Fuji GFX 50s
After the recent announcement about Fuji's medium format mirrorless camera, I am wondering what opinions exist...
By virtue of sensor size, I expect that image quality will be "better" than most current FF cameras - and I hope the GFX 50s will prove beneficial/useful for pro-level travel, street/reportage and fine art photography.
However, with the A7rii currently available (I already own 35mm and Hasselblad V system lenses) - I'm wondering if the wait, unknown cost and inevitable difference in size and weight will be beneficial...
By virtue of sensor size, I expect that image quality will be "better" than most current FF cameras - and I hope the GFX 50s will prove beneficial/useful for pro-level travel, street/reportage and fine art photography.
However, with the A7rii currently available (I already own 35mm and Hasselblad V system lenses) - I'm wondering if the wait, unknown cost and inevitable difference in size and weight will be beneficial...
In the film days people would choose medium format when they were chasing high image quality.
Digital it means of course a bigger sensor, more light, better signal to noise ratio, possible to have larger pixels and a cleaner image. I'd be interested to see how good it is.
I certainly see a difference between MFT and full-frame (35mm) but the gains are less apparent when comparing APS-C and full-frame.
Digital it means of course a bigger sensor, more light, better signal to noise ratio, possible to have larger pixels and a cleaner image. I'd be interested to see how good it is.
I certainly see a difference between MFT and full-frame (35mm) but the gains are less apparent when comparing APS-C and full-frame.
People still choose medium format that takes film.
Really interested to see the pricing - I could be interested at some point. I read that Fuji said it will be 'a lot less than 10,000 dollars', which i guess is the benchmark. It's closest rival in concept is the Hasselblad X1D (about £7k without lens, nearly £11k with), and I guess the cheapest complete system is Pentax 645 (£7k) - interesting to see if it's significantly cheaper than that.
My interpretation of the OP's comment 'However, with the A7rii currently available' is, is it relevant when high MP 35mm cameras exist. Well, I use a D800 (as well as MF film), and it doesn't matter whether a 35mm camera has 36, 50 or 150 mp, it's still a 35mm sensor, and will never truly replicate MF, because of physics, the fact that a MF camera uses longer lenses to achieve a given angle of view. You can get close, using fast lenses, cropping to 5:4, filmy processing, but MF does have a 'look', which isn't all about resolution. Of course the film itself is part of the aesthetic equation, and I would like to see a camera that gets the colours, skin tones, softness with detail right as much as pure mp. A lot of people are turning - and returning - to film, expecially MF, partly because of retro fashion and tangiability, but also because of the aesthetics. If a MF camera can be as affordable as a decent DSLR system, and deliver truly film-like looks, it will do well I think.
When the Hasselblad was announced my first thought was 'digital Mamiya 7', but I think the Fuji has the potential to be that camera - at the right price.
My interpretation of the OP's comment 'However, with the A7rii currently available' is, is it relevant when high MP 35mm cameras exist. Well, I use a D800 (as well as MF film), and it doesn't matter whether a 35mm camera has 36, 50 or 150 mp, it's still a 35mm sensor, and will never truly replicate MF, because of physics, the fact that a MF camera uses longer lenses to achieve a given angle of view. You can get close, using fast lenses, cropping to 5:4, filmy processing, but MF does have a 'look', which isn't all about resolution. Of course the film itself is part of the aesthetic equation, and I would like to see a camera that gets the colours, skin tones, softness with detail right as much as pure mp. A lot of people are turning - and returning - to film, expecially MF, partly because of retro fashion and tangiability, but also because of the aesthetics. If a MF camera can be as affordable as a decent DSLR system, and deliver truly film-like looks, it will do well I think.
When the Hasselblad was announced my first thought was 'digital Mamiya 7', but I think the Fuji has the potential to be that camera - at the right price.
Let's wait and see. Even it if it is £7000 for the body it is expensive when lenses are added and probably out of reach of many of the readers on this forum 
The inevitable benefits are better colour separation, acutance and at high ISOs better noise performance.
As it is a camera more likely to be used on a tripod than smaller formats; by current standards it may not have particularly high ISO ability.
The inevitable benefits are better colour separation, acutance and at high ISOs better noise performance.
As it is a camera more likely to be used on a tripod than smaller formats; by current standards it may not have particularly high ISO ability.
There are some interesting comments in Amateur Photographer out today.
Fuji make the point a full frame camera would probably cannibalise what we have already done. This is probably a reference to the often relatively small to almost non-existent difference between their "DX" format and 24x36.
Fuji also made the point a larger sensor can be susceptible to mirror shock. While Fuji is not the only Mirrorless medium format camera; having tried to cut my teeth with a medium format Bronica for portrait work in the late1970s the point is very well made.
Fuji make the point a full frame camera would probably cannibalise what we have already done. This is probably a reference to the often relatively small to almost non-existent difference between their "DX" format and 24x36.
Fuji also made the point a larger sensor can be susceptible to mirror shock. While Fuji is not the only Mirrorless medium format camera; having tried to cut my teeth with a medium format Bronica for portrait work in the late1970s the point is very well made.
You don`t need mirrors in this day and age 
Quote:You don`t need mirrors in this day and age
That is a matter of opinion
I agree there is less need of a mirror on a camera likely to be used indoors or outdoors on a tripod such as medium format. However using something like Nikon auto AF in a very active subject area is substantially better through a viewfinder.
With an electronic viewfinder you can run out of mirrorless battery power before the action reaches a key stage,
Whilst the EVF may be slightly more battery draining it does give a more realistic view of the end product and that has to be welcomed.
A bit of sensible forward planning (e.g. an extra battery or two - AND changing it before the one in the camera runs out) should resolve any issues.
The use of 4K for action stills photography - and soon 6K (upcoming Panny GH5... rumoured) will doubtless increase.
A bit of sensible forward planning (e.g. an extra battery or two - AND changing it before the one in the camera runs out) should resolve any issues.
The use of 4K for action stills photography - and soon 6K (upcoming Panny GH5... rumoured) will doubtless increase.
Its a couple of years since this camera was discussed, I should imagine there are quite a few users by now. Would be interested to hear any user updates for the GFX - 50S, Currently I can purchase the camera and zoom lens for around £5500 would like some opinions, I would be using this piece of kit for Landscapes and some Portrait work only. My usual camera is the Canon 5D mk 4 the Fuji is roughly the same size and weight.
