p.9 #4 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Pavel wrote:
Kit; I'm trying to get myself to get where I can during from that same Holy Grail cup. I believe in it ... but why do I always stray and cheat with other lenses, other systems? This HAS to stop. Just .... which one IS the one true Grail?
p.9 #5 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
As I have said before, I think it comes down to aspect ratio preference. If, for example, one prefers 4:3 or even square then the difference between cropping FF35 to that aspect ratio vs either no crop or minimal crop is significant. This will make a difference with large prints in those aspect ratios.
+1 @ choping FF (36 x 24) down to 4:3 (32 x 24) vs. a native larger 4:3 (44 x 33) can have a diff @ essentially 2X the area. The underlying diff (math) will be in MP vs. pixel density options ... which can then show up in a variety of different manner. Also, shooting with a lens that is designed to have a larger image circle projects a different rendering regarding transition rate.
Combined, it can make a diff. For some, these diff's will be negligible to their style of shooting, while for others they will appreciate the diff.
p.9 #6 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
Pavel wrote:
Cartier Bresson? Had he shot leica, View Cameras, Polaroids, 35mm on sunday and 400 mm for birds on tuesday - There would be NO Bresson worth the remembering. Imho.
There isn't enough time to become great without willingly restricting ones discipline. Otherwise one risks staying a dilettante. (like me! )
With the possible exception of 400mm for birds, Ansel Adams shot all of those and more — 35mm, medium format, a wide variety of LF, and Polaroids.
I have yet to meet a photographer who decided, "If I'm to be great I must restrict the equipment I use," though a lot of folks who want to be photographers seem to interpret things that way. It is strange that we imagine things would work that way in photography when they don't much of anywhere else. What if someone said, "I need a vehicle to get into backcountry locations."? Would we say, "Get a Prius. By restricting yourself you'll be a much better driver!" (BTW: I own a Prius... and a 4WD vehicle for those places.)
Instead, every photographer I've met chooses the gear they chose because they like to use it and because it enables them to produce the work they want to produce. If they intend to do something that their current gear can't do, they quite often modify their gear in order to do it.
Having the capacity to make good photographs with less than ideal equipment is a good and even critical skill. Choosing to use tools that are inappropriate for the work you do is not such a great thing and I'm hard pressed to understand how that makes anyone's photography better.
(And, of course, this is most definitely not to suggest that an obsessive with acquiring get is a good thing. If anyone reads this post that way, they are misunderstanding.)
p.9 #10 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
carstenw wrote:
In other words, there are currently two...
Depends on what you call mirrorless. Leica rangefinders technically employ a mirror, and their live view implementation is not what many would call ideal. Also, their digital division sells a paltry number of units to millionaires and dentists. So actually, I should correct my statement, there is only one FF mirrorless camera maker for interchangeable lenses. Thanks for pointing this out.
p.9 #11 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
taran wrote:
Depends on what you call mirrorless. Leica rangefinders technically employ a mirror, and their live view implementation is not what many would call ideal. Also, their digital division sells a paltry number of units to millionaires and dentists. So actually, I should correct my statement, there is only one FF mirrorless camera maker for interchangeable lenses. Thanks for pointing this out.
Well Mr Sarcastic so you say a fixed mirror in M camera is the same as the moving mirror in a dslr? Sounds very weird to me. Anyway even if the M isn't mirrorless enough for you what about the Leica SL, how are you going to ignore it?
p.9 #12 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
joakim wrote:
Well Mr Sarcastic... how are you going to ignore it?
We don't need that kind of nastiness here. It drags down the quality of discussion in the forums. If you have a point, I'm sure you can make it in more objective terms minus the insult.
p.9 #13 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
joakim wrote:
Well Mr Sarcastic so you say a fixed mirror in M camera is the same as the moving mirror in a dslr? Sounds very weird to me. Anyway even if the M isn't mirrorless enough for you what about the Leica SL, how are you going to ignore it?
Of course you are right, forgot about that one. But again, the price does not make it accessible. Leica is Leica, is all I am saying. I'm glad they are around, because they are the only company whose feature set isn't dictated by Sony.
p.9 #14 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
I think a big factor lost in the discussions is not just about Fuji MF and the size of the sensor, but the ergonomics and haptics of the system with lenses. Systems as a whole have to work!
I do hope that Fuji follows a similar path as Hasselblad with a slim form factor, and the ergonomics similar to the XT2/XPro 2.
If there is a offering of a slim Fuji MF with 1 or 2 lenses that work well and priced competitively, I think I am in
p.9 #16 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
This rumor is why I have resisted being baited into buying the latest aps-c and FF equipment. For those who have the means to buy into a DMF camera, there will be regret buying new Sony FE lenses or the new Fuji X-T2 when a DMF from Fuji might be around the corner. I definitely do not want to spend anymore money this year or early next year till I see this Fuji DMF camera and the Sony A9.
I bet many of these GAS induced purchases of these new Zeiss lenses, Sony GM lenses, and Fuji X-T2 systems will be up on the FM B&S board if this Fuji DMF camera materializes.
p.9 #17 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
I also agree that Fuji's DMF camera success will depend on whether they go for the enlightened Hasselblad X1 route or the Pentax 645D/Leicas S route. Anyone looking to building a new system today must consider the vocal demands of users for small and light. The photo equipment market is shrinking way too fast to ignore such an important demand. I have a feeling Fuji will make the right choice. If they don't, I'm sure Sony will.
p.9 #18 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
sflxn wrote:
I also agree that Fuji's DMF camera success will depend on whether they go for the enlightened Hasselblad X1 route or the Pentax 645D/Leicas S route. Anyone looking to building a new system today must consider the vocal demands of users for small and light. The photo equipment market is shrinking way too fast to ignore such an important demand. I have a feeling Fuji will make the right choice. If they don't, I'm sure Sony will.
In reality, even within the small MF and mini MF market, the determination of which route is "enlightened," what the "right choice" is, and which demands are predominant is perhaps not quite as clear as you think. ;-)
p.9 #19 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
sflxn wrote:
I have a feeling Fuji will make the right choice. If they don't, I'm sure Sony will.
Sony already made the choice, by making the sensor, and offering for external sale. Everything Fuji does is dependent on Sony CMOS, same with Hasselblad. Neither company have the resources to develop the camera they are developing if Sony hadn't greenlighted it.
A Sony bean counter came up with a brilliant plan about 5 years ago.
1) Build a sensor and offer it as an exclusive to Leica.
2) Amortize costs by bringing on two more manufacturers (Hasselblad, Fuji), so Leica cannot claim dominance and because Sony has all its resources devoted to FF right now.
3) Develop a new MF sensor.
4) Package new sensor in an RX body and fracture the market.
5) Sell the original sensor to Fuji and Hasselblad because they can go nowhere else.
Repeat.
3,4,5 haven't happened yet. But I bet you the shorts I am wearing they will.
Not a bad strategy actually, the only problem is that all photography decisions you think are being made by Fuji and Hassy are actually made by a Sony accountant who's principle occupation is how to leverage their monopoly.
p.9 #20 · Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
gdanmitchell wrote:
In reality, even within the small MF and mini MF market, the determination of which route is "enlightened," what the "right choice" is, and which demands are predominant is perhaps not quite as clear as you think. ;-)
Dan
I don't think entry into this market is really meant to compete with the existing DMF market. It may feel like competition to cropped DMF equipment makers like Pentax and Leica. It feels like the creation of a new market, introducing more 35mm users to a somewhat approachable entry into medium format. If this market succeed, I don't think Fuji, Sony, and Hassy will attack FF DMF mirrorless. That market is too small and really don't appeal to the more mass market. I think with the way the photography equipment market is shrinking, there won't be many more avenues for expansion. This might be one of the last new viable market for equipment makers.
)