Fuji GFX 50S

paulr

Early indications show that Fuji have taken on the challenge of the megapixel race with their new medium format mirrorless camera with a medium format size sensor. Reading the initial reports this Fuji model is set to stir not only the medium format market,but may temp 35mm high mega pixel camera users also.

Come on Nikon your are definitely starting to lag behind.We may be loyal customers, but not forever, if other manufactures advance their technology and you do nothing.

snakebunk

Fujifilm has a great strategy, they are focused and continue to improve with new models. High end compacts, dx and medium format. They have already transitioned to mirrorless (if they ever had dslrs?) and they make good looking and functional cameras. I think they are as future proof as a camera company can be.
Sigma also has a great strategy. They make great lenses and invest the profit in improving their Foveon cameras.
About Nikon strategy I can only say that I don't know what it is. Hope it will change and that the latest reports of a new strategy proves to be true.
I will never be loyal to a large company but in the camera world you choose a mount and you don't really want to change. One reason that I usually prefer Sigma lenses is that you can actually change the mount. If Nikon shows a clear strategy I would probably be more inclined to buy Nikon lenses.

So, I agree, come on Nikon!

PB_PM

Yawn. Medium format is not the saviour of the world, and is just a hole to throw money at, due to the larger amount of glass required for lenses. I don't see Nikon going medium format, because it really doesn't offer anything that FX doesn't other than narrower depth of field. The current range of medium format sensors are no better, or worse, in low light than FX either, so what's the point? MP I guess, but you sure won't be shooting wildlife or sports with medium format any time soon. For landscapes and portraits I'm sure it great.

For Fuji it makes sense, because Nikon, Canon and Sony have FX locked down and they current max format was APS-C. Fuji also needs something different, because they attract buyers from a small niche, and i don't see that changing with the move to medium format, with a $8k body.

snakebunk said:

Fujifilm has a great strategy, they are focused and continue to improve with new models. High end compacts, dx and medium format. They have already transitioned to mirrorless (if they ever had dslrs?) and they make good looking and functional cameras. I think they are as future proof as a camera company can be.

Fuji has a good strategy for selling to the small niche they have, no doubt about it. Not so sure about future proof, profit hasn't really been there for them. Luckily for them the company sells more than cameras, because the camera business has been shedding money for years, it's a hobby for them, which is good for consumers since they make great cameras/lenses.

Fuji made DSLR's for a while, all rebadged Nikon bodies with custom Fuji sensors. They left the DSLR market back in the mid-2000s, and returned to the higher end with the X100 and X-Pro 1 a few years back.

MegapixelSchnitzel

I predict (I have an 8-ball in my office to make any serious decisions) Nikon will pull a 20-pound rabbit out of their hat about the beginning of July. They will lay out a solid direction; they will wow us with sensor technology and an Expeed 6; and they will astound us with a new mirrorless lineup with F-mount capability. It will be called the Nikon SM (Serious Mirrorless). So, go ahead and buy that GFX. You'll be sorry!

Really.

snakebunk

@PB_PM: When it comes to bird photography medium format mirroless has an advantage over smaller sensors since it allows you to use a longer lense. For example an 800 mm lense on an fx camera can be too long even for bird photography, but an 800 mm lense on a medium format body could be a perfect setup for birds. And if Nikon uses pf technology it wouldn't have to be that long either.

PB_PM

I doubt you could even carry a 800mm medium format lens, even if it used PF elements. You do realize how much larger the glass has to be in circumference right? Even with PF glass, the front element would be huge, if you wanted a meaningfully larger aperture (F4 or larger). It would be large and weigh as much or more than the current 800mm F5.6E.

There is simply no meaningful reason to go larger format for most subject matter.

snakebunk

The front element of a tele lens must be focal length / max apperture. In the case of the 800/5.6 this is 143 mm. This is independent of the size of the sensor.
For a large sensor tele lens the elements close to the camera body must be larger because the image circle needs to be bigger.
So, I think an mf tele lense needs to be slightly larger than an fx tele lens. Please correct me if you disagree (optics is not super easy).

There are many possibilities for a long mf lense: 800/5.6, 800/8, 1000/8. Pf technology would be very useful.

Below are images of an mf 600/4 lens. You can see that it is thicker but not that much bigger than fx 600/4. Also, Pentax 67 is a much larger sensor than what is in Fuji GFX 50S.

https://luminous-landscape.com/600mm/

[Deleted User]

You have to wonder how many would buy into MF package when a D810 with the best lenses is already pretty close to older 50MP MF cameras in terms of image quality. And speaking of image quality how is the new GFX going to give us a "better image" from D810, except to allow us to make massively sized prints. We have to carefully examine comparative outputs.

I am unconvinced that MF is the great panacea for photogs without a wide selection of T/S lenses to take advantage of the best apertures from sharpest lens and give architectural photogs and landscapers the ability to tilt for max DOF and to correct converging lines. And if Nikon brings a 50MP or better camera with improved DR, what is the sense in dumping FF gear?. I also am unconvinced that MF camera will be an economic home run for makers (Hasselblad may be the exception with its light and sleek x1d-50 which looks to have immediate high demand). Diglloyd's examples with the new Hasselblad clearly show a distinctive look and improved accutance compared to FF). It is a sexy, svelt offering with in combination with 50MP, is at first blush, quite enticing for some shooters. Will it be too fragile for outdoor work? - enter Fuji GTX as outdoor workhorse purportedly. It seems to me that few moved to Pentax MF though priced about where the GFX is sitting. So how much better than Pentax MF.

And what about the weight of the GFX with 3-4 lenses? I am close to tapped out with a F810 and 4 lenses with gitzo tripod. Isnt the main purpose of and demand for mirrorless to lose some weight?

This desire for the GTX seems to be a somewhat irrational exuberance for the new hyped product. I admit I could be wrong.

[Deleted User]

"Irrational Exuberance", a tried and true American tradition - and we can look back to 2008 for proof that we tend to overshoot the market and pay the price later. On a personal level, new/bigger does not necessarily mean better unless you have early adaptor syndrome.

Rx4Photo

If you nail the focus with a D800 and the Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar f/2 you'll realize you might need to actually soften up the image in post. It's that incredible. No need for MF.

pictureted

It all depends on what you shoot. I was at an architectural shoot where the photographer was shooting a Phase One 100MP body. He indicated it was smaller than a view camera and the large number of MP was useful for post processing and allowed clients to drill down to details in the final images. He would have shot with more if available.

I saw a shot from the shoot and the detail and DR were extraordinary. I shot a few similar shots with my D810 and the difference was obvious.

[Deleted User]

Sample images (colors) so far to my eye are not as attractive as the 1xd samples I've seen from pro shooters.. Diglloyd is having material issues with camera and one lens; so maybe we are going to see the results of a "budget" MF system with design and/or production issues. Too soon to tell - in hand testing required. I can't say I like the color output of Fuji aps-c systems as compared to Nikon for instance; but b&w rendering seems excellent.

CirenSnapper

I had an opportunity to look at and try the X1d a month ago in Norway when I shot landscape with an Austrian photographer who had just received his (and all three lenses). The camera is superbly made, the menu system intuitive and very easy to learn quickly, but there are clearly improvements to be made and software issues to iron out (though I note that Hasselblad clearly seem to be listening hard - they issued a big firmware update two weeks ago that hit a large portion of the suggestions for improvement by the early buyers). To pictureted's point, he also shot a lot of architecture and it was here that he saw the advantage for him. For landscape, I agree that with the right glass and technique the 810 will run this camera close. The output from the X1d is however impressive - particularly the out of camera colour which looks very good to me and the lenses seem very good quality robust too - we were shooting in temps of around freezing and in rain and sleet. I saw no problems for the camera in these conditions. My 810 did pretty well too, I might add, but if you are a landscape/architecture, studio shooter I can't help but imagine you have to be at least curious about these cameras. And there's the risk for Nikon; we the users don't see what's coming from Nikon, no information other than a very bland statement when the DL was cancelled. Some 810 shooters will be tempted and some will buy. If Nikon does not react and Hasselblad and Fuji continue to map out a clear future and to improve firmware etc then the flow of departures could be greater still.

[Deleted User]

The conundrum for Nikon is whether they should or even can react timely (or react at all) to every level of competition in the range of their perceived market. With the virtual collapse of the market since 2010 to mostly cell phone sales and their history of being late to the party but bearing equal or better gifts (d3, d700, and d800 being exceptions), staying head to head in a race with MF may not be feasable for them. A good example of their past culture is with large format lenses where Schneider, Rodenstock, Fuji (and other relative insignificants) had already established themselves and along comes Nikon late to the game but with a broad range of well thought out, excellent quality instruments, some quite innovative (T lenses which used ED glass and components to have different FLs using different rear glass but the same front group.) They also innovated by bringing out Copal shutters.

But that market was growing then. They appear to gave been successful in this niche until competitors started to innovate for which they never responded again.

So how do you stay profitable in a condensing environment? In part by being innovative, eliminating some competitors (probably unlikely for a while) and in the immediate short term by raising prices. If their own history is an indicator, without exciting innovation, even if their presentation is tardy to the market, I would say they will be forced to sell assets or close. Can they change their culture to innovate more quickly? Sigma ceo says it takes 2 years to bring a new lens concept into production. Like the auto industry, Nikon will need to cut their own time line or face elimination in the race.

I am unconvinced their is enough in MF sales for Nikon to worry too much due to MF price point. How many can/will cough up $10k+ for a new system? Their delay in reacting with strong FF innovation, however, a business culture holdover from cultural from their past wont fly in this market. They need to think and act like a series of small, facile and well capitalized cutting edge businesses bringing a range of new products to the market. That may be unrealizable given their history. Sorry for deviating so far from the main topic.

At least Fuji is doing what is necessary to survive.

CirenSnapper

Flip, I tend to agree on the point regarding the size of the MF market.And I admit I'm a landscape and nature shooter, so I'm probably more interested in the Hasselblad given I shoot on a tripod 90% of the time, use live view and focus manually. I'm sure however some will be tempted away and it's a bucnch of people who are capable of spending a lot of money on high end gear, the camera is just the start - it's another bite out of Nikon's income but also reputation and prestige in a certain area. Counter that with a new D8?? and some mirrorless developments and the interest swings back? But the moment we have a vacuum and although I am hugely invested in Nikon lenses and equipment (and still keeping the faith) the X1d makes me very, very curious!

MegapixelSchnitzel

Then again, don't be surprised if Nikon's D5x comes in at around $10K... FF not MF.

paulr

Nikon learnt their lesson with the D3X when they brought that out. at silly money.There strategy should be to bring a the new D8xxx at the most lowest price they and afford to, and hope that the real profit is made from the add- ons photographers buy later, with a new range of high megapixel capable lenses.

Ironheart

@CirenSnapper Have you thought about a gigapan system? This would let you use your Nikon investment, but really get hi-res images:



https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1279614-REG/gigapan_600_0008_epic_pro_v_robotic.html
http://www.gigapan.com/galleries/10307/gigapans/123493

paulr

There are a few on Ebay at the moment, problem is, you needs sherpa to carry it with an appropriate Tripod to handle stability.

Ironheart

Or a burro named mistletoe:

paulr

You ain't too far from the truth Ironheart Nice Donkey

Ironheart

Mistletoe was Ansel Adams' faithful sidekick on many a trek through the Sierra

[Deleted User]

Diglloyd has little positive to say about this Fuji GFX system so far. His broad comment is "disappointed" after having given the the X1d strong positives on most everything but especially the lenses quality. The Fuji color characteristics seem very "off" to me from samples thus far. A pity if this new Fuji' offering is inferior to alternatives. Obviously it's not simply about core resolution output. Who was it that said if it seems to good to be true, it probably isn't. I'll wait until the jury's out before I consider MF. I prob want more than 50mp anyway.

CirenSnapper

Ironheart said:

Mistletoe was Ansel Adams' faithful sidekick on many a trek through the Sierra

Very good Ironheart! I think the running costs of the mobile tripod stand might be beyond me. I like to travel as light as I can and had genuinely never seen one of those contraptions before. Looks too complicated for my simple head.
Interesting what is said about the Fuji by Lloyd C. I think Fuji's colours can be a bit love 'em or hate 'em. They are not really my thing. The Hassie is more interesting to me: I think they have worked hard on giving good tonal transition and are more to my taste, having seen the output. i do wonder about the touchscreen's practicality in the great outdoors though? I like the knobs and dials of the Fuji. All in all I agree with Flip that its maybe time to wait a few months. Any longer and I think I could be tempted by the Hasselblad -- especially if they keep sharpening up the camera with good firmware upgrades as per the first release.