"small" medium format choices - Leica vs Hasselblad vs Fuji

[Paratom]

I am not looking for a "my is better than yours" discussion but as a longterm S (now Sooo7) user, 1 year x1d user and still being interested in Fuji I wonder which system(s) work best for you and why?

Here I go:
Leica S:
+ very fast operation in regards of shutter release and blackout
+ optical viewfinder - you see the real light
+ color seems very smooth and nice for skintones
+ fast lenses
+smooth bokeh and rendering - mostly all lenses can do this
+ (for me) same handling/menues like SL - I can use S lenses on SL
-- only one center AF point, no face detection
- AF sometimes hunting and sometimes slightly not accurate
- some older lenses need AF-motor replacement
- some lenses are heavy (45,120 for example)
- relativly high prices for new equipment/ but sometimes very good prices on used equipment; bad resale values

x1d:
+ (low/just right) size and weight -> portability
+ feels very good in hand and balances very nice
+ very nice color
-- delays for switching on and blackout time (I thought I get used to it but I hate the time for switching on the camera)
- hexagonal bokeh when not used wide open (even though not a problem for my taste)
- I miss a joystick for moving AF point

Fuji: (only limited experience from 2 days testing and using 1 lens)
+ best AF for all three IMO, including face detection, joystick for AF points
+ tiltable display
+ larger than x1d but smaller/lighter than S and S-lenses
+ I find the zoom quite attractive lens
++ price
? is the color up to Leica and Hassy?
o doesnt "feel" as solid as Leica and Hassy, (even though I believe it is as solid/reliable)
o color - I dont know yet

 

[Vivek]

Looks like a nice, concise summary with a clear verdict!

 

[PeterA]

I am not looking for a "my is better than yours" discussion but as a longterm S (now Sooo7) user, 1 year x1d user and still being interested in Fuji I wonder which system(s) work best for you and why?

Here I go:
Leica S:
+ very fast operation in regards of shutter release and blackout
+ optical viewfinder - you see the real light
+ color seems very smooth and nice for skintones
+ fast lenses
+smooth bokeh and rendering - mostly all lenses can do this
+ (for me) same handling/menues like SL - I can use S lenses on SL
-- only one center AF point, no face detection
- AF sometimes hunting and sometimes slightly not accurate
- some older lenses need AF-motor replacement
- some lenses are heavy (45,120 for example)
- relativly high prices for new equipment/ but sometimes very good prices on used equipment; bad resale values

x1d:
+ (low/just right) size and weight -> portability
+ feels very good in hand and balances very nice
+ very nice color
-- delays for switching on and blackout time (I thought I get used to it but I hate the time for switching on the camera)
- hexagonal bokeh when not used wide open (even though not a problem for my taste)
- I miss a joystick for moving AF point

Fujionly limited experience from 2 days testing and using 1 lens)
+ best AF for all three IMO, including face detection, joystick for AF points
+ tiltable display
+ larger than x1d but smaller/lighter than S and S-lenses
+ I find the zoom quite attractive lens
++ price
? is the color up to Leica and Hassy?
o doesnt "feel" as solid as Leica and Hassy, (even though I believe it is as solid/reliable)
o color - I dont know yet

I'm an ex Leica S shooter and owner and I am also an ex XID shooter and owner and I am a very happy Fuji GFXS shooter and owner and will also be a GFX100MP shooter and owner as soon as the beast is released. the truth is that all the cameras and lens systems are very good and the colour from all systems are very good. Fuji works best for me because I trust the company - it delivers continual improvement at low cost and high value.

I can write a wordy essay about MY feelings and experiences and user cases - bit all that is opinion that will be irrelevant to you. Suffice to say - I've owned and shot with both systems you are currently using and shifted out of both to Fuji.

atb
Pete

 

[SrMphoto]

I am not looking for a "my is better than yours" discussion but as a longterm S (now Sooo7) user, 1 year x1d user and still being interested in Fuji I wonder which system(s) work best for you and why?

Here I go:
Leica S:
+ very fast operation in regards of shutter release and blackout
+ optical viewfinder - you see the real light
+ color seems very smooth and nice for skintones
+ fast lenses
+smooth bokeh and rendering - mostly all lenses can do this
+ (for me) same handling/menues like SL - I can use S lenses on SL
-- only one center AF point, no face detection
- AF sometimes hunting and sometimes slightly not accurate
- some older lenses need AF-motor replacement
- some lenses are heavy (45,120 for example)
- relativly high prices for new equipment/ but sometimes very good prices on used equipment; bad resale values

x1d:
+ (low/just right) size and weight -> portability
+ feels very good in hand and balances very nice
+ very nice color
-- delays for switching on and blackout time (I thought I get used to it but I hate the time for switching on the camera)
- hexagonal bokeh when not used wide open (even though not a problem for my taste)
- I miss a joystick for moving AF point

Fuji: (only limited experience from 2 days testing and using 1 lens)
+ best AF for all three IMO, including face detection, joystick for AF points
+ tiltable display
+ larger than x1d but smaller/lighter than S and S-lenses
+ I find the zoom quite attractive lens
++ price
? is the color up to Leica and Hassy?
o doesnt "feel" as solid as Leica and Hassy, (even though I believe it is as solid/reliable)
o color - I dont know yet

I am sure you can't go wrong with either camera. I own X1D and here are my comments:
- I am used to having a joystick to move the focus point, but X1D's implementation of "Touchpad for EVF" is the best I know. I do not miss having a joystick on X1D.
- X1D is the only camera that does not have/need LENR.
- While slow to start up, X1D has a very quick wake-up from sleep.

 

[Christopher]

I’m a very happy GFX shooter and currently wouldn’t invest in the X1D. I want to know what’s happening in the future and while Sony showed us the road I find Hassis silence shocking.

 

[faberryman]

I want to know what’s happening in the future and while Sony showed us the road I find Hassis silence shocking.

You mean because they haven't announced a 100MP X2D?

 

[k-hawinkler]

I have had zero interest in MF cameras, be they (in alphabetical order) Fujifilm, Hasselblad or Leica. But here I am with a Fuji GFX 50S and its stellar lenses at what I would consider reasonable discounted prices. Such a joy to use this system. :thumbup:

What happened? I saw a few amazingly detailed 50S images and noticed the announcement for the 100S to be released in 2019. Now that I have used my 50S system for several months with a smile on my face and am heavily invested in GFX lenses I am not interested to look elsewhere and am looking forward to add the 100S - provided it lives up to high expectations. :grin:

 

[Satrycon]

Interesting...can you explain this a bit more? it does not need LENR because the files are clean?


Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

- X1D is the only camera that does not have/need LENR.
-

 

[algrove]

Fuji seems to have taken over this market segment in short order. Other than the Leica S that has the oldest sensor Fuji, Pentax and Hasselblad all use the same Sony sensor which is very good. Fujis refinement is terrific and that's why I bought the 50R along with FGujis ever increasing SMF (Small Medium Fotmat) lens lineup.

 

[vieri]

In MF, I had the S 007, the Pentax 645Z before that, Pentax 645D before that, Leaf 12R before that, PhaseOne P65+, P45+ before that. Now, after three years of Leica SL, I decided to go with the Hasselblad X1D and couldn't be happier.

However, I shoot ONLY landscape with my kit, and that makes a lot of difference of course (i.e., I don't care about the power-up time, but 23mm of the widest Fuji vs 21mm of the widest Hassy makes a huge difference for me, X1D's implementation of long exposures vs Fuji makes a huge difference for me, and so on). To me, I would take a purpose-oriented approach rather than a feature-oriented one:

- If you need a more "universal" MF, then Fuji is probably your best bet, and not only for the money;
- If you do landscape only, the X1D wins for me;
- If you do studio / portraits with high sync flashes only, then probably the S 007 with leaf lenses would be my choice, followed by X1D;
- If you do sport or nature, then 35mm is still the way to go, IMHO.

Just my .02. Best regards,

Vieri

 

[PeterA]

In MF, I had the S 007, the Pentax 645Z before that, Pentax 645D before that, Leaf 12R before that, PhaseOne P65+, P45+ before that. Now, after three years of Leica SL, I decided to go with the Hasselblad X1D and couldn't be happier.

However, I shoot ONLY landscape with my kit, and that makes a lot of difference of course (i.e., I don't care about the power-up time, but 23mm of the widest Fuji vs 21mm of the widest Hassy makes a huge difference for me, X1D's implementation of long exposures vs Fuji makes a huge difference for me, and so on). To me, I would take a purpose-oriented approach rather than a feature-oriented one:

- If you need a more "universal" MF, then Fuji is probably your best bet, and not only for the money;
- If you do landscape only, the X1D wins for me;
- If you do studio / portraits with high sync flashes only, then probably the S 007 with leaf lenses would be my choice, followed by X1D;
- If you do sport or nature, then 35mm is still the way to go, IMHO.

Just my .02. Best regards,

Vieri

Vieri - Fuji will bring out something wider and as good as the 23mm - which is as close to perfect a wide I have ever used ..
Whilst wides are important for landscape so are longer lenses at times - and I think Fuji has covered XID there easily with the 250 + 1.4 X TC and the to be released in March 100-200...

As for studio work - I think a lot of people use HSS these days don't they - the advantages of Leaf shutter are also disadvantages against focal plane - I didn't t like the 1/200th limit on my XID....

I can't see any difference in "purpose" between the two cameras- I can see a huge difference in operation and value for money.

Of course there are personal preferences - which are important - so fo ryou a lot of the utility functions and amenity that the Fuji delivers are less relevant - still this is a lead up camera for Fuji - the 100MP version will be released later this year. It isn't an accident Fuji is selling so many of these systems.

Pete

 

[vieri]

Vieri - Fuji will bring out something wider and as good as the 23mm - which is as close to perfect a wide I have ever used ..
Whilst wides are important for landscape so are longer lenses at times - and I think Fuji has covered XID there easily with the 250 + 1.4 X TC and the to be released in March 100-200...

As for studio work - I think a lot of people use HSS these days don't they - the advantages of Leaf shutter are also disadvantages against focal plane - I didn't t like the 1/200th limit on my XID....

I can't see any difference in "purpose" between the two cameras- I can see a huge difference in operation and value for money.

Of course there are personal preferences - which are important - so fo ryou a lot of the utility functions and amenity that the Fuji delivers are less relevant - still this is a lead up camera for Fuji - the 100MP version will be released later this year. It isn't an accident Fuji is selling so many of these systems.

Pete

Pete,

exactly, these are personal preferences. I guess, since you get access to unreleased lenses, that you are a Fuji spokesman of sorts (Ambassador / close to Fuji / something like that?) and I appreciate it that you'll defend your brand, but I stand by what I said. Personally, for me:

- I prefer Hasselblad X1D for landscape, I don't need a 250mm for that, least a 1.4x converter, even less a 100-200mm large and heavy lens (if its photos are to be believed) when a 120 or 135mm suffices for me; I prefer X1D's implementation of long exposures, including the absolutely genius "end exposure" feature, the X1D's form factor, size, weight, built, its "Essential" interface, etc etc. Exactly, there is a huge difference in operation, and one clearly in favour of the X1D for my application.

- For studio, I don't think given the choice between high-speed sync and HSS that photographers would chose HSS. That said, even if they did, I think the best solution is the Leica S 007 (or the upcoming S3), leaf lenses for high-speed sync, focal plane shutter for HSS and to have a faster shutter when you need it. Best of both worlds.

- For nature / sports, 35mm is king (still, at least).

- As a universal MF camera, Fuji GFX are just the best, no question about it. It's the best developed system, more lenses, more accessories, etc. But, being the best Jack of all trades might not (and does not, IMHO) make it the best at (some) of those trades

Again, just my .02. Best regards,

Vieri

 

[Paratom]

A lot of interesting answers which show that the choice depends a lot on application but also on personal taste.
If I would buy a new MF system today and if this should be my main camera (without any additional DSLR) I would probably go Fuji since its flexible and the prices are hard to beat.

On the other side there are also some positive points going for Hassy and Leica S.

I took some more time and ran some more comparisons (and also compared weight) and here are some further findings from my side:
- the x1d has a clear size and weight advantage in regards of body and lenses; Easy to carry 3 lenses and the body. Great for long hikes and for travel, I think this is a big plus;
Also unobstrusive when shooting images of people. The UI with few buttons has advantages and disadvantages, but it certainly has a certain simplicity.
- The S has only one AF point and no face detection, on the other side the operation and shutter delay, blackout time feels very responsive and faster than Fuji and Hassy.
- WHile the Fuji feels solid the Leica and Hassy feel even better and more sturdy.
-People who also use the Leica SL have the advantage that SL and S have same user interface (button layout/menues) and S-lenses can be used on the SL.
- I any way - I believe Leica should look into its pricing strategy

I decided for now to stay with what I have, and if after 6 months Fuji lust will still be there I will buy a used 50-s from you guys, who will upgrad to the gfx-100

 

[dj may]

It is surprising how quickly and frequently some people switch systems! It probably says more about the individual than the camera .

All the mentioned manufacturers make good systems. It comes down to personal preferences. I suggest the OP choose the system that "clicks" with him. Individual specs such as quantity of pixels, ISO, etc. are irrelevant if the camera is not comfortable to use. Also, the final image is the result of the entire process of exposing, processing and printing. This process can minimize or maximize the effect of individual spec items.

The system that "clicks" with me is the Leica S. I would need a very compelling reason to consider something else.

Jesse

 

[PeterA]

Pete,

exactly, these are personal preferences. I guess, since you get access to unreleased lenses, that you are a Fuji spokesman of sorts (Ambassador / close to Fuji / something like that?) and I appreciate it that you'll defend your brand, but I stand by what I said. Personally, for me:

- I prefer Hasselblad X1D for landscape, I don't need a 250mm for that, least a 1.4x converter, even less a 100-200mm large and heavy lens (if its photos are to be believed) when a 120 or 135mm suffices for me; I prefer X1D's implementation of long exposures, including the absolutely genius "end exposure" feature, the X1D's form factor, size, weight, built, its "Essential" interface, etc etc. Exactly, there is a huge difference in operation, and one clearly in favour of the X1D for my application.

- For studio, I don't think given the choice between high-speed sync and HSS that photographers would chose HSS. That said, even if they did, I think the best solution is the Leica S 007 (or the upcoming S3), leaf lenses for high-speed sync, focal plane shutter for HSS and to have a faster shutter when you need it. Best of both worlds.

- For nature / sports, 35mm is king (still, at least).

- As a universal MF camera, Fuji GFX are just the best, no question about it. It's the best developed system, more lenses, more accessories, etc. But, being the best Jack of all trades might not (and does not, IMHO) make it the best at (some) of those trades

Again, just my .02. Best regards,

Vieri

Of course Vieri - camera choice/system choice is all about personal preference - I have no issue what so ever with the XID, fantastic ergonomics ( best in class easily) more compact lenses I am not 'defending' Fuji at all, since there is no reason or need to 'defend' anything although ( as a Leica fan boy) I will reserve my criticism and negative opinion about the Leica S system as an ex user of this system I know its strengths and weaknesses very very well.

Happy Shooting

Pete

 

[vieri]

Of course Vieri - camera choice/system choice is all about personal preference - I have no issue what so ever with the XID, fantastic ergonomics ( best in class easily) more compact lenses I am not 'defending' Fuji at all, since there is no reason or need to 'defend' anything although ( as a Leica fan boy) I will reserve my criticism and negative opinion about the Leica S system as an ex user of this system I know its strengths and weaknesses very very well.

Happy Shooting

Pete

You are not the only one - I had high hopes for the S 007, kept it for about 6 months with a few lenses (24, 35, 70, 3-90mm) thinking they'd fix long exposures (it was 1 minute when I got it) but I have been very disappointed. I am curious to see what the S3 brings to the table, but whatever that is, it's not going to be for me

Best regards,

Vieri

 

[k-hawinkler]

I still own (and use some on other vendors cameras) a fairly large number of Leica M, R, and V lenses, and an M9 body, but have been disappointed with the direction Leica has been taken lately. So I ave been looking elsewhere for camera gear and have found what I was looking for in Olympus, Sony, and now Fujifilm GFX offerings. All systems that I use concurrently. I even kept some special Nikkor lenses.

In terms of Fujinon GFX lenses and their sizes I don't have a problem, assuming the larger lens sizes permits cheaper manufacturing that's reflected in their prices and discounts.

 

[mristuccia]

Maybe it is only me, but after seeing many shots taken with all the three systems, I must say that I prefer the rendering of the Hasselblad and Leica lenses: lots of fine details, silky, without exagerated microcontrast. They are just more delicate and magic to me.
GFX systems are really great but the rendering has something going, so to say, towards the overdone side. Probably it is is only a feeling, maybe it is only the kind of post-production done by the respective authors, but I keep noticing this.

 

[PeterA]

Maybe it is only me, but after seeing many shots taken with all the three systems, I must say that I prefer the rendering of the Hasselblad and Leica lenses: lots of fine details, silky, without exagerated microcontrast. They are just more delicate and magic to me.
GFX systems are really great but the rendering has something going, so to say, towards the overdone side. Probably it is is only a feeling, maybe it is only the kind of post-production done by the respective authors, but I keep noticing this.

Do you use any of these systems - have you got any examples to post to illustrate what you are 'feeling' - that would be interesting.

 

[thompsonkirk]

"GFX systems are really great but the rendering has something going, so to say, towards the overdone side. Probably it is is only a feeling, maybe it is only the kind of post-production done by the respective authors, but I keep noticing this."

I tend to agree with Marco as far as the Fuji primes are concerned, but the 32-64 zoom produces slightly flatter files and is less micro-contrasty and/or 'clinical.'

I tried and then sold the 63 and 45mm; used Pentax 645 primes for a while; and then discovered – despite a prejudice against zooms – that I liked the Fuji 32-64 quite well. Also, with GFX files I use no sharpening (not even the LR default sharpening). So maybe the zoom without sharpening would provide the je-ne-sais-quoi that Marco is looking for. In post-processing, starting with the softer Astia camera profile will also produce a gentler file.

One of the nice things about the system is the ease of using other lenses – even the tiny Canon f40mm f2.8 pancake, which to my eye produces a nice image quality. I just take a step back, 'zooming with my feet,' so that in PP I can crop a bit off the corners.

At any rate, I don't think the differences matter much. All three 'small medium' format systems are good enough for the average perfectionist. For most folks variables of price, ergonomics/hand size, familiarity with brand/menu system/dealer, faith in the manufacturer and its repair service, and lenses-on-hand will matter more than any predictable differences in image quality.

Kirk