Digital Medium Format Thread

todders said:
Hi Chris good to hear from you again, yes it is not like the first time is it. I think i will be afflicted forever at this rate. i am now semi-retired so i will have to reign in my spending from now on and stick to just one system :) (I cant believe i said that either)
Click to expand...
I fully understand Adrian,being likewise afflicted only tempered by my lack of funds lol. enjoy whatever you have, you take lovely photos
 
Will the GF 20-35mm be announced at the Fuji summit next week?

If it's a fixed apature I may be on bread and water for a while :/
 
Some buskers playing as a band out in the summer weather at the weekend

1.
full


2.
full


3.
full
 
SFTPhotography said:
I don't think it will - the money is really in the sensor with these and a 100mp medium format sensor is never going to be cheap. There are 35mm format cameras that cost the same or more.
Click to expand...
Steve. Actually had my tongue firmly in my cheek. As you know I had one last Autumn. At the time I still had my Full Frame gear. Needed to make a financial decision. I’d have happily kept both systems.
Happy with my choice. But still drool over the Tones, Colours and Dynamic Range of Fuji Medium Format. If my situation improves I’d definitely get another.
Keeping my 35mm for the fast primes I love to use and of course the frankly astonishing eye af.

Naturally I reserve the right to come up with different excuses/scenarios as my GAS rises and falls.
 
trevorbray said:
Steve. Actually had my tongue firmly in my cheek. As you know I had one last Autumn. At the time I still had my Full Frame gear. Needed to make a financial decision. I’d have happily kept both systems.
Happy with my choice. But still drool over the Tones, Colours and Dynamic Range of Fuji Medium Format. If my situation improves I’d definitely get another.
Keeping my 35mm for the fast primes I love to use and of course the frankly astonishing eye af.

Naturally I reserve the right to come up with different excuses/scenarios as my GAS rises and falls.
Click to expand...

Is the dynamic range any better than your FF stuff though?

The 100mp is based around the same photo sites that make up the 61mp A7Riv. In reality there shouldn't be any real difference between that camera, and the GF other than the GF file being larger by 40%. Sony will use a different image engine to Fuji but the two sensors are related - one is just a larger version of the the other.

I've played with samples from the 100mp Fuji - they are clean - but I don't think they are quite as clean as the ones from the 50mp cameras. The 50mp MF sensor is actual bespoke - the 100mp is based around the design of a high res 35mm sensor.

I've also got a pair of D850's and find myself using them more and more - and bar a slight drop in res from the 645z - at base ISO both the 645z and D850 give very similar yielding files that recovery incredibly cleanly with amazing colours. If you have a Z7ii - you might find it actually out performs the D850 due to the newer image engine in that camera. That should give cleaner files than a GF100 series - just maybe too small for your needs. Depends.

My draw for the GFX100s is the resolution - it will actually be slightly less clean than my D850/645z but still very good - but the 100mp is a real draw and I have itching GAS for one. I have a few misgivings around lens line up and maybe some (misfounded) concerns around build quality based around musings I've heard - but you are getting 100mp for a grand and a bit less than 45mp on a Z9 - something has to give.
 
Last edited:
SFTPhotography said:
Is the dynamic range any better than your FF stuff though?

The 100mp is based around the same photo sites that make up the 61mp A7Riv. In reality there shouldn't be any real difference between that camera, and the GF other than the GF file being larger by 40%. Sony will use a different image engine to Fuji but the two sensors are related - one is just a larger version of the the other.

I've played with samples from the 100mp Fuji - they are clean - but I don't think they are quite as clean as the ones from the 50mp cameras. The 50mp MF sensor is actual bespoke - the 100mp is based around the design of a high res 35mm sensor.

I've also got a pair of D850's and find myself using them more and more - and bar a slight drop in res from the 645z - at base ISO both the 645z and D850 give very similar yielding files that recovery incredibly cleanly with amazing colours. If you have a Z7ii - you might find it actually out performs the D850 due to the newer image engine in that camera. That should give cleaner files than a GF100 series - just maybe too small for your needs. Depends.

My draw for the GFX100s is the resolution - it will actually be slightly less clean than my D850/645z but still very good - but the 100mp would be a real draw. I have a few misgivings around lens line up and maybe some (misfounded) concerns around build quality based around musings I've heard.
Click to expand...
I guess the Dynamic Range concern is probably less of an issue than I perceive.
Currently have Sony A1. It’s definitely much more of a camera than I am a photographer.
 
trevorbray said:
I guess the Dynamic Range concern is probably less of an issue than I perceive.
Currently have Sony A1. It’s definitely much more of a camera than I am a photographer.
Click to expand...

I think an A1 is optimised for slightly higher ISO shooting - DR is very good on them but a shade behind the A7RiV/D850/GF100 thing...not a lot in it.

Brass tacks - if a medium format maker had to scale up a 35mm sensor to MF for landscape - you'd be best scaling up the D850 one (not the Z7 with the PDAF stripes) as it's just so clean and optimal and creating a still very nice 80mp or so.

I was kinda hoping Pentax would do this with the 645z line, maybe introduce some nice sealed zooms like their 28-45 but it won't happens.
 
A 100s @ £4219 is very tempting but let's not forget the real cost is in the lenses.

Oh course you can adopt lenses but that can be a lot of effort, I started with one gf lens and a few adopted canons but I did'nt get on well with this method. I know I am lazy but there were too many variations in output for me to be arsed with, now of course I have too many gf lenses.

I'll never learn :)
 
Mr Bastable said:
A 100s @ £4219 is very tempting but let's not forget the real cost is in the lenses.

Oh course you can adopt lenses but that can be a lot of effort, I started with one gf lens and a few adopted canons but I did'nt get on well with this method. I know I am lazy but there were too many variations in output for me to be arsed with, now of course I have too many gf lenses.

I'll never learn :)
Click to expand...

The primes are big money on the GF system.

The 23 is rather excellent but nearly £2000 - whereas a Z mount 20mm is do-able for half that.

The two zooms I would buy are the 45-100 and 100-200 - and compared to GM Sony, S Line Z mount, RF Canon price wise they're OK.

Something like a 20-45 or 25-45 would seal the deal.

I've said this before but the zoom range and FL overlap in the Fuji range bothers me - 32-64, 35-70, 45-100 - 3 lenses cover 45-64, 2 cover 35-64 2 cover 45-70 yet nothing covers 25 to 32 so landscape users are forced into the 23 and 30 primes plus 2 zooms so it gets expensive.

I appreciate zooms might not be the biggest priority for medium format users who shoot studio and portraits - but this isn't a bulky Hasselblad system but something about the size of a 35mm DSLR - and there's landscape shooters galore with the money, skill and need for a trinity zoom medium format system.
 
@SFTPhotography I've tested the canon 200-400 f4 with GFX - the image circle covers the sensor at 200mm and everything 200-400mm with the included TC activated. at 400mm there is a small vignette. Looks promising :)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
And GF20-35 F4 to be announced next Tuesday - at constant F4 won't be cheap though.........
Click to expand...
And that still leaves the 34-45 gap uncovered unless you go for the 35-70 AND 45-100 plus 100-200.

They've not quite thought the lens FL coverage through.

Still, it should be good and I could probably survive without 35-45 covered....
 
SFTPhotography said:
Does the GFX100s have a pixel shift mode like the latest 50sII to make ultra high res files?

Does the GFX100 have this feature?
Click to expand...
Gfx100 has it. I didn’t manage to get it work very well so far though. It seems to need a completely stationary scene. The slightest movement between frames causes glitches. Maybe I didn’t use it properly though, I didn’t study the feature too much.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Does the GFX100s have a pixel shift mode like the latest 50sII to make ultra high res files?

Does the GFX100 have this feature?
Click to expand...
TimHughes said:
Gfx100 has it. I didn’t manage to get it work very well so far though. It seems to need a completely stationary scene. The slightest movement between frames causes glitches. Maybe I didn’t use it properly though, I didn’t study the feature too much.
Click to expand...

The pixel pitch is 3.76 microns, any movement greater than 25% of this size when using the pixel shift mode will cause blur (softening), so basically 1 micron movement in the camera will render the image not sharp. Equally if the subject moves by 1/4 of a pixel (obviously len size determines this), it will not be sharp. I suspect it might work ok in a studio environment where the conditions can be tightly controlled, but outside of that I suspect that as @TimHughes says there will be issues.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top