Fuji GFX v FX

[jrp]

No doubt a FAQ, but I haven't found a good source:

How does the GHX-R (say) compare to

1. 45Mpx FX (such as the Sony or Nikon)
2. 24Mpx FX

from the perspective of

1. image quality (slower lenses & shallower depth of field v faster lenses, etc)
2. usabilty

(I am less interested in flash compatibility, etc)
for

1. Land/cityscapes (day and night)
2. Casual portrature

The sample GFX images look great, but the more technical comparisons that I have seen seem to show less of a difference (at 45Mpx at least).

 

[tcdeveau]

What do you mean by “FX”? Since “FX” is Nikon’s designation for full-frame, are you talking full-frame 35mm (i.e. 24x36mm sensor)?

 

[fotophil]

I think he is interested in comparing the new Fuji medium format "R" Camera to the "full frame " Mirrorless Bodies. Pretty broad subject. He needs to do a lot of homework.

 

[PeterA]

No doubt a FAQ, but I haven't found a good source:

How does the GHX-R (say) compare to

1. 45Mpx FX (such as the Sony or Nikon)
2. 24Mpx FX

from the perspective of

1. image quality (slower lenses & shallower depth of field v faster lenses, etc)
2. usabilty

(I am less interested in flash compatibility, etc)
for

1. Land/cityscapes (day and night)
2. Casual portrature

The sample GFX images look great, but the more technical comparisons that I have seen seem to show less of a difference (at 45Mpx at least).

there is no relevant comparison to be made- the Nikon D850 or any Sony is the better choice for your purposes - here are the facts:

Fuji lenses are bigger and slower
Megapixel difference is not much
ISO performance is better in your Nikon/Sony cameras
Flash compatitbilty is the same for all major makes - you can get triggers for any of these with advanced features if you like
Handheld shooting is better on Sony and Nikon - because one has 5 axis something or other anti shake and the other is smaller size also lets not forget Nikon make great if not teh best lenses and Sony are pretty good too.
all the Fuji lenses are very slow and therefore cant make good BOKEH - Fuji dont make a 0.95 nocti or even a 1.4 anything for the GFX- this is a major oversight for sure - but probably Fuji dont knwo how to make fast lenses anyway so it is a lost cause.

also Fuji GFX isn't a FULL FRAME camera - like the Nikon and Sony are- the Nikon and Sony are fantastic cameras - i don't know why I bought a FujiGFX - it fails on every measure relative to the great Nikon and Sony cameras.

 

[JeRuFo]

Wow, everybody is on good form today. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy when I catch up on an inclusive forum like this at the end of the day.

 

[PeterA]

Wow, everybody is on good form today. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy when I catch up on an inclusive forum like this at the end of the day.

Ok I'll prertend you weren't having a joke:

For night time shooting , hand held and occassional portrait work - Sony and Nikon offerings are better, cheaper, faster - no contest - it is why I use Leica gear for that kind of stuff.

atb
Pete

 

[ErikKaffehr]

No doubt a FAQ, but I haven't found a good source:

How does the GHX-R (say) compare to

1. 45Mpx FX (such as the Sony or Nikon)
2. 24Mpx FX

from the perspective of

1. image quality (slower lenses & shallower depth of field v faster lenses, etc)
2. usabilty

(I am less interested in flash compatibility, etc)
for

1. Land/cityscapes (day and night)
2. Casual portrature

The sample GFX images look great, but the more technical comparisons that I have seen seem to show less of a difference (at 45Mpx at least).

Hi,

I would think that most sample images tell more about the photographer than the camera. The reason? Most are shown at reduced size.




Can you say which image is out of focus?



Looking at actual pixels makes it quite clear. What is the difference? Autofocus left and careful manual focus on right.

Quite obviously, pairing a large sensor size and a very good sensor with excellent lenses cannot go wrong. And that is exactly what Fuji does.

Fuji also offers the system at attractive prices.

It seems that the Fuji lenses are extremely good. It is true that 51 MP on the GFX and 42-50MP Sony/Nikon/Canon is not a lot of difference, but that depends also on how you crop. If you tend to crop to 4/3 aspect ratio, the GFX will you give you more pixels.

Don't forget that you are always buying into a system. Right now the GFX is 51 MP and has no in body image stabilisation or phase detect AF. But, next generation will have 100 MP, in body image stabilisation and phase detect AF with 6 FPS.

The other question is of course if you need more than 24MP. Fact is that most people are perfectly happy with 24 MP. Just as an example Canon had the 50MP 5Ds/5DsR for a long time, but the 30MP 5DIV or the 26 MP 6D probably outsell it by a wide margin. The reason is of course:

• 20-30 MP are perfectly good for prints you can make with a desktop printer, like A2 (16"x23") or C-print size.
• You can make excellent prints at large sizes, even from 24 MP. Folks have done that for many years.

But, very clearly, printing like at 40"x60" from the GFX will show a significant advantage.

Here are two different crops, 40" height at 180 PPI from Sony A7rII, Fuji GFX, Canon 5DsR, all using DPReview sample image. Sony and canon 40"x60" while Fuji GFX 40"x53". Same sharpening procedure to all images.

This is a pretty central crop. Full size: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/TMP/40_120_cmp_crop1.PNG

This is a pretty periferal crop. Full size: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/TMP/40_120_cmp_crop2.PNG

If you look at the images on a 24" 1920x1200 screen, it would be a good match for a print viewed pretty close. (Screen viewed at 90 cm corresponds to 50 cm viewing distance from print).

Other aspects:

• Costs obviously - but the Fuji GFX lenses are reasonably priced.
• Lens choices

I am shooting Sony A7rII with Canon mount lenses and I don't think I want to go Fuji GFX, why? My reasons:

• I mostly print 16"x23", seldom at 30"x40" or larger. The A7rII is still OK for the larger sizes.
• I want a single set of gear, covering all my needs.
• Using tilts/swings is essential for my needs.
• I usually shoot zooms, from ultra wide to long telephoto. To that comes a few special lenses.
• I have spent to much on gear and needs to spend on other things

Best regards
Erik

 

[jrp]

Interesting. Thanks for all this. I was expecting to hear lots about the magical rendering of MF lenses, low noise high ISO capabilities, etc. But I suppose that it's just like AFX to FX, AFX can be done, but it's much more of a strain to produce a system capable of producing the same results; the laws of physics, etc.

 

[PeterA]

Interesting. Thanks for all this. I was expecting to hear lots about the magical rendering of MF lenses, low noise high ISO capabilities, etc. But I suppose that it's just like AFX to FX, AFX can be done, but it's much more of a strain to produce a system capable of producing the same results; the laws of physics, etc.

You might find this useful...
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/sony-vs-fujifilm/sony-a7riii-vs-fuji-gfx-50s/

Pete

 

[DougDolde]

I concur the D850 (or Z7) is a better alternative for most people, More versatile and
a huge lens selection of great Nikkors.

 

[David Schneider]

I concur the D850 (or Z7) is a better alternative for most people, More versatile and
a huge lens selection of great Nikkors.

I agree. But fortunately, I don't consider myself "most people."

Medium format is hardly ever going to be considered "versatile" any more than a Corvette would be considered "versatile."

Gear choices depend on usage, needs, desires, money and more. Life is short. Use the cameras that work for you.

 

[GrahamWelland]

For me, even just 4:3 aspect ratio vs 3:2 (which I really hate in portrait mode) are enough reason for me to shoot with the GFX. That’s a very personal bias but it also applies to why I also enjoy shooting my IQ3100’s 5:4 ratio too. Heck, if I had a preference it would be 1:1 but the slightly extended square formats work for my compositional preferences.

With respect to resolution, image and lens quality, I think that it’s all pretty much a wash these days but every one of my Fuji lenses has turned out to be excellent so I’m not complaining.

 

[mota25]

there is no relevant comparison to be made- the Nikon D850 or any Sony is the better choice for your purposes - here are the facts:

Fuji lenses are bigger and slower
Megapixel difference is not much
ISO performance is better in your Nikon/Sony cameras
Flash compatitbilty is the same for all major makes - you can get triggers for any of these with advanced features if you like
Handheld shooting is better on Sony and Nikon - because one has 5 axis something or other anti shake and the other is smaller size also lets not forget Nikon make great if not teh best lenses and Sony are pretty good too.
all the Fuji lenses are very slow and therefore cant make good BOKEH - Fuji dont make a 0.95 nocti or even a 1.4 anything for the GFX- this is a major oversight for sure - but probably Fuji dont knwo how to make fast lenses anyway so it is a lost cause.

also Fuji GFX isn't a FULL FRAME camera - like the Nikon and Sony are- the Nikon and Sony are fantastic cameras - i don't know why I bought a FujiGFX - it fails on every measure relative to the great Nikon and Sony cameras.

My experience is only shooting portraits with GFX. I was a canon shooter before. On Canon I used 85mm but due to focus issues with dSLRs, my 85mm was mainly used at f2. With 5dmk3 I had to shoot atleast 1/250 to get sharp shots. I can't hand hold that well. Then I got Fuji XT1 & 56mm f1.2. Nice small combo. About a yr ago I moved to GFX50s and 110mm f2. GFX50s and 110mm f2 is little less weight than 5dmk3/85L or feels that way to me. I can use 110mm f2 wide open at f2 (f1.6 FF equivalent). At beginning I was worried about 1/125 max sync speed of GFX50s but it hasn't been an issue. I can get very sharp results at 1/125 which I couldn't with 5dmk3. For higher than 1/125 I am happy my strobes do HSS and it works all the way to 1/4000. Picture quality wise I don't need crazy high ISOs and this 5 yr old sensor still works pretty good IMHO. I just like Fuji camera more than Sony's. Never had Nikon.

I do wish Fuji 45mm f2.8 was f2 to begin with.