vieri
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #10 · A landscape photographer's Hasselblad X1D review | |
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't think it is quite fair to say that the Hassy X lenses are smaller and lighter than the Fuji GF equivalents. In fact, there are no exact equivalents, but the closest exact equivalents are the Hassy XCD 65 f/2.8 and the Fuji GF 63 f/2.8 which are the same aperture and very nearly the same focal length. Here the Fuji is way smaller 405g vs. 727g and in fact this is by far the biggest discrepancy between any of the similar lenses. The second closest pairing is the Hassy XCD 120 f/3.5 Macro vs. the Fuji GF 120 f/4 Macro. Here the Hassy weighs 970g and the Fuji weighs 980g. Obviously the 10g difference is a very small difference, but given that the Hassy is a third of a stop faster this is win for the Hassy. The next closest pair is the Hassy XCD 45 f/3.5 which is 417g and the Fuji 45 f/2.8 which is 490g. I have a hard time calling this a win for the Hassy given that it is 2/3rd of a stop slower. The 73g for 2/3rds of a stop in aperture is actually a pretty small difference. Although I can see why a landscape photographer at this focal length would rather trade a bit smaller size for a slower aperture, lots of other people wouldn't. I know I would much prefer having a slightly heavier f/2.8 lens at this focal length than a slightly lighter f/3.5 lens. I don't think we can declare a winner here. The next closest comparison is the Hassy XCD 21 f/4 vs the Fuji 23 GF 23 f/4. Here the Hassy is a clear winner at 600g vs. the Fuji at 850g. Finally, the only sort of close other comparison that makes sense is the Hassy XCD 135 f/2.8 vs the Fuji GF 110 f/2. These are both portrait lens but differ significantly in both focal length and aperture. They are fairly close in weight, however, with the Hassy weighing a bit less at 935g vs. the Fuji at 1010g a difference of 75g.
What does this mean for weight of the two systems? Well, if you use the Fuji GFX 50r the cameras have quite similar weights but the Hassy wins by a small margin. Nevertheless is you look at a whole kit of comparable lenses, the big difference between the two most comparable lenses (i.e., the 65 f/2.8 and the 63 f/2.8) means that every kit that includes the normal lens (i.e., 65 and 63) and does not include the ultra wide angles (i.e., 21 and 23) the Fuji will weigh less than the Hassy.
So a 45, 63/65, 120 macro kit including the camera will weigh 2839g for Hassy and 2650g for the Fuji.
A 45, 63/65, portrait lens (135 for Hassy and 110 for Fuji) will weigh 2804g for the Hassy and 2680g for the Fuji.
A 45, 63/65, 120 macro, and portrait lens (135 for Hassy and 110 for Fuji) kit will weigh 3774 for the Hassy and 3760g for the Fuji.
I can certainly see why a landscape photographer who would see the ultra wide angle lens as essential would see the Hassy and being smaller, but the bottom line is that if you don't need that lens then the Hassy system is not smaller and even for the landscape photographer it is only smaller because the ultra wide angle lens is smaller. Right now with the current lenses available most people see the 23 as a pretty essential lens for the Fuji, but if Fuji would make a comparable lens to the Hassy 30 f/3.5 I think many people (I would be one of them) might forego the Fuji 23 for the 30 as their widest lens, and if Fuji makes that near the same size as the Hassy 30, then it will be even more clear the Hassy system is only smaller because its ultra wide angle lens is smaller and more people may well forgo that lens for the Fuji system.
Don't get me wrong. I think Hassy has picked a wonderful set of lenses (the only two I don't like are the 45 and 90 as I think they should have been made as faster lenses), and they have done a fantastic job of making very high performing lenses small even with the leaf shutters. Nevertheless, I think it is more accurate and fair to think of the Hassy system and the Fuji system if you pick the GFX 50r as being about the same size and which system wins the size comparison really depends on exactly which lenses you pick for each system....Show more →
Steve,
thank you for your comment. I stand by my numbers, which you confirm by the way saying that the 63/65 goes in favour of the Fuji, and all other comparisons in the review go in favour of the Hasselblad. More importantly, I stand by the statement of purpose at the beginning of the review: a review by a landscape photographer for landscape photographers. As I clearly stated in the article, if you do some other kind of photography your conclusions will likely be different, no problem there  I am not trying to convince you otherwise, and you'll not convince me otherwise, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I will enjoy the Hasselblad X1D, and you will enjoy the Fuji, that's the beauty of the times we live in: so much choice, and all great cameras to boot.
My numbers are in the review, no point in repeating them here, and they clearly show - with the lenses I picked for my work - that the Hassy is smaller and lighter than the Fuji. Numbers never lie Oh, and your ifs are very big ifs, and again very personal: i.e, you base a long reasoning on the eventual appearance of an eventual Fuji 30mm that would eventually make people forego the 23mm (why, that's totally mysterious) and therefore make the system lighter than the Hasselblad. Personally, I would NEVER forego the 21mm for the 30mm, in fact the 21mm is a big part of my reason to go for the Hasselblad; and I also have the 30mm, which I don't find at all an alternative to the 21/23mm but a complementary lens. So, as you can see, for the the Hasselblad will ALWAYS be lighter than the Fuji And, again, it all depends on your personal style and way of shooting.
Finally, I put numbers in the review for a reason: people can see the numbers and decide:
- They do what I do, with the same lenses: then the Hassy is lighter;
- They don't do what I do, but they can still use the numbers to make up their mind and go for the Fuji;
- Their lenses aren't mentioned in the review? Fine, but they got a method from it, which they can apply to their lenses of choice, exactly as you did.
So, overall I think the review is not only fair, but I also hope that it might be helpful in the way of showing a method to approach gear choice even for gear not mentioned in the review. Hope this helps, best regards
Vieri
|
