Hi,
Except that with film we used similar films in all cameras.
With digital we may have different sensors in different cameras. Just as an example, it would be absolutely feasible to have a Nikon D850 or a Sony A7rII producing the same image quality as the Leica S, provided the lens was good enough.
The point could also be made that small medium format is not that much larger than 24x36 mm. In film times I was shooting 55x69 mm (Pentax 67), that had 4.4X the area of 24x36 mm film, or something like twice the linear size. The Leica S has an image area that is 1.56x the area of 24x36 mm or 1.25X the linear size. It is a larger sensor, but not much larger.
But, in the end, sensor resolution decides how much detail a camera can record. A sensor with 50 or 100 MP will be able to resolve more detail than a camera with 24 MP.
It seems that the Fuji GFX combines excellent lenses with the best small medium format sensor available today, and it is pretty clear that 100 MP is around the corner and those 100 megapixels are probably needed to make the lenses justice.
I freely admit that I don't own and have never used the GFX, my appreciation of that camera/lens system is based on Jim Kasson's writings (and his measurements). I would guess that the same applies to the Hasselblad X1D. Same sensor and probably excellent lenses. But, I have not seen the same depth of analysis of the X1D as Jim has done with the GFX.
I have been shooting 24 MP on 24x36 mm for a long time. I would say that it is perfectly good for prints up to A2 size (16"x23"), but I would say that 24MP is not optimal for say 30"x40". Not saying that it is not possible to make excellent prints from 24MP at that size, just that it is not really optimal.
An interesting question may be how well a Fuji GFX 100 will match today's 100MP digital backs from Phase One and Hasselblad, my guess is that it will hold it's own.
At this stage, we only need high resolving systems for large size prints. Computer screens are pretty much limited to small resolutions. With 8K we will need 39MP (on 2:3 crop) to fill the screen.
Best regards
Erik
I cannot comment on the specifics of SL vs GFX, however I can on FF vs MF. For me the decision was SL vs S and I chose Leica S. I come for 4x5 view camera use and tonality and image quality are key factors. I am not saying that SL or other FF is not good, but that MF is much better. I also use Leica M-P 240. With FF one has better maneuverability, faster operation and a potentially smaller kit. Of course, it is possible to add more lenses and accessories in FF and end up with more stuff in an equally large kit.
In the film days I knew guys that pushed slow 35mm film to the limits to obtain the highest level of detail and tonality possible. They did quite well but could not match medium format. The situation is similar with FF vs MF sensors.
You need to decide on the most important factors for you, such as maneuverability vs image quality.
Jesse
I regularly shoot in the neighbourhood of 2-10 minutes, but I very rarely go "all in" myself...