GFX 50MP- Blog on the VERGE regarding Fujifilm Medium format pros/cons

Osa713 wrote in post #18803060
Alan why do you want a FF fuji camera so bad? I feel like you are the only one requesting it every month or so...

I could count the number of times I've missed full frame since switching fully to Fuji on one hand... but first I'd have to chop off all my fingers

Osa713 wrote in post #18803060
Alan why do you want a FF fuji camera so bad? I feel like you are the only one requesting it every month or so...

Kinda complicated......

I really was considering on buying a GFX for the sake of trying something new. The actual application would be a bit limiting for what I want to do. AF speed would just be the biggest hurdle to tolerate. With 3 kids I really am not always going to take static photos/portraits. Many things have a check mark beside my wants and needs and some miss the mark....

The image quality and "look" fuji provides is just very pleasant. Post processing is ridiculously simple and easy vs Sony. Canon seems to be easier than sony as far as making colours and render look calm and easy on the eyes.

Fuji fans love to praise that they have a MF sensor in their family. I've seen comments where a Fuji shooter must step up to the GFX over a small FF sensor system. On the same note I think a tiny fraction of Xt3 shooters own a GFX for niche application. Sadly the GFX isn't meant to be a universal application camera that can take action equally as well as static subjects.

Why Fuji full frame? As you can see Fuji is producing some bulky lenses. These crop lenses do not provide the loved small factor system many swear by. Fuji might as well go larger. Fuji already has an unpopular sized bulky XH1 to miss the mark in the Fuji small form factor lovers world.

The signature "pleasant cooked" look is much appreciated as the calm beautiful colours just look great. The current XT3 system with a FF sensor would be an incredible system. If the current XT3 had the identical high iso capabilities and dynamic range of the basic Sony A73 camera I'd buy it in a second. Time after time aps-c shooters will say the difference between FF and aps-c is negligible. However in my case every little bit counts and I've had plenty situations where I'm happy I used a larger sensor. I just don't seem to hit that limit often where the bad noise is apparent and the Canon/sony raw files fall apart.

If my Fuji colours/tones was effortlessly transferable to my Sony system I'd be over the moon. Fuji could easily produce a high fps, buffer, FF mirrorless if they desired to make such a thing. If Fuji was able to make the GFX to have identical blazing fast AF, buffer, fps performance specs then I would truly consider it. However I've already have my FF gear to do everything relatively well except when I want Fuji pixie dust it's not so easy to replicate in lightroom.

Simply, if Fuji produced a FF mirrorless system then Canon/Nikon should truly fear it. 2018/19 Nikon/Canon's first kick at FF mirrorless is a small mediocre step but when it evolves it'll be interesting.

A panasonic GH5 user should be over the moon if the new panasonic FF lumix promises and delivers. I think same goes for an X-t3 user getting a better larger sensor in a Fuji FF system (if it existed) that performs like the current X-t3. Plenty of people that still do not whine about larger form factor will happily trade off a tad more weight for more headroom in challenging light.

Cant wait to see how things go in the next several years.

I gotcha, for me fuji is great because the system is very flexible in terms of size.
If I want a travel setup you can get a smaller camera (x-t20) and buy a 35mm and call it a day, for professional use a gripped X-t3 and an 8-16, 80, 16-55 or 50–140.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18803083
I could count the number of times I've missed full frame since switching fully to Fuji on one hand... but first I'd have to chop off all my fingers

I don’t even think in terms of FF vs crop anymore, my crop camera is actually excedding my needs.

gremlin75 wrote in post #18800079
I'm sure Fuji has considered it but in the end the answer was probably why.

Sony, Canon, and Nikon all do Full frame and all do it well. What could fuji do that one of those don't already do or what could they do better?

Fuji has found a niche in the APS-C cameras. The other camera Brands treat APS-C as the second class sensor. One to get you into photography that will lead you to their FF cameras. Fuji on the other had treats APS-C as a premier camera sensor and it has worked quite well for them. Then they decided to take on another niche market in medium format. They now have 2 medium format cameras that are cheaper then any other MF camera and that are about the same as a high end FF camera.

The camera market is very competitive and pretty saturated right now. Fuji does what they do and they do it well. So like I said, I'm fuji has considered doing FF, but the answer probably why compete in a very competitive, and shrinking, market when they already have a good place where they are at.

Fuji already rules the aps-c mirrorless market. The way Sony is going it almost seems they are still putting tiny effort in the aps-c mirrorless market with their low buck A6400 body.

The difference is Sony does not have the culture / cult following like Fuji has. Fuji has a big market in creating an image both cosmetically to gear with fashionable straps and tighter knit supportive community.

Fortunately for Fuji the other manufacturers are getting a bit ridiculous in the really large lenses for their FF mirrorless. Fuji will always continue to have the small form factor as well as bulky "pro" class lenses like the 33 f/1.9, 80mm, 16-55, 200 f/2 etc.

I think Fuji just missed a point as an asset in creating FF. The biggest fanboys of Fuji appreciate the render and colours Fuji provides. This is the glue that holds many and draws them into Fuji land. I often hear people leaving Fuji for Sony. One common regrettable departure is missing the Fuji magical pixie dust from the Render and colours Fuji provides.

Fuji's bulk users are buying aps-c. A different group of photographers/people are drawn to the GFX. Fuji aps-c love the slightly more economical purchases but get great IQ. The other group of Fuji users are the MF lovers but are more Pro realm (Pro Portrait shooters, demanding landscape/advertisemen​t/marketing) photographers..... than the aps-c crowd. Now that I've been dipping into the Sony world I'm finding fuji lenses to be ridiculously affordable. Canon RF glass and Nikon Z glass will be much more spendy especially that it's new fresh gear and will be painful to buy.

Sony on the other hand seem to have all walks of life buying their FF mirrorless. Little emphasis on their aps-c line but people still buy it. 3rd party lens manufacturers are jumping on the band wagon to provide glass for the FF mirrorless. From soccer mom's to hardcore professionals are getting Sony bodies that can take anything from 0MPH to 100 MPH+ due to advanced AF speed, buffers etc. Demanding in high RES? they get the A7Riii.

Fuji and Sony culture are totally different!!

One interesting thing is I have pure enjoyment shooting Sony, Canon and Fuji. I do not buy into a camera having a "soul". I'm the minority I guess but I careless of dials. Once I customize my camera bodies I use it and master it. Too much glorified story telling on how blissful Fuji is to use. It's a tool that I do enjoy to shoot with and I can navigate my Sony and Canon just as fast as my Fuji in stressful situations.

The Fuji MF just fails for universal use. This is the reason why I stopped the idea of buying a GFX. This is where it's much more advantageous to buy a high end FF camera (average mega pixel to high density). The body performance difference in FF is getting the "shot" is more in tune with anyone shooting static to high speed moving subjects. FF has much more selection of glass vs GFX native lenses. High res FF is good enough for billboards and fine details for many I suppose. However this is entirely based on your subject matter and application.

Osa713 wrote in post #18803110
I don’t even think in terms of FF vs crop anymore, my crop camera is actually excedding my needs.

The fuji render is truly something special. Not trying to gain bonus points saying this........

It does take effort in post processing Sony files. The additional time it takes to make it look "better" to my eyes is extra effort. This is why I understand the strong Fuji community loving the files. Canon is not bad to tweak in post.

My beliefs in unicorns is giving me a glimmer of hope that one day Fuji will reconsider FF. This is more to do with slightly more headroom in higher iso. Otherwise there isn't much complaining about the rich, lush files fuji produces.

Fuji FF not going to happen any time soon.

GFX and action sports:

Kim,

The image of the mediocre blurry car can be obtained by my old Canon Xti. We can use any tools we like and of course a GFX can be used for taking sports action. You can use a general cresent wrench to remove a 17mm bolt head but of course it's more ideal to use a socket or close ended wrench. Daniel Tengs is an official Fuji X-photographer so he's gaining bonus points using the GFX in a self promotion video pimping Fuji gear. Kim if you pulled out your tiny little X-t3 aps-c body vs big slow AF GFX body you would be able to capture much more images to cull. You would be able to have way more images to choose from that are high quality.

Just because you can press a shutter button of a GFX for sports doesn't mean it's using the best tool. It would be safe to say the beast AF system of the X-T3 is superior to the GFX. If you're shooting for a small print magazine ad you do NOT need a medium format system.

My former line of work when I use specialized tools as an auto technician I can do things in a matter of minutes to an hour vs spending 3+ hours trying to remove or fix something. Selecting the appropriate tools for the job is the responsibility of the professional. Using the GFX at this moments with current Camera's technology makes no sense. Picking a Nikon D850 or Sony A7R3 would be able to keep up to such fast moving subjects better. "Better" in obtaining usable images to cull and have a better session vs a whopping 3fps in the Fuji GFX

Almost any modern camera can document a distant car on a track. The DOF is so deep that there is less margin of error to pan shots. I'm surprised that track car looks so poor and blurry. Would have been nice to see a sharp detailed car and blurry background. In this particular image the photog must have been closer to the track and the AF just cannot keep up.

Now that I'm shooting more mirrorless I've improved my manual focus skills A LOT!! Both my Sony and Fuji still are not as good in AF in lower light but this is where I am compensating with manual focus peaking.

I fully understand investing in photography skills in hardware usage but having "better" tools makes a huge difference too.

Moving forward with mirrorless I think it's an eye opener in how many photographers. Many using bounced flash during events using red focus assist with Nikon/Canon will be haunted by Fuji/Sony AF hunt in low contrast lighting. I have NEVER EVER experienced this with my Canon gear but had a rude awakening shooting mirrorless AF hunt.

I'm now using a Godox X1TS Sony trigger for some help with a red focus beam. Sony godox flash does NOT emit a beam. Fuji on the otherhand shoots the red beam to help a tad in low light close proximity shooting. However a photographer would lie if they say they can manual focus all of the time and not miss a shot vs a guy shooting auto focus. When I hear such stories i get very entertained in such primitive discussions. Manual focus is my last means to grab the shot. I just never ever have to rely on this method with my 5dmk3/4.

My tools are my tools and others can use what they please. Fuji full frame would draw more dslr shooters IMO but that's my speculation. I know I'd buy into fuji full frame simply because it's better than aps-c for dynamic range and high iso. This matters to me but others can do as they choose with the tools they own. People move away from fuji and return and some leave aps-c all together. At least we have a choice.

If Panasonic really delivers in their new LUMIX Full frame it'll disrupt the video world. The only thing really holding back micro 4/3 is the dynamic range and high iso. Now they have full frame it'll very likely destroy Fuji X-H2, Sony, Canon etc. Panny has the same "listening ears" to thier customers so IMO "if" Lumix FF delivers Fuji XH2 is gonna feel the competition for video work.

It's gonna be happy times for Fuji. Most Fuji crop sensor users will NOT be stepping up to a limited bulky MF GFX as a universal beast camera for an all application system. This is where Fuji full frame ticks all of the demands and would meet the aps-c bodies performance. But Fuji declines FF so..........

I really don't understand how you're failing to see the arguments for Fuji not needing a full frame camera. The market is overly saturated at this point with FF cameras and guess what... Fuji still sells their APS-C cameras very well (as you noted with your very first post).

Point me to one other APS-C system that's as diverse as Fuji's. Heck, many (or most) FF systems aren't nearly as diverse as Fuji's APS-C lineup these days.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18803426
I really don't understand how you're failing to see the arguments for Fuji not needing a full frame camera. The market is overly saturated at this point with FF cameras and guess what... Fuji still sells their APS-C cameras very well (as you noted with your very first post).

Point me to one other APS-C system that's as diverse as Fuji's. Heck, many (or most) FF systems aren't nearly as diverse as Fuji's APS-C lineup these days.

Fuji is still the king for lens lineup in the aps-c world. There is a reason why I appreciate the Fuji 16mm and 56mm prime setup I use. NO arguments in Fuji working hard in the lens lineup. To a point fuji is hitting a saturation point with the crop sensor glass...why not populate with FF glass

My discussion of Fuji FF is falling on deaf ears. NO big deal as the alternatives are amazing these days.

I've become happy with a certain lens line that works with me. The Canon EF glass lineup is very big but obviously they've had so much time to develop. Fuji has been going gangbusters in pumping out a huge selection of glass.

Big changes as Canon and Nikon has jump on the bandwagon of mirrorless. As I mentioned before if the panasonic Lumix FF delivers with the video / still camera this will also ramp up the competition. The Fuji render and colours are so special that I also feel they have a unique twist if they enter FF. Fuji film look in the digital world is special and if if elevates dynamic range and sensor performance while retaining XT3 body performance it'll be an amazing system.

No debate...it's just a pipe dream but what if......

I guess another possibility is Fuji can make a medium format system have the performance of an XT3.....now that will be mind blowing! There would be no need to create Full frame glass....another what if.........

AlanU wrote in post #18803543
My discussion of Fuji FF is falling on deaf ears. NO big deal as the alternatives are amazing these days.

I guess another possibility is Fuji can make a medium format system have the performance of an XT3.....now that will be mind blowing! There would be no need to create Full frame glass....another what if.........

Oh they are not deaf to the FF ‘wanters’ They just don’t consider it enough of a jump from what they have in the APS-C models, hence putting the effort into developing the much bigger MF system.

Imagine a medium format camera with 100% PDAF coverage good FPS and those Fuji colours. Add in good 4K video and a big battery with built in vertical grip and oh let’s say 100 or so megapixels that’s priced not much more than a Nikon D5…

Would you buy that Alan?

AlanU wrote in post #18803312
Kim,

I fully understand investing in photography skills in hardware usage but having "better" tools makes a huge difference too.
(

No one argues this point but you, the argument is and always will be "is that margin worth the hassle of carrying three systems"...

Osa713 wrote in post #18804148
No one argues this point but you, the argument is and always will be "is that margin worth the hassle of carrying three systems"...

Well, when it comes to hired events I shoot 5d3/5d4. For my casual needs/family jaunts I'll take either Fuji or Sony. I'm ramping up with Sony so I'm considering on picking up a new Sony A9 in the near future for redundancy. Casual jaunts would not be greatly effected if a body fails so I'm cool with my current setup.

People tend to discuss the E mount Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and it's such a silly light combo of 1200 grams. Fuji Xt3 with 16-55 f/2.8 is 1194 grams.

The Sony A73 and Tamron 28-75 weigh in at 1207g. The Fuji lens is made of metal not plastic like that Tamron plus the XF16-55/2.8 is wider at 24mm and more Tele at 84mm. Does seem like a nice lens all the same. All are well under 3kg so they are all lightweight thankfully. But if you want or need to be light you can pronk one of Fuji’s exelent f/2 primes on an X-T20 (or 30) and that is about 563g less than half.

Choice, so so nice to have.

So would you buy that medium format camera as I discribed above Alan?

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18804450
The Sony A73 and Tamron 28-75 weigh in at 1207g. The Fuji lens is made of metal not plastic like that Tamron plus the XF16-55/2.8 is wider at 24mm and more Tele at 84mm. Does seem like a nice lens all the same. All are well under 3kg so they are all lightweight thankfully. But if you want or need to be light you can pronk one of Fuji’s exelent f/2 primes on an X-T20 (or 30) and that is about 563g less than half.

Choice, so so nice to have.

So would you buy that medium format camera as I discribed above Alan?

The E mount Tammy 28-75mm is a compromise for me. I prefer 24mm but I decided to go cheap and buy the Tammy instead of the GMaster 24-70mm for now anyways. I can handled the 28mm wide end as I can just throw on a GMaster 16-35mm f/2.8 if I really want wider FL. Even my Canon 24-70Lmk2 isn't used that often but I have it for continuity of ranges in the Canon zooms. For an inexpensive zoom the Tammy really delivers IQ especially the sharpness across the entire range. Didn't think much of the Tammy but now that I've used it more it's such a bonus for Sony lovers.

Not sure if I'd go for a Medium format camera with 100MP. Even 50MP is beyond my needs in photography. Fuji intentionally staying away from FF should perhaps design a GFX 50 turbo version attempting to match X-T3 performance. They could ditch the current processor and throw in the quad processor version that's in the X-t3. That alone would speed things up. Video is not my real appeal but only used for casual documentation.

My only appeal to Fuji Medium format is really to elevate the high iso performance vs their Fuji Crop counterpart. The Fuji Medium format lens selection is growing but I still have more comfort in the lens ranges Sony and Canon has for their FF systems. Does the GFX have a UWA alternative lens?

If Fuji had a 30mp range FF with a 24 f/1.4, 35 f/1.4, 85 f/1.4, 16-35mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8 I'll buy it 100%

I'm already convinced that I'll eventually be adopting an EOS R Pro version or mk2,3,4 etc and buy Canon RF glass and adapt my EF glass too. If Fuji created such a FF mirrorless system I'd go for it retaining Fuji render/colours and sell off my Fuji crop setup!! AS you can see I'm having great difficulty letting go of the fuji colours/render.