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 50s vs IQ150 ?
- Thread starter archivue
- Start date
voidshatter
Member
Not sure what you shoot and what's your shooting style!
GFX with GF lenses: small and light, with FPS and ES.
IQ150 with XF+ body: bulky and heavy, but leaf shutter supports decent flash sync speed.
GFX for technical camera: sensor cover glass "may" have an impact on smearing/astigmatism/curvature.
IQ150 for technical camera: about 100g lighter than the GFX as digital back alone, and proven performance.
GFX with GF lenses: small and light, with FPS and ES.
IQ150 with XF+ body: bulky and heavy, but leaf shutter supports decent flash sync speed.
GFX for technical camera: sensor cover glass "may" have an impact on smearing/astigmatism/curvature.
IQ150 for technical camera: about 100g lighter than the GFX as digital back alone, and proven performance.
In addition, it provides shutter for use on a view camera and compatibility with even UWA lenses (wider than ever) that will cause no color casts.
Of course the GFX will sync with leaf shutter lenses and Fuji representatives have mentioned that they'll come up with dedicated leaf shutter lenses at the future (other than the HC lenses that will work alreadt via the G to H adapter).
Looking at the two new mirrorless cameras I have just acquired a CFV-50c.
Primarily for the long term option of returning to an Alpa STC/SWA and
a couple of HR Rodies.
I do have a A7RII and Loxia lenses as a travel cam.
There are a lot of folks moving in the opposite direction ....
The CFV-50c will be swapped down the line for a larger sensor back.
Not a cheap alternative but it does allow a few more options.
And I never got over my 30 year love of the V cameras.
Bob
Primarily for the long term option of returning to an Alpa STC/SWA and
a couple of HR Rodies.
I do have a A7RII and Loxia lenses as a travel cam.
There are a lot of folks moving in the opposite direction ....
The CFV-50c will be swapped down the line for a larger sensor back.
Not a cheap alternative but it does allow a few more options.
And I never got over my 30 year love of the V cameras.
Bob
I believe (personal opinion) that 33x44mm sensor is perfect for use on a view camera, due to far more lenses being compatible and ability to work with wider lenses than any other sensor size.
One can share the same lenses for all his tasks if he uses 54x40 sensor on a "non-movement" DSLR and then 44x33 on his view camera. After all, if one uses a tech camera, the abilities one adds, is far more important than using a larger sensor or improving on (details of the) image quality.
voidshatter
Member
Talking about wide angles - I agree. For single exposure, 44x33 gets movement with Rodenstock 23HR, which is filter-friendly, and at the same time, wider than 54x40 with Rodenstock 32HR, which is filter-unfriendly.
JoshMerwin
Member
You have to compare it to the IQ3100!!! I couldn't find the link to the actual comparison test, just the "article" on mirrorlessrumors.com That last sentence though... :ROTFL:
Attachments
voidshatter
Member
Last sentence is yet to be verified. Fuji is well-known for its highly inflated ISO numbers.
As a side note, CCD digital backs (e.g. 80MP and 60MP from Phase One) also seems to use the trick of inflated ISO numbers to hide its impotence of low light (supported by dxo numbers as well as forum posts about having to push in post-processing).
Shashin
Well-known member
Fake news? Define "highly inflated." ISO is a standard. You can't use it if you don't follow it.
are you using a CF filter with the 23 ?
i will test an iq150 tomorrow with my 28HR but don't have the center filter.
JoshMerwin
Member
Just to be clear. I was NOT agreeing with the comment. I was laughing at the statements in general.
voidshatter
Member
If you are looking for a good scientific article in English, I don't know. Though I know a good article in another language.
You can google search for "fuji inflated iso" and then you can get an idea about what it is. Alternatively, you could check the "ISO sensitivity" tab in dxomark and compare Fuji against other brands (e.g. X100 vs NEX-7).
voidshatter
Member
Yes, for long exposure, a center filter is mandatory, otherwise the vignetting is too harsh.
The center filter for 32HR is too huge and won't accept 100mm filter system, which is the main reason I don't like it.
What strobes are you using and do you achieve full power at theses sync speeds? Usually with HSS power is reduced. However, if Elinchrom makes an adapter for Fuji then you'll achieve full power sync with compatible units.
stephengilbert
Active member
Perhaps GetDPI should charge a fee for the tenth time a poster says the same thing?
Erik Lundqvist
Member
They (Elinchrom) are working on one.
Speedgraphic
Member
I think the differences on their face are enough to warrant a basic distinction between users. Personally I would use each basically as intended. The Fuji will be better with Fuji lenses, in traditional photographic situations. The Phase will be more adaptable to tech cams. Obviously the Fuji will be such a better 'all rounder', but there are certainly things that the Phase will do better on it's own.
I'd for sure go with the Fuji even excluding the adapted lenses. Personally I think the Fujinon line up sounds spectacular. That 23/4 is going to be a beaut, and a 110/2? Yes please.
I'd for sure go with the Fuji even excluding the adapted lenses. Personally I think the Fujinon line up sounds spectacular. That 23/4 is going to be a beaut, and a 110/2? Yes please.