same as a 24mm f2.8 I used to have a $1300 Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 but I was about to get an even faster one a $1400 24f1.4 GM A GFX 50s is $5500 an A7riv is $3500. So for the price of a gfx 50s I could buy an a7riv with 24GM and I’d get two stops shallower DOF, which is undeniably the most important characteristic of medium format look. I used to have an RZ67 for years I have experience with what I felt when I looked down in the chimney of the mamiya.
You have to distinguish geometric distortion (stretching in rectilinear wide angles) from lens characteristics (barrel/pincushion/mustache distortion and field curvature) if you want to have a meaningful discussion.
I disagree. I traded my Nikon D850 for a GFX-50R and single 50mm f3.5 lens. I'm much happier with it despite what seems like a limited lens. Files are superior to the D850 and the lens kills Nikkor G lenses
It is a fine lens, and its sharp. But... the thing with the whole GFX system is that it lacks that 'Medium Format' feel. It is just not there in any of these images and it is missing in every single image I have seen from the GFX so far. The only lens that comes close is the 110mm f2.0.
The classic standard lens for Hasselblad is the 80mm f2.8 and all pictures taken with it look ”medium format”. My Fuji 35mm 1.4 roughly gives the same field of view and depth of field but do not look ”medium format” at all.
It is not only about isolating the subject that creates that look.
You are saying that only super fast lenses give the medium format look, I gave you an example of one of the classic lenses for Hasselblad and it is f2.8, which is a legend. Again, same field of view and shallow DoF as my Fuji 35mm f1.4.
@Foskito But explain to me what that "MF look" is that is so different.
Obviously there are some things contributing like aspect ratio and high resolution. But those can be achieved in many systems now. What else makes up that MF look you think you cannot replicate?
I am not saying super fast lenses would give that feeling.
The problem with the GFX imho is twofold: Sensor size of the GFX is not distinctive enough from FF. It is only slightly larger as FF and therewith FOV and DOF is only 2/3rd stop different. This is why the perceived difference between these two sensor formats is negligble.
This together with the current line-up of slow lenses makes this camera feel boring in its image output and makes the images not look any different from FF.
If you have ever shot true medium format 4x5 or 5x7 you know that an f3.5 looks much different on those cameras than an F3.5 used on the GFX.
I find it funny that people believe that 2/3 stop difference is negligible, but add 1/3 more stop and those same people think full frame is a lot better than APSC.
DarnGood - FYI that difference is also not that big, but the funny part is though that the step from APS-C towards FF is indeed larger than it is from FF to Mini Medium Format GFX. Another fact is that you can get faster lenses for these cameras than you can get for APS-C. And if we are talking Fujifilm X-Series f2 or f1.4 is still relatively slow if one takes equivalence into account.
Now only if Fujifilm used a true medium format sensor size, that would have made a difference. But Fujifilm went cheap and wanted to make sure that they could charge a premium for the lowest cost 'large' format sensor they could get.
The entry level GFX is still 3x higher priced as an entry level FF camera these days, while that entry level FF camera even has more features and faster AF. Also the GFX lenses are pretty high priced compared to equivalent 35mm lenses.
Weird that FF owners get so antsy about the GFX because its sensor is "only" 70% larger than theirs. They convince themselves they can't see any difference , as much out of a fear their purchase decisions are not validated as much as anything else.
And yet they so often declare their superiority over sensors smaller than theirs.
Bottom line - GFX ( and Hasselblad X1D ) sensor can in circumstances that matter to some people, produce a more pleasing file. Thats it.
People either appreciate the difference or they don't.
As for me, I prefer MF film anyway so I have no horse in this race.
Or its the other way around and some GFX owners have buyers regret. You seem to be easily stepped on your toes when people tell you the difference in perception is negligible.
No wonder, because you pay three times the price for a camera that doesn't make any difference in IQ. - Oh wait of course GFX owners see the difference ;) But I'll bet you can't tell the difference in a blind test though. The funny part is you know it too, but will always tell me you can.
Whenever I see a photo book that has stunning medium and large format lenses they are never shot at 1.8 and never have bokeh. The MF look to me is usually large DOF with staggering fine detail and IQ that in print form is immersive.
"Weird that FF owners get so antsy about the GFX because its sensor is "only" 70% larger than theirs. They convince themselves they can't see any difference... And yet they so often declare their superiority over sensors smaller than theirs."
That statement is 100% correct.
In my last travel, I took the M9 with a (borrowed) $4500 28mm f2 ASPH, along with my Fuji X-T3 plus its fast primes. I carefully process the files with Capture One and I need to check the EXIF data to see which camera took each picture, I love the look from all.
Most cameras paired with good lenses deliver great results, it is more about enjoying the gear, that's why my Sony A7Rii is eating dust somewhere in the house. I don't buy the sensor size superiority.
Things like the more we square AR (specially for shots in portrait) and a more deliberate approach can play a role... I'm hardly an expert since I've mostly shot smaller formats, but once you get up there in res/MPs it seems you need pretty good glass and discipline... I'm not sure everyone shooting higher res FF bodies is getting the most out of them...
All that being said, I don't see what's wrong with any system having lens options that allow it to further scale up/down rather than just fitting one mold or a narrow(er) performance envelope that some users think the system should stick to.
I could get an R body with a slow zoom for the same money I paid for my new Fuji X-T3 plus the kit zoom and 5 fast primes, all-metal, with aperture rings, and excellent glass. I know if I want to see a real "upgrade" in IQ, I need to invest not only in the camera but also in those stunning L-lenses, which each one goes for like $2500. A full-frame camera with mediocre lenses offers zero advantage vs an high-end APS with good glass.
The images from the GFX100 are better compared with an FF body like an A7RIV but the GFX50R does not have that superiority.
MF look ? Is there a MF look? It's just the focal lenght and f-stop that gives the look and the rendering if the lens and camera.
Anyway the GFX100 is easily beaten by real MF like a Phase One but it's also a completely different world.
I am a bit in love with the GFX100 but can't afford it and will for practical reason never get one. The body and lenses are simply to large. I much prefer the small Sony A7 and A9 cameras. They also have a plethora of lenses available.
I wouldn't say a Phase One "easily beats" the GFX100.
Phase One cameras are not portable and are confined pretty much to studio work. Take them outside and the GFX will shine. (Besides, the Phase One 150MP costs like 55 grand)
Agree that the 50R offers little superiority -if any- to a high-res full-frame camera, in my case APS and FF cameras are good enough for any need I might have. But...
I would LOVE to have a Hasselblad 907X. What a beauty.
@DBHC The images from GFX100 are better compared to the files from A7R IV, although they share the same sensor with same size pixel pitch, just a smaller sensor. But I still prefer the 50S files over the A7R IV files. The files are sharper, tonal gradation is better, the overall clean and detailed look, that I do not get from the A7R IV files. GFX 50S/R doesn't even compete with A7R IV in terms of feature. A7R IV is amazing, but when it comes to the files, 50S/R is still better. If you process the files in PS or LR, you will see how much you can push them before degrading the image quality.
GFX 100 actually can be quite tough to beat, because PhaseOne glasses are so old and can't resolve the details the sensor captures. Also PhaseOne is like 50K+ where GFX100 is below 10K.
Foskito - "Weird that GFX owners get so antsy about the Phase One. They convince themselves they can't see any difference... And yet they so often declare their superiority over the Phase One."
GFX can't compete to a sensor with a size of 52,4x40mm. Which is true medium format.
Nor can the GFX actually compete against 35mm when it comes down to performance if you take it outside.
GFX sensor size is a jack of all trades, but master of none.
Yes, the Phase One sensor is massive, "true medium format" well... MF starts at 6x4.5, maybe is semantics, but is the biggest digital sensor for commercial use.
The Phase One can't compete against the GFX when it comes down to performance if you take it outside. The point is that all cameras have a place and can be useful for what they are intended for.
I don't really understand why you'd make a video about this lens, given how tiny the target audience must be. Reviews of (relatively) affordable lenses for affordable systems would be far more impactful and greatly appreciated. Personally, a review of the Nikon 24-200 would be great.
@OOtollap: Isnt this selfishness of highest degree? Dpreview is a business that covers all aspect of photography regardless of market share or your individual preference. Not everyone shoots Nikon or Canon......There are other brands that caters for the market that you take no part of. Imagine one complaining about Nikon's reviews on here, howe would you feel? Vindicated? I bet!
It's not that much more expensive than current full frame systems tbh. If this were a car-review website, I'd get rather bored of reading about Toyotas all the time when one can dream of an Aston Martin or Lamborghini!
That being said, I agree with the other commenters saying that this lens just doesn't have the "medium format look"
Maybe you can get into the system cheaper but I'd say $10k for a GFX 100 is quite a different league than the $3-4k high-end FF. Pair the Sony a7r IV with the $1400 24mm f/1.4 GM and you got a very worthy 60 MP image with shallower depth of field for less than half of the body alone. But it's a bit like trying to measure the value of a formula one car, you could do the same lap half a minute slower for half the price. But that's not the point.
Reviewing "halo" camera systems is in some ways more interesting for a video, because so few of us are likely to buy into medium format or Leica - or even handle them in stores.
DPReviewTV is also a great way to create content for the site while journalists cannot travel, trade shows are cancelled, etc. You just need two guys to borrow a camera from the local camera store...
In all seriousness, Chris and Jordan seem to work at a pretty fast clip (certainly faster than the pace DPR has set for the more in depth written reviews), I don't see what the big deal is, they go thru loads of gear. A week or so ago they had a pretty good review of a Tamron superzoom that's about as mass market as it gets (for this shrinking market that's turning into a niche anyway), this week it's some MF unobtanium, you don't have to watch them all.
I would appreciate videos about how hard or easy it is with different bodies to switch back-and-forth between auto ISO aperture priority for natural light and full manual for flash photography, or between eye AF and single point AF, and similar real-world usability topics that actually impact my ability to capture a moment.
This lens is likely designed to resolve well over 400mp. At some point every modern optic would be diffraction limited. This lens might be already there.
@Jones Indiana We don't actually know the resolving power of the new lenses. At first Fuji did say that all lenses will be able to resolve 100MP, but then newer lenses came out, and some were resolving more details for example the 250mm. So we do not really know how much the newer lenses resolves.
A lens that is large, expensive, and with a slow aperture both in real and equivalent terms? ...
Well, that's probably worth it if the money was invested into a superb optical design, AF-drives etc.... But then why is the magnification so poor? One of the main advantages of short flange distance designs is amazing flexibility regarding close focus. Especially once you start using some of the modern AF technologies, like dual focus groups. So why is Fuji not emphasizing that on MF? They themself showed with the 16mm F1.4 in APS_C land what is possible regarding close focus
@NexUser You didn't understand my post. The question is why the close focus ability is missing. If you already take the design freedoms of large size, weight, price and conservative aperture you could at least make it a feature-complete lens
Doesn't a short MFD get progressively more challenging with larger formats? Or are larger format lenses generally just not great at that for other reasons?
Fujifilm's 30mm F3.5 R WR is a super sharp 24mm-equivalent lens for the company's GFX lineup of digital medium-format cameras. Is it good enough to warrant a place in your camera bag? Find out in our field review.
Sony has just released a trio of impressively small, light, ultrawide lenses for APS-C. These lenses are designed for vloggers, so Chris decided to film himself and find out how they perform.
The Fujifilm X-H2S is the company's latest APS-C flagship, using a 26MP Stacked CMOS sensor to deliver the fastest shooting, best autofocus and most extensive video specs of any X-series camera yet. Here's what's new and what we think so far...
How do you make weird lens even weirder? Put a periscope on it! We check out the new Laowa Periprobe 24mm F14 2X and explore some of the creative things you can do with such a bizarre lens.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
Most modern cameras will shoot video to one degree or another, but these are the ones we’d look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We’ve chosen cameras that can take great photos and make it easy to get great looking video, rather than being the ones you’d choose as a committed videographer.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
In our continuing series about each camera manufacturer's strengths and weakness, we turn our judgemental gaze to Leica. Cherished and derided in equal measure, what does Leica get right, and where can it improve?
A dental office, based in Germany, had a team of pilots create a mesmerizing FPV drone video to give prospective clients a behind-the-scenes look at the inner workings of their office.
Samsung has announced the ISOCELL HP3, a 200MP sensor with smaller pixels than Samsung's original HP1 sensor, resulting in an approximately 20 percent reduction in the size of the smartphone camera module.
Street photography enthusiast Rajat Srivastava was looking for a 75mm prime lens for his Leica M3. He found a rare SOM Berthiot cinema lens that had been converted from C mount to M mount, and after a day out shooting, Srivastava was hooked.
The lens comes in at an incredibly reasonable price point, complete with a stepping motor autofocus system and an onboard Micro USB port for updating firmware.
The new version of the Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K brings it much closer to the 6K Pro model, with the same battery, EVF but a new rear screen. New firmware for the whole PPC series brings enhanced image stabilization for Resolve users
The OM System 12-40mm F2.8 PRO II is an updated version of one of our favorite Olympus zoom lenses. Check out this ensemble gallery from our team, stretching from Washington's North Cascades National Park to rural England, to see how it performs.
The first preset, called 'Katen' or 'Summer Sky,' is designed to accentuate the summer weather for Pentax K-1, K-1 Mark II and K-3 Mark III DSLR cameras with the HD Pentax-D FA 21mm F2.4 ED Limited DC WR and HD Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited lenses attached.
As we continue to update our Buying Guides with the cameras we've recently reviewed, we've selected the Sony a7 IV as our pick for the best video camera for photographers. It's not the best video camera we've tested but it offers the strongest balance of video and stills capabilities.
For the next several weeks, many observers will be able to see Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn in the predawn sky with the naked eye. Of course, a camera with a telephoto lens or telescope attached will get you an even closer look.
The June 2022 Premiere Pro update adds a collection of new and improved features and performance upgrades, including a new Vertical Video workspace, improved H.264/HEVC encoding on Apple silicon and more.
Researchers at NVIDIA have created a new inverse rendering pipeline, 3D MoMa. It turns a series of images of a 2D object into a 3D object built upon a triangular mesh, allowing it to be used with a wide range of modeling tools and engines.
Light Lens Lab is a rather obscure optics company, but their manual lenses for Leica M-mount camera systems tend to offer a unique aesthetic at what usually ends up being reasonable price points.
We've updated our 'around $2000' buying guide, to include cameras such as the Sony a7 IV and OM System OM-1. We've concluded that the Sony does enough to edge-out our previous pick, the Canon EOS R6.
This compact shotgun microphone will convert the analog audio signal to digital internally before sending it as a digital signal to compatible MI Shoe cameras, such as the ZV-E10 and a7C.
In addition to the Amber and Blue versions, which give flares and highlights warm and cool tones, respectively, the new Silver Nanomorph option offers a more neutral flare that changes with the color temperature of the lights being used.
The organizers of the Bird Photographer of the Year competition have revealed the top finalists, showcasing the incredible photography of avian photographers from around the globe.
Both the 27" and 32" models use a 3,840 x 2,160 pixel IPS LCD panel that offers 98% DCI-P3 coverage and Pantone validation for accurate color representation.
A very special Leica camera just became the most expensive ever sold. Chris and Jordan were in Germany for the auction, and to tell you why this particular camera is so special.
As part of any mission to Mars, there will be garbage and discarded components. The Perseverance rover recently spotted a piece of trash, a bit of shiny thermal blanket. It's believed to be from Perseverance's landing operation, but it's not clear how it ended up where it did on the red planet.
Fujifilm has announced the Instax Mini Link 2 smartphone printer. The compact printer features new customizable frames, image modes and a feature called INSTAXAiR that lets you 'draw' designs onto your prints.
DxO has announced Nik Collection 5. The suite of eight plug-ins includes redesigned Color Efex and Analog Efex plug-ins, plus Viveza and Silver Efex, which were rebuilt last year.
Comments