fredmiranda.com
Login

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              77              79              85       86       end
  

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

  
 
flash
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #1 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Jeffrey wrote:
Pardon me for getting on this train a bit late. I can't read thru all 77 pages here, but what will this GFX-50S do for me that my Canon 5DSR will not? About the same pixel count. I love my XPro2's as well and trying to make sense if it all. Thanks.


More DR. Less noise. Smoother transitions. More colour depth. Plus all the advantages of a mirrorless camera over a DSLR and those of a larger sensor. Fuji colours and controls.

But the Canon has advantages too. More lenses. System flexibility. Cheaper. More battery life.

So there's a modest IQ bump on the Fuji versus the flexibility of the Canon.

Gordon



Mar 12, 2017 at 03:21 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #2 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Audii-Dudii wrote:
And for me, that is potentially its most significant drawback!

I already use long exposures for most of my photography and making them even longer still is problematic.

It's funny how that works sometimes, eh?


In most of those situation you can use one stop higher ISO and have fairly similar results or use a one stop less ND filter if you are using one and get the same results.



Mar 12, 2017 at 04:52 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #3 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Jeffrey wrote:
Pardon me for getting on this train a bit late. I can't read thru all 77 pages here, but what will this GFX-50S do for me that my Canon 5DSR will not? About the same pixel count. I love my XPro2's as well and trying to make sense if it all. Thanks.


One of the things I am going to use which isn't available (at least that I know of) on FF 35mm is lenses with leaf shutters and very fast flash sync speeds. These allow some creative use of flash outdoors with fast aperture. I also plan to use the GFX as a view camera with a Cambo Actus and large format lenses. This setup can be done on FF 35mm but there are some advantages of doing it on the GFX. Mainly that it is easy to get wide angle with lots of tilt and shift capabilities, but Canon has some mighty nice lenses for that so it isn't a huge advantage. Then you have everything that Gordon (aka, flash) mentioned. I am also an odd duck in that at least initially I won't be using any native lenses, but rather all adapted lenses. So there are some specific lenses I look forward to using with the GFX.



Mar 12, 2017 at 04:59 PM
Alex Phan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)



Jeffrey wrote:
Pardon me for getting on this train a bit late. I can't read thru all 77 pages here, but what will this GFX-50S do for me that my Canon 5DSR will not? About the same pixel count. I love my XPro2's as well and trying to make sense if it all. Thanks.


Just $10,000 up front investment for 1 body and 1 lens.



Mar 12, 2017 at 05:36 PM
Audii-Dudii
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Steve Spencer wrote:
In most of those situation you can use one stop higher ISO and have fairly similar results or use a one stop less ND filter if you are using one and get the same results.


For many, that will be true, but not for me, unfortunately. Where I live, for a large part of the year, it's a struggle to achieve decent IQ even at base ISO due to the ambient temperature (during the summer months, it can still be over 100 degrees at midnight, which wreaks considerable havoc on almost every digital camera's noise signature).

Plus, because I photograph mostly urban scenes, longer long-exposures provide many more opportunities for undesired elements -- cars, trains, airplanes, people with cell phones, et al -- to enter the frame during the exposure, forcing me to start over.

From the latter perspective, m4/3 is the best format for this type of photography (because I can achieve adequate DoF at f4 and shorten the length of my exposures accordingly) and medium-format the worst (because I often have to stop down to f11 to achieve adequate DoF without movements, which lengthens my exposures insufferably, sometimes out to as long as five or six minutes.)

From the former perspective, however, 35mm in the form of a Sony A7R (but not an A7RII, which is actually performs worse than an A7R for my purposes!) seems to be best compromise, at least as compared to previous generations of medium-format sensors. My P30+, for instance, cannot be used at anything but base ISO for an exposure longer than, say, 15 seconds, which occurs very rarely for my type of nighttime photography.

No doubt the GFX sensor and processing pipeline is many magnitudes better at handling noise than my venerable P30+, but factor in the summer heat and its compact form-factor (which potentially makes it more difficult to dissipate its self-generated heat) and well, I'll definitely need to try it before I buy it. <shrugs>

(Like you, I am very much an outlier in the way I use my cameras, because I similarly don't own a single native lens for any of my Sony or Fuji bodies.)



Mar 12, 2017 at 05:56 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Audii-Dudii wrote:
From the latter perspective, m4/3 is the best format for this type of photography (because I can achieve adequate DoF at f4 and shorten the length of my exposures accordingly) and medium-format the worst (because I often have to stop down to f11 to achieve adequate DoF without movements, which lengthens my exposures insufferably, sometimes out to as long as five or six minutes.)



When you are DOF and low light limited at the same time, the results are basically format-independent. For sensors of the same efficiency, you can raise the ISO 3 stops on the 44x33mm sensor at f/11 and not get any worse results than m4/3 at f/4. Of course they are not getting any better either. As long as the m4/3 gives you sufficient resolution and you are happy with the lenses, the format makes perfectly sense for DOF/low light limted photography.




Mar 13, 2017 at 02:45 AM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #7 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Dpreview has posted studio samples. Here are some comparison links, all at native resolution:

GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 100
GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 12,800



Mar 13, 2017 at 09:21 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #8 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


snapsy wrote:
Dpreview has posted studio samples. Here are some comparison links, all at native resolution



To me the results are extremely similar between the GFX and 5Ds, which is to be expected since they have the same number of megapixels and the size difference is relatively small.

The lenses used are making a much bigger difference - lots of purple fringing from the 85mm f/1.8 on the Canon, but much lower contrast near the edges and LaCA in the extreme corners from the 63mm f/2.8 on the GFX (which has a wider FOV and will thus probably be closer to its MFD).

High ISO looks better on the GFX... but they used a longer exposure (1/1250s at ISO6400 vs 1/2500s for the 5Ds) so it's not a fair test or representative actual use cases (there's no reason in the field to use a faster shutter speed for the same FOV with the 5Ds).

The correct test is the GFX at ISO 6400 vs the 5Ds at ISO 3200. When you do this the results are very similar.






Mar 13, 2017 at 11:29 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #9 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Matt Grum wrote:
That's correct, Fuji's ISO settings are different than others so we need to ensure the same exposure settings are used. Cannot judge by the ISO value from the different cameras.




Mar 13, 2017 at 11:43 AM
Schlotkins
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #10 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


snapsy wrote:
Dpreview has posted studio samples. Here are some comparison links, all at native resolution:

GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 100
GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 12,800


One place you can see a difference with the 5Ds is on the 3 person sticker (or whatever it is) just to the left of center. There is no details in the black of the guy on the left. Too bad Canon won't update the 5Ds this year with their new sensor tech.




Mar 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Schlotkins wrote:
One place you can see a difference with the 5Ds is on the 3 person sticker (or whatever it is) just to the left of center. There is no details in the black of the guy on the left. Too bad Canon won't update the 5Ds this year with their new sensor tech.



That's just too high contrast in the ACR profile used or the 5DS R . The detail is there in the blacks, I can see it by just cranking up the display brightness.



Mar 13, 2017 at 12:40 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Matt Grum wrote:
High ISO looks better on the GFX... but they used a longer exposure (1/1250s at ISO6400 vs 1/2500s for the 5Ds) so it's not a fair test or representative actual use cases (there's no reason in the field to use a faster shutter speed for the same FOV with the 5Ds).

The correct test is the GFX at ISO 6400 vs the 5Ds at ISO 3200. When you do this the results are very similar.



They uses f/5.6 for the Canon and f/8 for the GFX. That explains the difference in shutter speed and means that they don't use manufacturer ISO but some kind of corrected ISO, by applying exposure compensation to get the "correct" shutter speed.

It would be very strange if ISO 12800 wasn't better than the 5DS R here.


Edited on Mar 13, 2017 at 01:01 PM · View previous versions



Mar 13, 2017 at 12:45 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


alundeb wrote:
That's just too high contrast in the ACR profile used or the 5DS R . The detail is there in the blacks, I can see it by just cranking up the display brightness.


The original 5DS/R ACR/LR profile crushed blacks. Adobe updated with a version 2 profile last year. Probably DPR never updated their images with the new profile.



Mar 13, 2017 at 12:48 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


FYI, dpreview makes the raws available in that widget if anyone wants to PP to taste.


Mar 13, 2017 at 12:56 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #15 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Just for kicks, here's the GFX50S vs K1 with and without pixel shift for comparison:

GFX50S vs 5DSR vs K1, ISO 100



Mar 13, 2017 at 01:03 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


snapsy wrote:
Dpreview has posted studio samples. Here are some comparison links, all at native resolution:

GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 100
GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 12,800


Interestingly, the 5DS R looks sharper in those samples. Which is the total opposite of the results in this test: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-gfx/fuji-gfxA.HTM



Mar 13, 2017 at 02:14 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


Makten wrote:
Interestingly, the 5DS R looks sharper in those samples. Which is the total opposite of the results in this test: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-gfx/fuji-gfxA.HTM


Likely the effect of default sharpening applied to each. I would use the readability of the text panel within the test scene to distinguish acuity from sharpness. Here's a link I generated:

Text panel in dpreview comparison



Mar 13, 2017 at 02:18 PM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


alundeb wrote:
They uses f/5.6 for the Canon and f/8 for the GFX. That explains the difference in shutter speed and means that they don't use manufacturer ISO but some kind of corrected ISO, by applying exposure compensation to get the "correct" shutter speed.


But that's gimping the 5DsR unnecessarily, how you test has to match match how you shoot. If you need to use f/5.6 on the 5DsR to get sufficient DOF then you need to use f/8 on the GFX, however that doesn't mean you need to use a faster shutter speed on the 5DsR. And if you're not DOF limited you'll find the maximum aperture on the 5DsR to be at least a stop faster than the GFX.



Mar 13, 2017 at 04:44 PM
charles.K
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


snapsy wrote:
Dpreview has posted studio samples. Here are some comparison links, all at native resolution:

GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 100
GFX50S vs 5DSR vs 645Z vs A7rII, ISO 12,800


It always great to see comparisons from DPReview, but we are now entering into the realm of diminishing returns with high MP sensors and often the selection of lens, lens alignment, technique is so crucial and may explain the wider variances in bench tests. I even compared the D810 at 64 ISO, and it is surprisingly sharp when we compare at base ISO's.

These test results are significant in that for on screen comparisons there is difference but minimal. Of course when you process the RAW's yourself the malleability and feel of the RAW files of the Fuji and Pentax are definitely better. As mentioned before the cost, weight/size, ergonomics, lens selection, and photographic style will be more important for most of us.

In playing with the GFX 50S, the ergonomics and feel are excellent and more importantly the RAW files are superb. The RAW files feel and render very film like and it is quality I love, particularly for lower contrast portraits and landscapes. This is why I loved the A7s for the film like look. The D810 at base ISO of 64 is also superb. Truth is we have so many great options now

Edited on Mar 13, 2017 at 11:58 PM · View previous versions



Mar 13, 2017 at 10:40 PM
rbf_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.78 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)


charles.K wrote:
It always great to see comparisons from DPReview, but we are now entering into the realm of diminishing returns with high MP sensors and often the selection of lens, lens alignment, technique is so crucial and may explain the wider variances in bench tests. I even compared the D810 at 64 ISO, and it is surprisingly sharp when we compare at base ISO's.

These test results are significant in that for on screen comparisons there is difference is there but minimal. Of course when you process the RAW's yourself the malleability and feel of the RAW files of the Fuji and
...Show more

It's good to have lots of good choices even though it can be agonizing at times! I think the D810 still has the most DR if I recall correctly so it really depends on what set of features is most important to you




Mar 13, 2017 at 10:52 PM
1       2       3              77              79              85       86       end




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

1       2       3              77              79              85       86       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account