Fuji GFX Lenses vs. Hasselblad X1D

[danlindberg]

Victor, It has nothing to do with that the XCD 90 isn't good enough, it is! No, it has to do with workflow and if I go trekking I rather bring my three techlenses and have the same mindset of how to shoot.

 

[sog1927]

Any thoughts on the native XCD lenses vs the Hasselblad H lenses via the adapter? I've been using the 210mm H and very happy with it. Autofocus is not a concern for me, I prefer manual focus anyways.

It seems like there are some good deals to be had on the H lenses used every once in a while.

I'm looking for something wider (maybe 30mm XCD or the 28mm HCD)

Well, there's nothing comparable to the 210 in the X lens range so it's not as though you have a lot of options . Kind of like me and the 500mm ApoTessar.

I've never used the 28mm HCD, but my experience with the 30mm XCD has been overwhelmingly positive. If you're persuaded by technical data, the Hasselblad datasheets suggest the 30 is sharper across the board (better wide-open than the 28 is at optimum aperture) with less distortion and comparable vignetting (slightly less wide-open, slightly more at optimum aperture):

http://static.hasselblad.com/2014/11/hcd28-uk-v5.pdf
https://cdn.hasselblad.com/b0a46124-9e82-46d5-b58f-fa163cdcad86_xcd30+datasheet+uk+170227.pdf

The 28 is, of course, a bit wider.

I don't think you can go wrong either way.

 

[retcheto]

Well, there's nothing comparable to the 210 in the X lens range so it's not as though you have a lot of options . Kind of like me and the 500mm ApoTessar.

What are you shooting the 500mm on? Does it hold up well on a digital sensor?

 

[sog1927]

What are you shooting the 500mm on? Does it hold up well on a digital sensor?

Mainly on an old Linhof twin-shank large format tripod with a Graf Studioball, but I'm looking for a more modern alternative. That's not a very portable combination.

So the 500 is not bad, actually (especially considering that Phocus won't let you get to the digital correction for the V lenses when you're using an X1D). I've tried using it with the 2X Mutar and that combination definitely has some purple fringing in the corners. I've heard that the 2XE converter is better in that regard but I have no actual data. I suppose the 1.4 APO converter would be better, but they're hard to find (I've had the 2X Mutar for almost 30 years, so I've certainly gotten my money's worth out of it).

Moving subjects are pretty much out of the question with the ES because of the Lartigue effect - which is why I was so disappointed in the Hasselblad XV adapter (I really wanted to use the shutters in my CF lenses). At least you get to use the shutter in your 210.

Not as sharp as my two XCDs (30mm and 90mm), but then few things are.

 

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi Darr,

Nice to hear you are interested in the GFX and the X1D. I have no pony in that race, as I am pretty much out of medium format.

But, Jim Kasson has done a lot of very good testing on Fuji lenses. Now, Jim is a scientist, so his tests are a bit different. As I am dabling a bit with science myself, it is very interesting for me.

But, it seems that most of the Fuji lenses are as good as it gets, but quite a bit better. It seems that they are corrected extremely well for LoCA, which yields magenta/green fringing in out of focus areas and they are mostly very sharp.

Jim doesn't test X1D lenses, and I cannot find comparable testing. Hasselblad's MTF data, which I think are quite reliable, are very good. Jim's articles about the GFX are here: https://blog.kasson.com/category/gfx-50s/

Obviously, it would be interesting to have similar data for the X1D, but Jim's site is not a testing site, rather an intellectual exercise.

The reason I am out of medium format is in part priorities, I regard money as a finite asset and I find that the gear I have is pretty perfect for my needs. What fascinates me with the GFX is that it is designed around 44x33 mm sensor. That also applies to the Hasselblad X1D, of course.

But, I think that the GFX is a logical extension to Fuji's APS-C cameras. With Hassy, it feels like more like some folks wanted to build an Interchangable Lens Electronic Viewfinder camera. Perry Oosten liked the idea, so they released it and found out that demand was so high they couldn't deliver. They also found out that building an EVF based system is a bit more work than they expected.

It seems they miss a cable release, just as an example.

I would expect that we are going to see a "mark II". Not so that I am a megapixel geek, but I think the lenses are designed for 100 MP, and I think that the 100MP sensor is needed to make the lenses justice.

So, it my make some sense to wait for the next version of the camera.

Best regards
Erik

Thank you Victor for posing this question!
As an avid Hasselblad (film and CFV50c) and Fuji (X-Pro 2, XE-2, X100T) user, I am all eyes! :bugeyes:

A Fuji or a Hasselblad mirrorless is in my future, I just do not know which way I will go!
And I admit, I am a lens queen! ��

Kind regards,
Darr

 

[PedroL]

Hi Darr,

Nice to hear you are interested in the GFX and the X1D. I have no pony in that race, as I am pretty much out of medium format.

But, Jim Kasson has done a lot of very good testing on Fuji lenses. Now, Jim is a scientist, so his tests are a bit different. As I am dabling a bit with science myself, it is very interesting for me.

But, it seems that most of the Fuji lenses are as good as it gets, but quite a bit better. It seems that they are corrected extremely well for LoCA, which yields magenta/green fringing in out of focus areas and they are mostly very sharp.

Jim doesn't test X1D lenses, and I cannot find comparable testing. Hasselblad's MTF data, which I think are quite reliable, are very good. Jim's articles about the GFX are here: https://blog.kasson.com/category/gfx-50s/

Obviously, it would be interesting to have similar data for the X1D, but Jim's site is not a testing site, rather an intellectual exercise.

The reason I am out of medium format is in part priorities, I regard money as a finite asset and I find that the gear I have is pretty perfect for my needs. What fascinates me with the GFX is that it is designed around 44x33 mm sensor. That also applies to the Hasselblad X1D, of course.

But, I think that the GFX is a logical extension to Fuji's APS-C cameras. With Hassy, it feels like more like some folks wanted to build an Interchangable Lens Electronic Viewfinder camera. Perry Oosten liked the idea, so they released it and found out that demand was so high they couldn't deliver. They also found out that building an EVF based system is a bit more work than they expected.

It seems they miss a cable release, just as an example.

I would expect that we are going to see a "mark II". Not so that I am a megapixel geek, but I think the lenses are designed for 100 MP, and I think that the 100MP sensor is needed to make the lenses justice.

So, it my make some sense to wait for the next version of the camera.

Best regards
Erik

Eric, there is now - IMO - as good a solution as it might get for release cable for X1D. It works great for me and I have as well connected Seitz VR drive and there are now probably a lot of other X1D users using same set up. Check it out. Have a great day, Peter

http://www.hasselbladdigitalforum.com/index.php?topic=5858.0

 

[Godfrey]

This was wonderful to read, Howard. I may never buy an X1D, but if I ever do the two lenses I want are the 21 and the 120.

Yes, I'm only interested in it for the extremes at this point. For everything in between I already have a full Leica kit as well as the Light L16, which both do well enough to satisfy my photographic interests...

G

Hi, Victor. I did have the GFX with 32-64 zoom for about a month and I tested it side by side against the X1D with the XCD 30 and 45. Short story is that the 30 and 45 were marginally better in the corners, but the GFX zoom was just amazingly close. Easily the best zoom I have ever used, so I can only imagine how good the GFX primes must be. However, the XCD 45mm while excellent is the weakest of the XCD lenses. The 30 and 90 are superb. The 120 macro is a level beyond, and the 21 is a simply amazing ultra wide. Hasselblad is slow in building out its lens line but I couldn’t be happier with the image quality of what they have released so far. There are 4 lenses that are still on the roadmap, 3 of which were supposed to have been released in the first half of 2018.

 

[Godfrey]

Eric, there is now - IMO - as good a solution as it might get for release cable for X1D. It works great for me and I have as well connected Seitz VR drive and there are now probably a lot of other X1D users using same set up. Check it out. Have a great day, Peter

http://www.hasselbladdigitalforum.com/index.php?topic=5858.0

Great to see this too, Peter! That fills in one big omission on the X1D.

It's very hard to understand why Hasselblad didn't supply a wired remote release for this camera, and the same for Leica with the CL body. A WiFi remote just isn't the same thing at all.

G

 

[bab]

BAB

You are seriously incorrect . Just completed a similar fashion shoot in NYC which included testing the new Leica 75/2 with the SL and using my legacy 50/1.4 R summilux ...plenty of similar window light images .

The contrast of the light has a huge amount to do with the perceived sharpness and this photo is near the edge of the DR .

When you can see the flakes in the eye makeup at 2:1 enlargement ....thats plenty sharp enough . When you can do that wide open at F2 its more than what is required .

As Dan mentions its the aesthetic ( roll off of sharpness and bokeh ) that is so important in a portrait lens . Personally I still prefer the rendering of the Leica R 80/1.4 for portraits and the Leica S 100/2 is a close second .

With that said the rendering of the 90 HB lens is impressive and paired with the larger 50MP sensor looks to be a exceptional all around performer . I ve looked at plenty of files and still believe you can not beat medium format with anything full frame . The tone separation,color responsiveness and the softer rolloff of the plane of focus creates at more pleasing aesthetic .

Let me break it down further it’s a given that Leica has made the industry standard best glass (if you get a good copy) for years. Most comparisons eventually end up with a staments reflecting how good one lens is compared to a Leica x mm lens as did your dissertation. However my point was to remark on how sharp the example picture is. And thus to point out when you say look at my image it’s so sharp most of the images POSTED shot with Leica glass are soft. In my days shooting Leica handheld the hit rate on tack sharp where I wanted it was low, today an SL with autofocus, or tripod and focus preview will get you a sharper image then could have been gotten in the past. I’m happy to hear you liked the 75/2 I hear it’s just a great piece of glass on the SL post a picture so we can all see the results.

BAB

 

[darr]

Thank you for your response Erik.

I enjoy my Fuji APS-C cameras a lot. I gave up my last FF DSLR a few years ago when I realized all I really need is MF and APS-C.
I never bought into the Hasselblad H system because it simply did not appeal to me, nor did the comparable Phase One systems.
But, the MF mirrorless is interesting and I may just sell-off my MF tech gear if I find it to be 'good enough' for what I shoot these days.
The Fuji is what I am leaning towards.

Take care!
Darr

Hi Darr,

Nice to hear you are interested in the GFX and the X1D. I have no pony in that race, as I am pretty much out of medium format.

But, Jim Kasson has done a lot of very good testing on Fuji lenses. Now, Jim is a scientist, so his tests are a bit different. As I am dabling a bit with science myself, it is very interesting for me.

But, it seems that most of the Fuji lenses are as good as it gets, but quite a bit better. It seems that they are corrected extremely well for LoCA, which yields magenta/green fringing in out of focus areas and they are mostly very sharp.

Jim doesn't test X1D lenses, and I cannot find comparable testing. Hasselblad's MTF data, which I think are quite reliable, are very good. Jim's articles about the GFX are here: https://blog.kasson.com/category/gfx-50s/

Obviously, it would be interesting to have similar data for the X1D, but Jim's site is not a testing site, rather an intellectual exercise.

The reason I am out of medium format is in part priorities, I regard money as a finite asset and I find that the gear I have is pretty perfect for my needs. What fascinates me with the GFX is that it is designed around 44x33 mm sensor. That also applies to the Hasselblad X1D, of course.

But, I think that the GFX is a logical extension to Fuji's APS-C cameras. With Hassy, it feels like more like some folks wanted to build an Interchangable Lens Electronic Viewfinder camera. Perry Oosten liked the idea, so they released it and found out that demand was so high they couldn't deliver. They also found out that building an EVF based system is a bit more work than they expected.

It seems they miss a cable release, just as an example.

I would expect that we are going to see a "mark II". Not so that I am a megapixel geek, but I think the lenses are designed for 100 MP, and I think that the 100MP sensor is needed to make the lenses justice.

So, it my make some sense to wait for the next version of the camera.

Best regards
Erik

 

[PeterA]

I'm testing the GFX with 23/zoom and 120macro ( i am curent user of XID) two similar shots from acrtoss the road where I live in manly in Sydney - second with XID and 45 using XPAN crop and first with GFX and Zoom at 56Mm using same XPAN crop in camera...







So far and not surprisingly - the actual IQ from both cameras is pretty much the same the ergonomics totally different...Fuji has a much more extensive range of lenses available as oppossed to in a timeline that gets extended...the first image is corner to corner sharp with the Fuji 35-64 zoom...whilst the second snap is from the 45mm Blad - it too is excellent.

The Blad can sync with flash up to its leaf shutter speed of 1/2000th if you need this then the 'Blad is advantaged, The Fuji is constrained by the usual foacal plane shutter speeds - I dont do much studio flash work - yet.

I dont think lens performance differences is an issue which is relevant in any choiuce between camera systems tbh.

 

[airfang]

I went for the GFX instead of X1D (partly because X1D couldn't get out of its door several months after announcement).

- A close friend of mine had both for a little while, he liked the Hasselblad color better. I am not that sensitive to color though.
- X1D does look much fashionable than the GFX, though I think the GFX feels more rugged and weather-resistant (unproven presumption) and I feel more comfortable using it in field.
- Initially the X1D had very slow playback (zooming in took 2 sec), and was difficult to change focus point, I think these issues are largely gone with the latest firmware.
- X1D has leaf shutter lenses, which have 1/2000 sync speed, this is essential to many pro photographers out there, but if you don't need it, these lenses are relatively slower and in general more expensive. You can adapt Hasselblad H lenses to the GFX to get 1/800 sync speed, but without af (I don't think there's any technical difficulty, since they make those H lenses, maybe it was a restriction based on some agreement with Hasselblad)

Regarding sharpness, I have done some unscientific tests on the GF 32-64mm and the GF 23mm, and in both cases, my first copies were problematic:
- my first 32-64mm was soft in the center @ 44mm wide open (worse than Canon EF 24-70mm @ 35mm)
- my first 23mm had severe field curvature and its corners look pretty bad compared to Canon EF 16-35mm III

However, I am amazed by the 2nd copies of both lenses: edge to edge sharpness wide open. My test shots of 32-64 can be found here:
https://airfang.wordpress.com/2018/...gf-32-64mm-f-4-vs-canon-ef-24-70mm-f-2-8l-ii/

I haven't got time to do a write up on the 23mm but I do have the test shots taken so if you are interested let me know.

That said, to answer OP's question: I can't comment on the XCD lenses since I never tested them, but for the GF lenses there are sample variations, but the good copies are really, really good.

 

[miska]

A nice twist: Laowa will offer a 17mm f/4 lens for the GFX:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/20267...models-including-the-widest-fujifilm-gfx-lens

It's interesting that third party manufacturers are starting to offer lenses for the Fuji...