Digital Medium Format
- Thread starter rfkiii
- Start date
You missed the most common answer, none of the above. I think we have a couple MF film guys here, not sure any other digital MF. This will be interesting to see.
AlanLichty
Moderator
Should have had an entry for "in my dreams" 
Rick, I would love to have you share some of the advantages of your system, like DR, better lenses light weight etc.
Kyle Jones
Moderator
I've been tempted by the gfx. How do you think it compares to the Pentax?
Jim Dockery
Well-Known Member
I'm with Ben, would like to hear why you went MF, and examples of the advantages you are seeing.
One of the biggest reasons I don't see myself going there (other than the obvious cost & bulk/weight) is the lack of long lenses. I like zooming into a landscape to find interesting compositions with a tele lens - I just got a Sony 100-400mm + 1.4 and am loving it.
One of the biggest reasons I don't see myself going there (other than the obvious cost & bulk/weight) is the lack of long lenses. I like zooming into a landscape to find interesting compositions with a tele lens - I just got a Sony 100-400mm + 1.4 and am loving it.
rfkiii
Well-Known Member
Sorry fellows, I didn't realize a conversation had developed.
Background. I have long carried two cameras with me. At first, it was two Canon 5 series cameras. When the D800E was released with more MPs and DR than Canon was offering in addition to some lenses only available with the Nikon brand, I started splitting my kit between the two brands. Using this logic, I felt I had a kit with the best of all worlds. I did rent a Sony A7rII & Batis 25 but could not get used to the ergonomics (too small). If Sony ever does something about the size of the A7r series cameras, I'll consider one. I'd also like to see more resolution in the next iteration.
In 2015, Canon released the 5DsR and Pentax lowered the price of their 645z. I bought both cameras and a handful of Pentax lenses which replaced my 5D3 & D800E. The 645z soon became my camera of choice for sunrise and sunset because of its DR (the resolution being a wash) but I always reached for my 5DsR when heading out for a hike because it was smaller & lighter than the 645z even though knowing that a better camera for DR was sitting at home/camp/motel.
So, when Fuji announced a camera with the same sensor in a mirrorless design, I knew the size/weight issue was going to be solved. In fact, the GFX+32-64 is almost identical in size and weight to the 5DsR/24-70 II. I was hesitant about using an EVF but those fears have evaporated and I can't think of a reason why I will ever buy a new camera without an EVF (butI still have my 5DsR in case I need it).
In addition to the larger sensor, Fuji did something with the microlenses to help sharpen the image. One of the biggest draws to the GFX and X1D are the lenses. The Fuji lenses are sharper than anything I've seen from Canon and Nikon (and I assume Sony as well). Fuji has a long history with MF lens making from the film era.
I am not here to convince anyone to buy anything therefore examples will not be forthcoming. I was just answering a poll. I recommend that anyone who is curious should rent a GFX or X1D and a native lens or two and put it up side by side to your current kit. If any of us get together at another meet up, you'll be welcome to try my camera.
Background. I have long carried two cameras with me. At first, it was two Canon 5 series cameras. When the D800E was released with more MPs and DR than Canon was offering in addition to some lenses only available with the Nikon brand, I started splitting my kit between the two brands. Using this logic, I felt I had a kit with the best of all worlds. I did rent a Sony A7rII & Batis 25 but could not get used to the ergonomics (too small). If Sony ever does something about the size of the A7r series cameras, I'll consider one. I'd also like to see more resolution in the next iteration.
In 2015, Canon released the 5DsR and Pentax lowered the price of their 645z. I bought both cameras and a handful of Pentax lenses which replaced my 5D3 & D800E. The 645z soon became my camera of choice for sunrise and sunset because of its DR (the resolution being a wash) but I always reached for my 5DsR when heading out for a hike because it was smaller & lighter than the 645z even though knowing that a better camera for DR was sitting at home/camp/motel.
So, when Fuji announced a camera with the same sensor in a mirrorless design, I knew the size/weight issue was going to be solved. In fact, the GFX+32-64 is almost identical in size and weight to the 5DsR/24-70 II. I was hesitant about using an EVF but those fears have evaporated and I can't think of a reason why I will ever buy a new camera without an EVF (butI still have my 5DsR in case I need it).
In addition to the larger sensor, Fuji did something with the microlenses to help sharpen the image. One of the biggest draws to the GFX and X1D are the lenses. The Fuji lenses are sharper than anything I've seen from Canon and Nikon (and I assume Sony as well). Fuji has a long history with MF lens making from the film era.
I am not here to convince anyone to buy anything therefore examples will not be forthcoming. I was just answering a poll. I recommend that anyone who is curious should rent a GFX or X1D and a native lens or two and put it up side by side to your current kit. If any of us get together at another meet up, you'll be welcome to try my camera.
My biggest objection to a MF system is that I am not a fan of the aspect ratio, I like wide, even 3x2 is not wide enough, I usually finish my images at 16x9. This cuts into the resolution of the MF system more than the 3x2 aspect ratio.
Vieri
Well-Known Member
I am using the Hasselblad X1D, and my story is very similar to Rick's, adding some Leica SL years in, and taking out Canon which I never used (perhaps the only brand, I used pretty much everything else!). The Nikon / Pentax bit sounds extremely familiar though
Ben, I see your point about 16:9, and I hate to lose resolution there, but that is compensated by the fact that I nearly always use 4:3 or 5:4 in vertical versus 3:2, so I'll get my resolution back with that
Best regards,
Vieri
Ben, I see your point about 16:9, and I hate to lose resolution there, but that is compensated by the fact that I nearly always use 4:3 or 5:4 in vertical versus 3:2, so I'll get my resolution back with that
Best regards,
Vieri