Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thinking about buying the GFX? Article by DpReview
Often, discussions about the merits of system A vs system B remind me of wine tasting. Pure subjectivity with a lot of placebo effect.

A lot has to do with people's own convictions about things (e.g. sensor size, color reproduction, brand, particular lens used, coating, etc. - insert whatever subjective metric here).

Sure, some parameters are quantifiable and measurable, but most of the time it's purely subjective and I'm sure than no one would be able to accurately pinpoint photos shot with say system A vs other systems in a blind test.

I believe that under most circumstances, people wouldn't be able to tell images from MFT, APS-C, FF and medium format (as in Fuji GFX) apart. Maybe for a few shots here and there, but I highly doubt it would be significant.


It reminds me of this article on lensrentals' blog:


Flickr gallery
That reminds me of this recent article/video:

thxbb12, a comparsion betweeen FF sensors might be hard. Less so a comparison between µ 4/3, FF and MF - but that depends on the subject. If it's already flat, is kind of typical web-resolution, has low contrast and not much colors in it, it will become difficult to tell. Pretty easy would be a wide angle comparison at A2 print size.


For the D850 I sometimes have the impression "blurred" or "out of focus", until I switch to 100% view  Big Grin


Focus transition zone, color details and shadow/highlights are different IMO and still sufficient to see the differences in extremely challenging situations - in normal situations, the "weakest" sesor in it's comfort zone, I'm pretty sure to have onyl a 50% chance of guessing.


I mean, in that blogpost you linked to, it was the non-photographer guessing right  Wink .

Joju and Obicon-


Your enthusiasm, and breakdown of this cameras features is really such that I would love to grab a GFX and see what it can do.  As an amateur photographer I doubt it's going to happen, but how fun it would be to use one and see the results! 


I guess guys like me are stuck with FF, APS-C, and MFT.  And so it is tempting to say FF can do just as much.  But if I say that, what I am really saying is that I have to try to make FF do just as much.  In fact, I have to make an older FF DSLR do as much.  And I am really glad I have my camera and lenses.  But that GFX is putting more pressure on CaNikon.  They've been chopped of at the knees by MILC's and now this!  I can live with it.  But it must be fun having GFX and/or Capture One!

Arthur, I don't own a GFX 50S, I just had maybe an hour with it to try some things, It was good to know the menu from the other Fujifilm bodies, because it's just a bit extended but more or less the same. I was at the edge to jump for this MF adventure, but then... after trying and feeling things are not that solid like a Phase One (for which I really would need a car to transport all the necessities, plus assistants  Big Grin ) I'm happy Nikon came out of their cover with something like D850. I only want to afford one body in the 47 MP class and it's the most versatile they made so far.


That sample is about the impression of a blurred picture


[Image: i-SvqJFZM-L.jpg]


which after all is not that blurred...  Big Grin


[Image: i-xDfhBJj-L.jpg]


I'm not sure about the "fun" part of the GFX 50S, I'd call it more a rewarding part - I know since I started fooling around with high MP bodies what can go wrong. Keeping an eye on this potential sources of technically bad pictures is not much of fun but I got a bit addicted to this amount of details.

Quote:I believe that under most circumstances, people wouldn't be able to tell images from MFT, APS-C, FF and medium format (as in Fuji GFX) apart. Maybe for a few shots here and there, but I highly doubt it would be significant.


Are you kidding, I can't tell my shots from whether they are wide open or one stop down Big Grin. Most embarrassing was looking at a shot I made, thinking "wow, I'm glad I've bought that 50/1.4 lens, wide open it's an amazing rendering", only to realize it's at f/2 Big Grin.


Side by side, of course I could've told which one is at f/1.4 and f/2 but an isolated shot with no comparison? Good luck with that.


I remember all the OMG WIDE OPEN fanboys debating the upcoming Zeiss Batis, precisely whether it was f/1.8 or f/2, 100mm, 135mm or 200mm, which turned out to be a 135/2.8. Almost all the so called experts, judging the sample shots had failed. It was hilarious.


There was even one guy saying it'll be precisely f/2.4. 
At least he was closer than the guessers of f/2.



Well, still, just guessing, but I am thinking more about the color transition quality, and the contrast.  I really don't ever shoot wide open except in poorly lit situations.  I seldom find wide open is sufficiently sharp and contrasty.  I just meant that some types of photos should be easy.  A photo of something complex and fairly close with slightly low light available, and a slightly variable light.  The lighting seems sufficient in terms of exposure, but my APS-C cameras just can't deal with the dynamic range, whereas my FF can.  It is the same lens, and the same image processor (more or less, I'd have to check.  I think the aps-c may even have a newer image processor).  The larger pixels.  I am seeing how that effects the cameras ability to do fine color transitions. 


And need resolution as well.   At some point this means a physically larger sensor. 


It is sort of a sad confession, but I really like large aperture lenses, simply because they work better better at the apertures that I use.  I would not expect to guess what a photos aperture is by looking at it.  But you can tell if you are impressed or disappointed!  We all have different tastes anyways.  But medium format cameras seem extremely capable for shooting portraits, and things like that.  It would be fun to have to struggle less with portraits.  Some say they are easy.  Well...I don't!

Quote:The lighting seems sufficient in terms of exposure, but my APS-C cameras just can't deal with the dynamic range, whereas my FF can. !
Which cameras are you using ? 5Dmkii doesn't hold the dynamic range advantage versus modern cameras like 80D, are you sure you have dynamic range issues that evident?
Now, I guess I have to look it up Sad .  The ones I've been using recently are Rebel T1i (D500) and 5D Mark ii.  Processors are...

...DiGIC 4 for both.  And anyways I am not a technician.  There may be a difference between the capability to span a dynamic range and the ability to sense as many shades at the sensor level, thus you could display the dynamic range, but only parts of the range will be detected by the sensor, so the outcome is different.


And actually I would not look forward to dealing with new controls, or software.  But it seems almost a sure thing that getting good photos of some subjects would be easy, and that's what puts the fun in it.  Fujifilm is working its way to a much better camera, and this current one is just round 1.  I like to see these developments because unlike Reaganomics trickle down theory, This technology has the potential to be affordable somewhere down the line.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)