gdanmitchell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.16 #4 · Adapting Lenses to the Fuji GFX | |
Since it is a really cold morning here in the Sierra foothills, and this warm cabin is so inviting when it is a bit lower than 20 degrees outside, and I have a cup of coffee on the table next to my computer... I'll reply before I put all of my warm clothes on and head down to photograph a cold winter day in Yosemite Valley. Lucky me! :-)
- - -
Sauseschritt wrote:
I dont really get the hostility in this thread ... I was merely stating for what I would want the GFX.
If thats somehow offensive then I'm sorry.
The "hostility" over camera format discussions baffled me, too. Too many go straight to ad hominem attacks as soon as anything less that effusive, unquestioning praise for their favored format (of all things!) is mentioned. (In the time it took me to type this, I see that another one jumped in to prove my point.)
Your post asked questions about some things that I've thought and written about and was in response to one of my earlier posts. But sometimes I'm unsure if a responder's message is actually a request for me to try to answer their questions or is more of a general post.
In the former case, I would offer a response. In the latter I might not. I was just wondering if yours were questions you were asking me to reply to, or if they were more general questions that don't warrant a specific response.
To clarify my general view at the current time — which is often either misunderstood or willfully misrepresented by some here at FM — I'm very interested in the miniMF 33x44 format, and I've been looking at it since the time that the Pentax 645d was first released, and considering it more seriously since Pentax updated that to the 645z, with essentially the same sensor as the GFX.
There are many things about miniMF that appeal to me: I prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio in much of my photography. A portion of my landscape photography would be suitable to the miniMF cameras. The larger sensor can provide some image quality advantages over the full frame system I currently use.
There are many things that I have considered in regard to deciding when and if I might acquire a miniMF system. They include: the quality obtainable from my current system, the kinds of photography I do, the increment of the image quality differences as seen in large prints, the financial costs, the availability (or lack thereof) of types of lenses that I rely on in my work, how the miniMF system would fit into the larger set of systems I use for my photography.
I remain intrigued, but for my own photography I'm unconvinced at this time that the pluses of miniMF outweigh the minuses for me and my photography. I've explained my thinking extensively here and at my website, so I won't recap all of it here.
I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that the GFX is anything buy a fine camera. My experience with it demonstrated that it can produce excellent image quality and that it is a well-designed and very functional camera. (Functionally, it reminded me a great deal of my other Fujifilm cameras, which I rely on heavily in parts of my photography.)
I remain interested. Things that are likely to increase my interest to the point that I might well acquire a miniMF system like the GFX include:
- introduction of a sensor that significantly surpasses the pixel resolution of full frame systems.
- introduction of native Fujifilm lenses that meet some of my needs not met by currently-available lenses.
- improvements in the AF performance of Fujifilm 1.5x cropped sensor bodies to the point that they could become my primary cameras for my wildlife photography, making it less necessary for me to continue to use a DSLR. (E.g. — moving to a Fujifilm-only system with a 1.5x smaller system for most handheld work and a miniMF system for most tripod-based work.)
It is possible for skillful, talented, smart photographers to come to more than one conclusion about the value of current miniMF systems for their photography. I have friends who use 33x44 sensor miniMF systems. (They moved down to miniMF from old-school MF and from LF film, and they feel that the quality of miniMF doesn't leave much "on the table" by comparison to what they had been using, while offering some functional advantages. They also all use FF systems.) Many others continue to use a range of FF systems from all of the vendors you can think of. Many of us also incorporate smaller sensor systems into our photography. Thus...
YMMV,
Dan
- - -
BTW: One way to deal with forum trolls is the hide me link. You can still see their post if you wish, but it is a constant reminder that replying to their insulting, demeaning posts isn't worth your time.
molson's post is hidden · Show · Unhide member · Unhide all · Hidden list
And – not writing to Sauseschritt here! — any others in the forum find themselves so angered by the mere presence of my posts that they are unable to suppress their instinct to hurl more invective... why don't you guys hide me? It will be good for your blood pressure. It will be good for the overall civility of the forum. My feelings won't be hurt. Try it.
|
