Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
chez wrote:
Well, if I can get the same quality of image out of an A7R2...why do I want to spend at least twice as much on the mini MF camera system? Ain't that the purpose of moving to MF...for the image quality. Sure ain't for the weight savings. Ain't for the cost savings. Ain't for the ergonomics. Ain't for the lens selection. Ain't for the flexibility.
If they all can produce stellar images...then I'll stick with the A7R(2) system.
Show me the money...where these new MF systems produce better results than can be obtained with the Nikon 810 or Sony A7R2.
Imo, the difference is going to be in the more relaxed drawing style that comes from the different optical design / projection path. I suspect that we won't be talking as much about corner fringing and kalari mods and soft corners, distortion issues, etc. in the UWA arena as much.
The concepts of "better" are subjective with regard to "better" @ what. Better corrected or just different with regard to transition rates, etc.
Also, the combination of detail and larger pixels has some potential merit for the right folks who desire its merits. Of course, +1 @ the proof will be in the pudding and we're gonna have to wait and see, but I suspect for those who are inclined to harness those diff's ... they'll be pleasantly rewarded. For others, simply pass on by.
And, while you have stated that it isn't for the ergonomics ... well, for some that WILL fit their hand better than other cameras with different ergonomics. I don't think you can universally dispel the ergonomics when it isn't your hand that is trying it on for size. Besides, compared to some of the other (larger than FF) camera's, it seems that it does have some relative reduction in size & weight as well. Different strokes for diff folks. Always has been, always will be.
As to the flexibility ... did you notice the technical adaptation capability and the portrait oriented tilting screen and the swivel viewfinder flexibility?
The other thing here is ... simply a matter of preference. Some folks like the Fuji glass rendering with a different approach than say Zeiss or Leica or Nikon or . The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.
Besides ... 3 FPS is "better" than 10 FPS. It makes you slow down and think more about what you're doing.
Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
chez wrote:
Well, if I can get the same quality of image out of an A7R2...why do I want to spend at least twice as much on the mini MF camera system? Ain't that the purpose of moving to MF...for the image quality. Sure ain't for the weight savings. Ain't for the cost savings. Ain't for the ergonomics. Ain't for the lens selection. Ain't for the flexibility.
If they all can produce stellar images...then I'll stick with the A7R(2) system.
Show me the money...where these new MF systems produce better results than can be obtained with the Nikon 810 or Sony A7R2.
Imo, the difference is going to be in the more relaxed drawing style that comes from the different optical design / projection path. I suspect that we won't be talking as much about corner fringing and kalari mods and soft corners, distortion issues, etc. in the UWA arena as much.
The concepts of "better" are subjective with regard to "better" @ what. Better corrected or just different with regard to transition rates, etc.
Also, the combination of detail and larger pixels has some potential merit for the right folks who desire its merits. Of course, the proof will be in the pudding and we're gonna have to wait and see, but I suspect for those who are inclined to harness those diff's ... they'll be pleasantly rewarded. For others, simply pass on by.
And, while you have stated that it isn't for the ergonomics ... well, for some that WILL fit their hand better than other cameras with different ergonomics. I don't think you can universally dispel the ergonomics when it isn't your hand that is trying it on for size. Besides, compared to some of the other (larger than FF) camera's, it seems that it does have some relative reduction in size & weight as well. Different strokes for diff folks. Always has been, always will be.
As to the flexibility ... did you notice the technical adaptation capability and the portrait oriented tilting screen and the swivel viewfinder flexibility?
The other thing here is ... simply a matter of preference. Some folks like the Fuji glass rendering with a different approach than say Zeiss or Leica or Nikon or . The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.
Besides ... 3 FPS is "better" than 10 FPS. It makes you slow down and think more about what you're doing.
Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
chez wrote:
Well, if I can get the same quality of image out of an A7R2...why do I want to spend at least twice as much on the mini MF camera system? Ain't that the purpose of moving to MF...for the image quality. Sure ain't for the weight savings. Ain't for the cost savings. Ain't for the ergonomics. Ain't for the lens selection. Ain't for the flexibility.
If they all can produce stellar images...then I'll stick with the A7R(2) system.
Show me the money...where these new MF systems produce better results than can be obtained with the Nikon 810 or Sony A7R2.
Imo, the difference is going to be in the more relaxed drawing style that comes from the different optical design / projection path. I suspect that we won't be talking as much about corner fringing and kalari mods and soft corners, distortion issues, etc. in the UWA arena as much.
The concepts of "better" are subjective with regard to "better" @ what. Better corrected or just different with regard to transition rates, etc.
Also, the combination of detail and larger pixels has some potential merit for the right folks who desire its merits. Of course, the proof will be in the pudding and we're gonna have to wait and see, but I suspect for those who are inclined to harness those diff's ... they'll be pleasantly rewarded. For others, simply pass on by.
And, while you have stated that it isn't for the ergonomics ... well, for some that WILL fit their hand better than other cameras with different ergonomics. I don't think you can universally dispel the ergonomics when it isn't your hand that is trying it on for size.
As to the flexibility ... did you notice the technical adaptation capability and the portrait oriented tilting screen and the swivel viewfinder.
The other thing here is ... simply a matter of preference. Some folks like the Fuji glass rendering with a different approach than say Zeiss or Leica or Nikon or . The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.
Besides ... 3 FPS is "better" than 10 FPS. It makes you slow down and think more about what you're doing.
Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
chez wrote:
Well, if I can get the same quality of image out of an A7R2...why do I want to spend at least twice as much on the mini MF camera system? Ain't that the purpose of moving to MF...for the image quality. Sure ain't for the weight savings. Ain't for the cost savings. Ain't for the ergonomics. Ain't for the lens selection. Ain't for the flexibility.
If they all can produce stellar images...then I'll stick with the A7R(2) system.
Show me the money...where these new MF systems produce better results than can be obtained with the Nikon 810 or Sony A7R2.
Imo, the difference is going to be in the more relaxed drawing style that comes from the different optical design / projection path. I suspect that we won't be talking as much about corner fringing and kalari mods and soft corners, distortion issues, etc. in the UWA arena as much.
The concepts of "better" are subjective with regard to "better" @ what. Better corrected or just different with regard to transition rates, etc.
Also, the combination of detail and larger pixels has some potential merit for the right folks who desire its merits. Of course, the proof will be in the pudding and we're gonna have to wait and see, but I suspect for those who are inclined to harness those diff's ... they'll be pleasantly rewarded. For others, simply pass on by.
And, while you have stated that it isn't for the ergonomics ... well, for some that WILL fit their hand better than other cameras with different ergonomics. I don't think you can universally dispel the ergonomics when it isn't your hand that is trying it on for size.
As to the flexibility ... did you notice the technical adaptation capability and the portrait oriented tilting screen and the swivel viewfinder.
The other thing here is ... simply a matter of preference. Some folks like the Fuji glass rendering with a different approach than say Zeiss or Leica or Nikon or . The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.
Re: Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499)
chez wrote:
Well, if I can get the same quality of image out of an A7R2...why do I want to spend at least twice as much on the mini MF camera system? Ain't that the purpose of moving to MF...for the image quality. Sure ain't for the weight savings. Ain't for the cost savings. Ain't for the ergonomics. Ain't for the lens selection. Ain't for the flexibility.
If they all can produce stellar images...then I'll stick with the A7R(2) system.
Show me the money...where these new MF systems produce better results than can be obtained with the Nikon 810 or Sony A7R2.
Imo, the difference is going to be in the more relaxed drawing style that comes from the different optical design / projection path. I suspect that we won't be talking as much about corner fringing and kalari mods and soft corners, distortion issues, etc. in the UWA arena as much.
The concepts of "better" are subjective with regard to "better" @ what. Better corrected or just different with regard to transition rates, etc.
Also, the combination of detail and larger pixels has some potential merit for the right folks who desire its merits. Of course, the proof will be in the pudding and we're gonna have to wait and see, but I suspect for those who are inclined to harness those diff's ... they'll be pleasantly rewarded. For others, simply pass on by.
And, while you have stated that it isn't for the ergonomics ... well, for some that WILL fit their hand better than other cameras with different ergonomics. I don't think you can universally dispel the ergonomics when it isn't your hand that is trying it on for size.
As to the flexibility ... did you notice the technical adpatation capability and the portrait oriented tilting screen and the swivel viewfinder.
The other thing here is ... simply a matter of preference. Some folks like the Fuji glass rendering with a different approach than say Zeiss or Leica or Nikon or . The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.
Jan 21, 2017 at 01:06 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #13887782 « Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499) »
. The one thing about Alt ... "better" is a misnomer that has folly implications. Different or preferred is really the order of the day whenever we are talking "Alt". What makes a diff for one person, may not make two hoots for another. So be it.