The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fuji GFX System

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
K-H
Have you gone to the fujirumors and fujinews sites to see the many videos of the cameras used by pros over the last 2 months? Many interesting videos.
Thanks Lou. No, I have not - but I should! :grin:

I should wait until this summer (or until Sony makes a move in the A9 direction) before I seriously consider the GFX.
At the moment I am busy with the Olympus E-M1.2+300/4 Pro+MC-14 to get ready for the migrating cranes overhead my house in late February and early March and the returning Hummingbirds and Turkey Vultures in April.

Also I should get my pre-ordered DJI Mavic Pro drone next month. With the many regulations and no-flight zones around here locally it will be a challenge to stay clear of any inadvertent violations. It looks like the free AirMap app should be a big help.

So Lou, what do you think of the GFX? Will that be in your future? TIA. :D
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well, if that's the case one might as well get the GF 120 macro lens which has IOS, AF and is Fuji glass and has LM and WR. The HC lens looks like a goner if I get the GFX system.
Im holding off for the GFX 110/2 but I did consider the HC 100/2.2 as it's an amazing lens. Perhaps I'd look at something in the 150mm or longer range from Hasselblad in a pinch.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Thanks Lou. No, I have not - but I should! :grin:

I should wait until this summer (or until Sony makes a move in the A9 direction) before I seriously consider the GFX.
At the moment I am busy with the Olympus E-M1.2+300/4 Pro+MC-14 to get ready for the migrating cranes overhead my house in late February and early March and the returning Hummingbirds and Turkey Vultures in April.

Also I should get my pre-ordered DJI Mavic Pro drone next month. With the many regulations and no-flight zones around here locally it will be a challenge to stay clear of any inadvertent violations. It looks like the free AirMap app should be a big help.

So Lou, what do you think of the GFX? Will that be in your future? TIA. :D
K-H

I just brought up those sites for informational purposes so that one might see what the new GFX contains versus our current tools and then be able to compare the GFX to any future tools we are contemplating.

I LOVE my XF+100 for landscape and specifically using it out your way. (Oh, by the way if you happen into the Leica Store Las Vegas take a look at my collection Leica selected called "My American South West") So after getting drenched during shooting of the Monsoon season over the Grand Canyon, I realized a true weather resistant (WR) MF system was in order. I had the Sony RX2R2 with me which I used when needed, but those images are so much different than the XF (of course) that I am yearning for a WR MF system to, in essence, first backup my XF system and second when I can no longer pay for a cherpa to carry that heavy system [joking as the cherpa is ME]), I want a lighter MF system I can use on its own without loosing my enthusiasm for hiking for photography.

Having sold my M & R gear I decided on the XT2. What a refreshing change for me. I am still getting use to its many advantages over the M (mainly super fast AF with no decernable lag/black out). I must say using C1 for those images makes life very easy. My familiarity with the Fuji menu system now makes me interested in the GFX more so than the X1D for the time being. Although like KR says in his X1D usage video, using the X1D with 3 or 4 lenses could be packed into a 10"x10" pack, peaks my interest in that system as that is my ultimate goal. I sure want Hasselblad to succeed.

For now I am studying both systems and seeing if more camera companies might enter the MF mirrorless market. If many manufacturers wait too long then many will have already decided on the mirrorless system they want and then moving to another brand will be fruitless unless something very different is announced which can justify the change. GAS is building. Exciting times for sure.
 

algrove

Well-known member
No it'll still be about a 118mm equivalent on the GFX the same as it would on the H6D-50. They have the same sensor sizes. The only lenses that are "different" are the HCD lenses that only have image circles large enough to cover the cropped MF sensors (like the 44x33 ones) and not the full frame MF ones.
Nelson
Did you happen to see digilloyds post on his blog on this exact same subject. For some reason he comes up with a totally different analysis. Wonder why/how?

FYI, the Hasselblad spec sheet shows they use a 37x49 sesnor size when converting the HC 150 lens to 35mm equivalent which gives them 110mm which is close to your analysis. Was this the sensor size the HC lenses were manufactured to?

I still say if that 110-118 range might be the equivalent on the GFX then getting the Fuji 120 macro is a better alternative than using the HC 150 since the Fuji lens has AF and weather resistance built in not to mention IOS. Plus the new 120 Fuji lens is $2600 versus a much higher priced HC 150n.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Nelson
Did you happen to see digilloyds post on his blog on this exact same subject. For some reason he comes up with a totally different analysis. Wonder why/how?

FYI, the Hasselblad spec sheet shows they use a 37x49 sesnor size when converting the HC 150 lens to 35mm equivalent which gives them 110mm which is close to your analysis. Was this the sensor size the HC lenses were manufactured to?

I still say if that 110-118 range might be the equivalent on the GFX then getting the Fuji 120 macro is a better alternative than using the HC 150 since the Fuji lens has AF and weather resistance built in not to mention IOS. Plus the new 120 Fuji lens is $2600 versus a much higher priced HC 150n.
The old Kodak sensor that Hasselblad used was a 48x36 sensor or so. That is a ~110mm equivalent since it was a 1.1x crop instead of the 1.3x crop. They went to a 44x33 crop with the CMOS sensor.
 

algrove

Well-known member
The old Kodak sensor that Hasselblad used was a 48x36 sensor or so. That is a ~110mm equivalent since it was a 1.1x crop instead of the 1.3x crop. They went to a 44x33 crop with the CMOS sensor.
Sorry to harp on this, but I just went to the Hasselblad User Guide for the H6D-50 and H6D-100. On page 11 of the User Guide , 1.2 General Specifications, line 4 it states for Lens Factor "HC-1.0, HCD-1.0". That surprised me and I cannot get through to any HB dealer or rep to verify this which would mean the HC 150 is still a 150 effective FL on the GFX when used with H Mount Adapter G.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Sorry to harp on this, but I just went to the Hasselblad User Guide for the H6D-50 and H6D-100. On page 11 of the User Guide , 1.2 General Specifications, line 4 it states for Lens Factor "HC-1.0, HCD-1.0". That surprised me and I cannot get through to any HB dealer or rep to verify this which would mean the HC 150 is still a 150 effective FL on the GFX when used with H Mount Adapter G.
It is. The FL doesn't change. It's sort of the same as a Canon EF and EF-S lenses. The focal lengths are the same but one is designed for cropped sensors and the others for FF.

HC = FF MF Compatible
HCD = Cropped MF compatible
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Sorry to harp on this, but I just went to the Hasselblad User Guide for the H6D-50 and H6D-100. On page 11 of the User Guide , 1.2 General Specifications, line 4 it states for Lens Factor "HC-1.0, HCD-1.0". That surprised me and I cannot get through to any HB dealer or rep to verify this which would mean the HC 150 is still a 150 effective FL on the GFX when used with H Mount Adapter G.
Focal length is focal length. Sensor does not change that.

Angle of view with be proportional to sensor diagonal, in this case 55mm. So a 150mm will be 2.7X normal or approximately a 115mm on 35mm or 200mm on a film 6x4.5 MF camera.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Have any XT-2 owners used the Lightroom Tethering Plug-in by chance? If so how stable is it and how does it compare to C1Pro? I don't expect P1/C1 to support (although if they change their policy then great and welcome to 2017) and frankly if this works fine I can just stop upgrading my C1 at this point as I don't believe in making my camera purchases solely around a RAW converter. Lightroom is good enough and with plug-ins from DXO, On1, Google Nik, etc. I feel it surpasses C1 in many areas.

https://creative.adobe.com/addons/products/16759#.WIREGLGZM_U
 

gmfotografie

Well-known member
the question is - is lightroom also fast as c1 --- c1 is actually realy a beast in tethered shooting.. lightroom always has bugs as i remember...

so i hope there is a good solution for studio photographers - as the fuji is more a camera for a dynamic shooting - i guess
 
the question is - is lightroom also fast as c1 --- c1 is actually realy a beast in tethered shooting.. lightroom always has bugs as i remember...

so i hope there is a good solution for studio photographers - as the fuji is more a camera for a dynamic shooting - i guess
If I had to guess, at launch the tethering solutions will not be as extensive as Phase One solutions. Fuji's dedication to making this happen will depend on the number of users who loudly ask for it. If your work relies on C1, your best bet is to stick with Phase. For my part, for the money, it would be worth adapting to another piece of software. Fuji can't make Phase use their file format, and Phase has little reason to support the GFX.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
If I had to guess, at launch the tethering solutions will not be as extensive as Phase One solutions. Fuji's dedication to making this happen will depend on the number of users who loudly ask for it. If your work relies on C1, your best bet is to stick with Phase. For my part, for the money, it would be worth adapting to another piece of software. Fuji can't make Phase use their file format, and Phase has little reason to support the GFX.
I think Phase has a huge reason to support the GFX and other MF cameras... Specifically entry level ones. Phase is never going to offer a fully featured sub-$10K camera as a new model. In some manner they will always cripple the budget model beyond sensor size and capability which is why people look at Pentax, Leica (now), Fuji (now), and Hasselblad. Most will never be able to justify or afford a $25k+ digital back or the $20K+ that you'd need to build a full kit but there are those that can make just enough of a sacrifice to afford an entry level model that does most things very well and allows one to shoot in just about any condition that advanced 35mm systems can shoot in as it applies to available light. Also some just don't want to be tied to Adobe or a subscription.
 
I think Phase has a huge reason to support the GFX and other MF cameras... Specifically entry level ones. Phase is never going to offer a fully featured sub-$10K camera as a new model. In some manner they will always cripple the budget model beyond sensor size and capability which is why people look at Pentax, Leica (now), Fuji (now), and Hasselblad. Most will never be able to justify or afford a $25k+ digital back or the $20K+ that you'd need to build a full kit but there are those that can make just enough of a sacrifice to afford an entry level model that does most things very well and allows one to shoot in just about any condition that advanced 35mm systems can shoot in as it applies to available light. Also some just don't want to be tied to Adobe or a subscription.
Not saying I specifically disagree with you, I'm just looking at it from Phase One's perspective. Frankly their products aren't much better than a cheaper Hasselblad or even Pentax (and theoretical GFX). Maybe they don't want anyone figuring out that the Pentax 645z (leaf shutter stuff notwithstanding) puts out as good a file or maybe better than any IQ250 back. Personally I think the only good reasons to use Phase equipment are largely workflow related. That's their biggest selling point to studios IMO. It sort of seem like their 'real' target market these days are not even conventional photographers. Many of the XFs feature sets benefit archivists and institutions more than the average photographer shooting table-top or on model fashion. They probably make the best backs for tech cams but man that's a shrinking market.

As for photogs not wanting Adobe...who are these people? I cannot imagine a professional photographer that does not have Photoshop or LR. It's not even that expensive! I got over the subscription model change real quick after I realized that I would have PS & LR for 10 bucks a month. That's a great deal. Hell even my current website is thru Adobe MyPortfolio which is included for free with CC.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Have any XT-2 owners used the Lightroom Tethering Plug-in by chance? If so how stable is it and how does it compare to C1Pro? I don't expect P1/C1 to support (although if they change their policy then great and welcome to 2017) and frankly if this works fine I can just stop upgrading my C1 at this point as I don't believe in making my camera purchases solely around a RAW converter. Lightroom is good enough and with plug-ins from DXO, On1, Google Nik, etc. I feel it surpasses C1 in many areas.

https://creative.adobe.com/addons/products/16759#.WIREGLGZM_U
Nelson
I have XT2, but use them outside so far mainly for street. Sorry. Plus I stopped using LR as soon as I got my XF.
 

algrove

Well-known member
Possible adapter for Contax 645 lenses with AF support by Fringer. Never heard of them, but bravo. I am waiting for Phase BL support.

This GFX system could end up being the Sony A7R system of the MF world as for adapting other MF lenses.
 

algrove

Well-known member
After using ES on my XF I do believe the GFX just might have the edge over the X1D for end user features.

The X1D looks better, but is that what's important in a photographic tool?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
After using ES on my XF I do believe the GFX just might have the edge over the X1D for end user features.

The X1D looks better, but is that what's important in a photographic tool?
I tend to agree and I think sometimes people focus too much on the idea of smaller/lighter being better for everyone. Smaller and lighter is fine but not at the expense of functionality and ability. The X1D is a beautifully crafted camera no doubt but I'm unsure that it's the right one for me at this time.
 

algrove

Well-known member
I see B&H now listed the GFX body availability as 1 March, but most lenses later in March. Is this the reverse of the X1D?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I see B&H now listed the GFX body availability as 1 March, but most lenses later in March. Is this the reverse of the X1D?
Might be the expected release dates of new preorders based upon existing ones and expected shipping quantities.
 
Top