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!

I am thinking of getting the Fujifilm GFX 50S ....am I nuts ?

tcdeveau

Well-known member
Very interesting thread.

Many of us who currently own the IQ3100 are open to new product suggestions concerning either a 33x44 100MP or an IQ3150. I did like Graham's sports car comment. It seems Don L. has made the switch from Phase to the GFX without issue. Smart move.:salute: Looks like others here have done the same.:salute:

DR is important, but what about sensor size? Do we need 100MP IQ sized sensors for prints in the 24x36 range? Sure I crop when I want, but when I owned the 645Z with that 50MP sensor I never wanted for more MP even though I bought into the IQ3100 for more MP and DR. Will I ever learn? Probably not.:banghead:

Interesting to hear many who own the GFX are not contemplating upgrading their IQ3100 to the IQ3150, but will upgrade to the new GFX100.

Heck I might get the GFX100 too and get the GFX-R and convert it to B&W. Wonder if the R will be a 50MP or 100MP? Then these two bodies could replace my IQ3100 color AND IQ3100 Achromatic with plenty funds left over for more photo travel. :clap:
Has anyone actually converted a GFX to monochrome?

I spoke to Daniel at monochromimaging about it, and he said it was theoretically possible but wouldn’t know for sure until he got one on his bench and examined the sensor assembly.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I spoke to Daniel at monochromimaging about it, and he said it was theoretically possible but wouldn’t know for sure until he got one on his bench and examined the sensor assembly.
If he needs one to look at (and I assume non invasively?), I actually live in the same town (Vancouver WA).

I’ve been contemplating either a 850nm IR conversion or I’d go true mono with the GFX if it was a realistic option.
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
If he needs one to look at (and I assume non invasively?), I actually live in the same town (Vancouver WA).

I’ve been contemplating either a 850nm IR conversion or I’d go true mono with the GFX if it was a realistic option.
If I remember correctly he said he’d have to disassemble it.

I was going to look into it with the GFX50s after the GFX100 comes out and prices of used GFX50s go down.

I’d go true mono/full spectrum if possible and use external filters for IR personally (like the IQ260/3100 achromatic)
 

algrove

Well-known member
Is it a given that Fuji will keep producing the GFX50MP after they introduce the GFX100MP? On another model to come, sure hope the R will be a 50MP.
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
I expect they won’t keep producing the GFX50s when the 100 comes out, but there should be plenty on the used market
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I expect they won’t keep producing the GFX50s when the 100 comes out, but there should be plenty on the used market
I’m not sure that this is a given. I would expect GFX50s to just drop in price for a considerable time if price predictions for the 100mp version pan out. Why abandon a potential affordable MF gold mine and not sell more lenses?
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I’m not sure that this is a given. I would expect GFX50s to just drop in price for a considerable time if price predictions for the 100mp version pan out. Why abandon a potential affordable MF gold mine and not sell more lenses?
There's also the possibility of a cheaper version when the 100mp version comes, with fixed viewfinder, fixed LCD etc., a Sony killer. It probably also depends on what Nikon and Canon do.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
My father competed against Fuji for 10 years and my brother worked for them for 15 years . They destroyed DuPont,Agfa and Kodak in the graphic arts segment in less than 10 years. They are huge ,powerful and very much a Japanese style management . They believe in very high quality products and LOW COST based on efficient manufacturing and pricing for volume . They do not focus on niche markets or highly innovative market leading products (although they do produce some ). They know color as well as anyone except maybe Kodak . Customer service is a abstract concept ..in simple terms they don t get it . (any improvement here is a result of them listening to international management ).

With this experience as a perspective ..they will strive to continuously improve their products and lower prices . Their ability to scale manufacturing makes the other MF supplies appear as amateurs (which they are in the area of camera manufacturing ).

Ask this question ? Which will benefit Fuji s market share more ......releasing an industry leading 100MP camera (dependent on an expensive Sony sensor ) or improving the 50Mp body and continuing to lower the price . The volume competition is from the Nikon D850 not the other MF cameras .
 

DB5

Member
It is really interesting to see the impact that the Fuji (and also X1D) is having on the overall market.

I am also a Phase One owner of many many years considering for the first time not to upgrade my Phase One and instead look to either the GFX-100 or the X2D-100.

Phase One have to pull a rabbit out of a hat and fast.
 

retcheto

Member
Not to hijack this thread but I recently got an X1D and am loving it. What are people’s thoughts on the X1D vs GFX? I like the UI on the X1D and the lenses so far are great. Since they both use the same sensor I’m assuming the differences are mainly in the handling, UI, etc and the lenses.

I ask because when the new chips come out I’m going to upgrade to the X2D or whatever they will call it, however switching to Fuji is also possible if it’s really better in any way.

I suspect I’ll be happy sticking with Hasselblad, any thoughts?
 

Gerd

Active member
It is really interesting to see the impact that the Fuji (and also X1D) is having on the overall market.

I am also a Phase One owner of many many years considering for the first time not to upgrade my Phase One and instead look to either the GFX-100 or the X2D-100.

Phase One have to pull a rabbit out of a hat and fast.
I was surprised today that P1 here in Germany an offer over 12.990.- € incl tax for a complete system sent to me. Well it's just the IQ1 50 MPix. Sensor - but that is already much less money than before.

Greeting Gerd

 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Been awhile since I've posted an image and wouldn't you know it, I post this in the wrong thread! I've since deleted that and am reposting here as a sample of just how well the Fuji GFX works handheld, autofocus and burst mode. This was taken with the new GF250 and 1.4 extender. This type of image would have been almost impossible to capture with the P1 due to a number of issues. Back to the original question - if you are nuts then so am I. Don
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
In fairness ..any evaluation of capabilities should be based on intended usage . A GFX can ,of course ,be used by a skilled photographer to appear as a “do everything well “ system . As a 50MP /MF system using a decent EVF ..you can expect it will be excellent for may applications . And for shooting seascapes both hand held and on a tripod ....pretty darn good .

But come on its not the best for many applications . It doesn t touch an M for street shooting , a Nikon for action and long telephoto work , an Alpa /100MP Phase for landscape . It has advantages and disadvantages when compared to every MF solution ....”Best” is determined by the potential buyer ..sometimes on a very subjective basis .

The photo of the cardinal (not to pick on it as its very interesting and apologizes to Don) demonstrates that the AF simply didn t track the flight of the bird . The beak would be sharp had this been taken with a D850 and a Nikkor 300/2.8 . If you expect AF to track like the Pro s ...you can forget MF as a solution .
 

tcdeveau

Well-known member
In fairness ..any evaluation of capabilities should be based on intended usage . A GFX can ,of course ,be used by a skilled photographer to appear as a “do everything well “ system . As a 50MP /MF system using a decent EVF ..you can expect it will be excellent for may applications . And for shooting seascapes both hand held and on a tripod ....pretty darn good .

But come on its not the best for many applications . It doesn t touch an M for street shooting , a Nikon for action and long telephoto work , an Alpa /100MP Phase for landscape . It has advantages and disadvantages when compared to every MF solution ....”Best” is determined by the potential buyer ..sometimes on a very subjective basis .

The photo of the cardinal (not to pick on it as its very interesting and apologizes to Don) demonstrates that the AF simply didn t track the flight of the bird . The beak would be sharp had this been taken with a D850 and a Nikkor 300/2.8 . If you expect AF to track like the Pro s ...you can forget MF as a solution .
True, but Don's point was only that with the GFX he was able to get an image he would not have been able to get with the Phase One.

As an X1D user, I've found mirrorless MF opens up the use of MF to applications which I primarily reserved for 35mm. This "usability" factor of the X1D/GFX, demonstrated by Don above, is a huge advantage of mirrorless digital medium format over the Hasselblad H-system and P1 XF.

To your point, I used to carry a 35mm dSLR and Hasselblad H-system. I can do with the X1D what I needed two systems for previously for my needs. For some things, like astrophotography, are there better tools out there? Yes, of course, but the X1D is capable of meeting my needs for that purpose - meaning I don't need a second system exclusively just for that.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
True, but Don's point was only that with the GFX he was able to get an image he would not have been able to get with the Phase One.

As an X1D user, I've found mirrorless MF opens up the use of MF to applications which I primarily reserved for 35mm. This "usability" factor of the X1D/GFX, demonstrated by Don above, is a huge advantage of mirrorless digital medium format over the Hasselblad H-system and P1 XF.

To your point, I used to carry a 35mm dSLR and Hasselblad H-system. I can do with the X1D what I needed two systems for previously for my needs. For some things, like astrophotography, are there better tools out there? Yes, of course, but the X1D is capable of meeting my needs for that purpose - meaning I don't need a second system exclusively just for that.
I understood Don s point . The usability factor is almost exclusively based on size and weight considerations ...not at all AF . If the subject is static ( the bird at rest ) ..the image could be taken with almost any system . If the subject is dynamic (the bird in flight ) it requires focus tracking . The photograph used as an illustration showed no focus tracking and thus showed no advantage . I couldn t have taken this with a Phase or Hb is only based on photographers willingness to handle the weight of a DSLR MF camera .

Everyone gets the size and weight advantages of mirrorless MF and it clearly makes it practical to “carry and use handheld” in situations that have generally not been favorable to MF .
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Interesting discussion I suppose about bird shooting and AF I guess. I might point out that Eliot Porter might be amused about what you can and can’t achieve with big gear and/or AF tracking, albeit with the aid of strobes. :facesmack:

Certainly if you’re wanting to spray and pray locked on to beaks or eyeballs, then a modern 35mm DSLR/mirrorless will be smaller and more productive than ANY MF based system today.

Now If needed to club an attacking beast to death then I would definitely reach for my Phase One XF/240LS and MFDB combo rather than a GFX or especially X1D. :thumbs:
 

jng

Well-known member
Now If needed to club an attacking beast to death then I would definitely reach for my Phase One XF/240LS and MFDB combo rather than a GFX or especially X1D. :thumbs:
Graham,

You would be far better off (in terms of survival and then dealing with the financial consequences) using your 3-, 4-, or 5-series tripod w/Cube attached as a defensive weapon. :ROTFL:

John

P.S. Actually I think Don's shot is pretty cool. I never would have gotten the bird in the frame for that shot, never mind mostly in focus and certainly not hand held. In regard to this latter point, his post in the tripod & head thread seemed totally appropriate. Keep 'em coming, Don!
 

sog1927

Member
Interesting discussion I suppose about bird shooting and AF I guess. I might point out that Eliot Porter might be amused about what you can and can’t achieve with big gear
Or, for that matter, a young Victor Hasselblad photographing birds with his trusty 4x5 Graflex SLR: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/s3BloulJ1iU/maxresdefault.jpg

;)

I've said this before, but with the advent of the GFX and the X1D, as well as the future Sony sensor roadmap, we are truly in the golden age of MF digital. I picked the X1D, but both the X1D and the GFX are excellent systems (and the GFX is certainly more flexible at this point). You wouldn't be "nuts" to pick either one.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
P.S. Actually I think Don's shot is pretty cool. I never would have gotten the bird in the frame for that shot, never mind mostly in focus and certainly not hand held. In regard to this latter point, his post in the tripod & head thread seemed totally appropriate. Keep 'em coming, Don!
John,

I agree entirely regarding the shot. My birds in flight shooting skills would seem to match yours!

Graham
 

PedroL

Member
In fairness ..any evaluation of capabilities should be based on intended usage . A GFX can ,of course ,be used by a skilled photographer to appear as a “do everything well “ system . As a 50MP /MF system using a decent EVF ..you can expect it will be excellent for may applications . And for shooting seascapes both hand held and on a tripod ....pretty darn good .

But come on its not the best for many applications . It doesn t touch an M for street shooting , a Nikon for action and long telephoto work , an Alpa /100MP Phase for landscape . It has advantages and disadvantages when compared to every MF solution ....”Best” is determined by the potential buyer ..sometimes on a very subjective basis .

The photo of the cardinal (not to pick on it as its very interesting and apologizes to Don) demonstrates that the AF simply didn t track the flight of the bird . The beak would be sharp had this been taken with a D850 and a Nikkor 300/2.8 . If you expect AF to track like the Pro s ...you can forget MF as a solution .
I know very little about shooting birds - but I can assure anyone that GFX or X1D with combination of VR drive by Seitz will be superior to any 100mp shot. And with leftover money you can take a trip or two....
I have all of that gear (less P1 system) in my store/studio and anyone can drop by anytime to test those combinations.
 
Top