fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 … 21

23 … 85 86 end

Archive 2017 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

anselwannab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #1 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

hauxon wrote:
Fuji is just focused on size and weight I think. The 23/4 lens is exactly the lens I'd design for a system like this if someone asked me. A "tiny" portable ultra-wide that isn't any trouble putting in your backpack.

The theme is compact and I'm glad Fuji went that way. Faster, larger, heavier lenses may come later.

..and maybe the Otus lenses will adapt well to the system.

I agree. All that sensor real estate and pixels allowing you to shoot with wides, and still have good resolution of details. I'm thinking of it as an in close in street photography camera for getting immersive pictures. Printed big enough to feel like you are there.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:16 AM

naturephoto1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

edwardkaraa wrote:
So now, the question is Hasselblad or Fuji?

Hi Edward,

Well we suspect that the Fujifilm camera will be less costly and more adaptable to other makers lenses. I think that you would therefore know my preference and I would suspect that it minght be yours as well especially if you have or will be using any Leica R lenses for your SL.

Rich

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:17 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Edward,

Well we suspect that the Fujifilm camera will be less costly and more adaptable to other makers lenses. I think that you would therefore know my preference and I would suspect that it minght be yours as well especially if you have or will be using any Leica R lenses for your SL.

Rich

Hi Rich,

I sincerely don't know hence my question. I think the Hasselblad is more to my taste ergonomically but the Fuji wins the specs battle and is more affordable.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:29 AM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

edwardkaraa wrote:
So now, the question is Hasselblad or Fuji?

Fuji.

Like the body size of the Hasselblad, like the lenses and focal plane shutter of the Fuji more. The entry fee to Hasselblad's walled garden is just too high, even though a leaf shutter would be great to have.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:32 AM

jhinkey
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.22 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

Looks very very interesting and potentially luggable into the the mountains since the body and lenses seem to be weather resistant (never use the "proof" word . . ).
Always exceeding the dynamic range of my D800 or A7RII up in the mountains and more DR is always welcome.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:41 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

sflxn wrote:
If I were to guess, I'd say that full Fuji lineup would set someone back 25k. Maybe my FF setup will do just fine. Maybe I'll add an RX100 or LX10 instead.

. I do look forward to seeing photos from this camera.

This is sort of where I am at the moment.

Allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment.

I'm a very big Fujifilm camera fan, relying on the XPro2 (and formerly the XE1) for my primary street photograph and travel system. I understand and appreciate the benefits of medium format, including the "mini MF" 33mm x 44mm format of the Fujifilm camera. I'm very pleased to see the increasing availability and decreasing cost of good mini MF systems. I think the Fujifilm mini MF camera looks like a great camera, and seeing the "lens roadmap" (which worked so well for the x-trans cameras) gives me a great deal of confidence about where Fujifilm is going with this. A good portion of my photography is landscape photography and I print large... and this system should produce excellent results for that kind of work

The whole thing is very attractive and part of me would like this camera. But...

... I'm not going to jump on this, at least not yet. Here are some things that make me, for my particular use case, slow down a bit and ponder.

1. My 51MP full frame system can already produce very, very high quality large prints. Yes, there is a difference between photographs on a full frame sensor system and photographs made on the slightly larger mini-MF sensor cameras, but it is far less than some might think. (I've compared large prints from both, produced by a master printer.)

2. I rely on having a range of lenses for my landscape photography, which frequently is done with 24-70, 70-200, and 100-400 zooms, occasionally augmented by a 16-35mm zoom. This range of lenses is simply not available for this system at this point, and some such lenses may never be.

3. At a minimum, the mini MF system would augment ��not replace ��my versatile full frame system. This makes the acquisition of the mini MF system a lower priority than it might otherwise be.

4. While the cost, viewed from the mini MF frame, is reasonable... the actual cost of an entire system built around such a camera is not inconsequential. I'm not sure that the $25k estimate is quite necessary, but it won't be a lot less than that.

5. As fine an offering as this seems to be, I'm left wondering (aside from size) how it would be better than the Pentax 645z system, for which quite a few excellent lenses are available used and new. In terms of price, the Pentax body is available now for $7k.

Again, I think it looks like a great camera and, potentially, the foundation of a great system. But when I step back a bit and think about this rationally, I'm inclined to hold off.

YMMV,

Dan

Edited on Sep 20, 2016 at 09:44 AM · View previous versions

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:41 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

Matt Grum wrote:
Fuji.

Like the body size of the Hasselblad, like the lenses and focal plane shutter of the Fuji more. The entry fee to Hasselblad's walled garden is just too high, even though a leaf shutter would be great to have.

Agreed.

But most importantly, I would love to see how the lenses perform. I'm sure we will see that soon enough.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:43 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #8 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

I could see switching to this system in many ways but I want to test it first for sure. It would still give me the speed I need for certain things. I want a focal shutter too. Flash units today are all HSS so your not stuck with leaf shutters to fill flash outside. I'm doing it today with Sony so no big deal. Also you can adapt other lenses to it with adapters . It's a very interesting release from Fuji. Looking forward to its development

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:43 AM

MJKoski
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

For me, 645Z would be direct competitor against this Fuji system. But Fuji allows adaptability which is a big deal. Not yet decided but Fuji seems more reasonable.

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:48 AM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #10 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

speedgraphic wrote:
I see a big difference in quality when I jump from APS-C to FF, and you will see a similar quality boost from FF to this.

Not really. The jump from APS-C to Full Frame is a factor of 1.5x - 1.6x whereas the jump from Full Frame to 44x33 is only 1.22x - 1.38x (horizontal crop vs vertical crop), i.e. it's only about half as much.

speedgraphic wrote:
Then why aren't we all using micro 4/3rds?

Lack of equivalent lenses, lack of high resolution sensors. Equivalence eventually breaks down as it's impossible to make lenses faster than a certain f-stop using standard optical glass.

speedgraphic wrote:
Why do I ALWAYS prefer images that I shoot with my Pentax 67 and 105/2.4 over images from my 58/1.4? Smaller format images lack dimensionality, the shorter lenses flatten out your subject in rendering. That's why I can't get down with anything sub 35mm.

Shorter lenses don't flatten out the subject, rendering differences are due to different design philosophies rather than the format size itself. There are advantages when it comes to contrast and microcontrast with larger formats.

---------------------------------------------

zhangyue wrote:
You are right about it. I meant to mention 50mm is still 50mm lens no matter which format it is at.

That's both true, and almost completely meaningless

The focal length is the distance behind the rear principal plane that parallel rays are brought into focus. Unless you're a lens designer it's not much use knowing the focal length, except in conjunction with the sensor size...

---------------------------------------------

anselwannab wrote:
I can't figure it out, but is it physics that makes the FF lenses the optimum when it comes to size and speed- or is it just that there have been more lenses and development for that size?

Aps-c lenses aren't that much smaller, and they and the 4/3 lenses usually don't gain the f stop needed to keep the DOF the same. 'Medium format' and I'm using that term loosely, are bigger lenses and don't keep up in the F-stop. This sensor is bigger than FF, but it isn't th jump to 6x7/8 that we got in film.

It's not physics, it's just history, 35mm cameras were used in low light much more than medium format, hence there were a lot of fast lenses for 35mm. I don't know why APS-C lenses aren't smaller, perhaps they are if you do a true like for like comparison, and perhaps there are other factors such as sharing the mount and perhaps other parts with 35mm lenses...

There's also a weight issue which is why fast lenses for medium format are very rare.

---------------------------------------------

I'm now caught up with this thread

Sep 20, 2016 at 09:56 AM

Schlotkins
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

The issue for me is always the wide focal length. As a landscape shooter, 18mm is wide but often on FF people are shooting 14mm or at least 16mm.

Also, remember this sensor is getting pretty old in the tooth. I bet the D810 has as much dynamic range as this camera.

Chris

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:07 AM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

Schlotkins wrote:
The issue for me is always the wide focal length. As a landscape shooter, 18mm is wide but often on FF people are shooting 14mm or at least 16mm.

I see this a lot, but what sort of landscape shots are people shooting at 14mm on FF? It seems like you would get a huge amount of the ground by your feet, and the picturesque mountains in the distance would come out tiny!

I do almost all of my landscape photography at 35mm, 50mm or longer!

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:12 AM

Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.22 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

edwardkaraa wrote:
So now, the question is Hasselblad or Fuji?

Keep in mind that if you're going to be adapting any lenses you have no choice since the Hasselblad is leaf shutter only.

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:15 AM

edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

Lee Saxon wrote:
Keep in mind that if you're going to be adapting any lenses you have no choice since the Hasselblad is leaf shutter only.

Understood but my preference would be to use native lenses rather than adoptive ones

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:32 AM

freaklikeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #15 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

adamdewilde wrote:
WEIRD because when you look at the stock images it's not hot.
Which is what makes me think that the EVF is wireless.

But if you've seen the contacts in the video, then maybe the stock image just had the contacts photoshopped out for some reason? Or they shot a preproduction model for the stock imagery.

I have the feeling pretty much everything we're seeing is pre-production, including the samples people have been given to evaluate. Still, I'd be shocked if it ends up being a cold shoe.

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:41 AM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

edwardkaraa wrote:
So now, the question is Hasselblad or Fuji?

On paper, not having tried either, my bias would be for Fuji primarily due to lens adaptability (both MF and potentially some 35mm FF) and Fuji's lens roadmap. That they're apparently following their X mount rollout formula is reassuring.

But I do prefer the size and design of the Hasselblad...

It would be interesting to see a smart Canon EF lens adapter... Some of the lenses have a fairly large image circle. Obviously the TS-Es, but also some of the zooms at some focal lengths. For example, apparently the 16-35/4 is viable as a shift lens on some of the T/S adapters, once its rear internal baffling is removed, though not sure how usable image quality is outside the FF image circle.

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:41 AM

alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

Matt Grum wrote:
Sure, but if we make no assumptions (which is always safer) then you can't say that a lower ISO brings any image quality advantages.

That's the point I was trying to make. Most people tend to assume it would.

Of course. But you can't assume the lower ISO is the result of more selective CFA, deeper wells etc. therefore you shouldn't long for lower base ISOs (unless the ND filter thing is a really big deal for you), you should long for wider DR and better colour response!

Today, the least likely reason for a high base ISO is high sensitivity, because QE is about maxed out already.

Sep 20, 2016 at 10:47 AM

freaklikeme
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

gdanmitchell wrote:
5. As fine an offering as this seems to be, I'm left wondering (aside from size) how it would be better than the Pentax 645z system, for which quite a few excellent lenses are available used and new. In terms of price, the Pentax body is available now for $7k.

You do get rid of the mirror-slap. Despite Pentax's excellent MLU implementation, it would still be easier no to have to use it. It's not as big a deal if you never plan to use the camera handheld.

And while I like Pentax lenses, again, my feeling is that Fuji will do a better job with the glass. I also wouldn't underestimate the size advantage. From the looks of it, a 645z + 2 lenses will be about the same volume as the GFX + 3 to 4 lenses.

Finally, while it may not matter to you, the 645z is pretty much limited to Pentax and old Hassy V lenses. I'm guessing the adapter manufacturers are going to have a field day with the GFX's short register. Given that some of Canon's UWA zooms have proven useful on sensors this size, it wouldn't surprise me at all if someone came up with an EF to GFX adapter eventually. Many 16-35/4L rear shrouds will be popped off if that happens.

Sep 20, 2016 at 11:00 AM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

gdanmitchell wrote:
As fine an offering as this seems to be, I'm left wondering (aside from size) how it would be better than the Pentax 645z system, for which quite a few excellent lenses are available used and new. In terms of price, the Pentax body is available now for $7k.

I believe the Pentax 645 system lenses all cover the full 645 format, despite the fact the 645D and 645Z both use the smaller 44x33 sensor (which is more demanding on absolute resolving power). Fuji are designing a new system around the 44x33 sensor (from the images the mount looks too small to support a 645 sensor) and thus ought to be able to hit a better size/performance/price balance with the lenses (by not making the image circle larger than it needs to be).
Greater potential for adaptability. We'll have to see what adapters get made but I would definitely expect support for manual lenses from other mounts. And if someone makes an EF adapter with electronic control then there's Canon's 17mm TS-E which would not only cover the sensor, but by my calculations would still give you +/- 7.2mm vertical shift and +/- 5.8mm horizontal shift!
It's mirrorless, which aside from size, has other advantages such as no mirror slap, no need for AF calibration, EVF (with live exposure preview, and presumably magnified manual focus support).

Sep 20, 2016 at 11:01 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.22 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)

^^^

I get all of these points. But, while acknowledging that this looks like a really fine offering from Fujifilm (whose cameras I use and like a great deal), my overall point is about the whole package as used for particular purposes relative to the whole range of pluses and minuses, specifically for my photography.

Dan

Edited on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:14 PM · View previous versions

Sep 20, 2016 at 11:28 AM

1 2 3 … 21 22 23 … 85 86 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 21 22 23 … 85 86 end