In this his most recent photo news ‘fix’, Jared Polin, AKA ‘Fro Knows Photo’ tackles rumors of a forthcoming replacement for the Canon EOS 6D, and the announcement of Phase One’s pricey new 100MP black and white back. What would you buy with $ 50,000? Fro wants to know.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
The recent announcements of Fujifilm’s GFX 50S and Hasselblad’s X1D have turned a lot of heads, and for good reason. To take the GFX 50S specifically (since it’s more likely to represent an affordable option for DSLR shooters), we love Fujifilm cameras. It’s hard not to – they offer excellent ergonomics with a level of direct control that photographers itch for, and Fujifilm’s color science renders images that harken back to the days of film, while retaining all the advantages of digital. Meanwhile, the X-Trans color filter array (CFA) offers a number of advantages compared to traditional Bayer CFAs, showing decreased false color and a slight noise advantage due to a (relatively) greater proportion of green pixels.
Ultimately, though, the image quality of Fujifilm’s best cameras was limited by their APS-C sized sensors, which simply cannot capture as much light as similar silicon in larger sizes. And if you’ve kept up with our recent technical articles, you’ll know that the amount of total light you’ve captured is arguably the largest determinant of image quality.
That left many of us wondering when Fujifilm would step up to full-frame (35mm). But Fujifilm went one better – they skipped the arguably saturated full-frame market and went straight to medium format. In a rather compact, lightweight mirrorless form-factor at that. That made a lot of sense especially when you consider Fujifilm’s heritage in medium format film cameras, and its experience making medium-format lenses for other brands.
So, finally, here comes the GFX 50S: Fujifilm ergonomics and colors, but with all the advantages offered by larger sensors. But while heads turn, eyes widen, and colleagues fight over who gets to take the camera out for a shoot, personally I’m in need of a little convincing. And think you should be too, if you’re thinking about plopping down a fat wad of cash for this seemingly drool-worthy system.
But what’s not to like, you ask? Bear with me…
The potential advantages of larger sensors can broadly be split into four areas: noise in low light, dynamic range, subject isolation (shallow depth-of-field), and resolution. But zoom into the following 36MP at 100% – are any of those lacking?
 |
| ISO 64 on a Nikon D810 gets me medium format-esque signal:noise ratio (image cleanliness), along with subject isolation I can’t get on medium format just yet, not at this focal length anyway (which would require a non-existent 44mm F2.5 MF lens). The incredible sharpness of this lens means I get good use out of those 36MP even wide open at F2. Photo: Rishi Sanyal (Nikon D810 | Sigma 24-35mm @ 35mm F2) |
The question is: does the GFX 50S currently deliver on all, or any, of these advantages over what the best of full-frame has to offer? Let’s look at each separately.
For the same f-number and shutter speed (or ‘focal plane exposure’), a larger sensor is exposed to more total light. The same light per unit area is projected by the lens, but the larger sensor has more area available capturing it. An image made with more light has less relative photon shot noise (the noise that results from the fact that light arrives randomly at the imaging plane). The more light you capture, the more you ‘average’ out these fluctuations, leading to a cleaner image (that’s the laymen’s description of it anyway; read about it more in-depth here).
That’s why a full-frame camera generally gives you cleaner images than your smartphone.* So if more light means better images, that’s a clear win for the GFX 50S, right?
Not so fast…
No, literally, not so fast. The lenses available for the GFX format simply aren’t as fast as those offered by full-frame competitors. The fastest lens on Fujifilm’s GFX roadmap is F2, which in full-frame equivalent terms is F1.56** (the concept of equivalence is out of scope for this article, but you can read about it in-depth here; for now, just remember the GFX has a reverse crop factor, relative to full-frame, of 0.79x). And most of the current MF lenses hover around F2.8 and F4, or F2.2 and F3.2 equivalent, respectively. That means that if they had the exact same underlying silicon technology (or sensor performance), a full-frame camera with an F2.2 (or F3.2) lens should do just as well as the GFX 50S with its F2.8 (or F4) lens. Even if were were to think ahead to the MF 100MP sensor Sony provides in the Phase One cameras, its 0.64x crop factor at best yields an F1.3 full-frame equivalent lenses from the one F2 lens announced, still not beating out the Canon 85/1.2, and barely beating out the plethora of available F1.4 full-frame lenses. So even if the newly announced G-mount lenses cover the wider medium format image circle (which I’d sure hope they would), things still aren’t so exciting.
But full-frame can do better than that: F1.4 and F1.8 lenses are routinely available for full-frame cameras, typically for less money too. An F1.4 lens projects twice as much light per unit area than an F2 lens, and 4x as much as an F2.8 lens, amply making up for the 1.7x smaller sensor surface area of full-frame.
That means full-frame cameras can capture as much, or more, light as the GFX 50S simply by offering faster lenses. But wait, it there’s more…
$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-19745370″,”widgetId”:489,”initialStateId”:3472}) })
Companies like Sony have poured a lot of R&D into their full-frame (and smaller) sensors, and the a7R II uses a backside-illuminated design that makes it more efficient than the sensor used in the 50S. It also offers a dual-gain architecture that flips the camera into a high gain mode at ISO 640, allowing it to effectively overcome any noise introduced by the camera’s own electronics. In other words, the a7R II’s sensor is better able to use the light projected onto it, relative to the MF sensor – ironically a sensor made by Sony itself – in the G50S (or Pentax 645Z, or Hasselblad X1D). This allows it to match the low light noise performance of the larger sensor in the GFX (and Pentax 645Z and Hasselblad X1D) even at the same shutter speed and f-number. See our studio scene comparison widget above.
So if we start with parity, guess what happens when you open up that aperture on the a7R II to an f-number simply unavailable to any current medium format system? You guessed it: you get better low light performance on full-frame. Whoa.
Although the same f-number and shutter speed give a larger sensor more total light, they receive the same amount of light per unit area. Most sensors of a similar generation have broadly similar tolerance for light per unit area (technically: similar full well capacity per unit area). But a larger sensor devotes more sensor area to any scene element, so can tolerate more total light per scene element before clipping. That means that for the same focal plane exposure, despite clipping highlights at a similar point, a larger sensor will render shadows (whose noise levels define the other limit of dynamic range) from more total light. And the same logic that applies to low light noise applies here as well: more total light = less relative shot noise and less impact of any noise from camera electronics. That means cleaner shadows, and more dynamic range.
So another clear win for the larger sensor GFX, no? Well, no. Because someone poured a lot of R&D into the Nikon D810 sensor (noticing a trend here?), giving it higher full-well capacity per unit area than any other sensor we’ve measured to date: its ISO 64 mode. Each pixel can hold more total charge before clipping, relative to equally-sized pixels on any other sensor in a consumer camera. That means it can tolerate a longer exposure at ISO 64, longer enough (at least 2/3 EV, or 60% more light) to capture as much total light as the 68% larger sensor in the GFX 50S exposed at its base ISO (100). Don’t believe us? Check out our real-world dynamic range comparison of the Nikon D810 vs the Pentax 645Z, which ostensibly shares the same sensor as the GFX 50S:
$ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-17142302″,”widgetId”:479,”initialStateId”:3427}) })
In this shoot-out, we exposed each camera to the right as far as possible before clipping a significant chunk of pixels in the brightest portion of the Raw (in the orange sky just above the mountains). The D810, in this case, was able to tolerate a full stop longer exposure***, which allows its (pushed) shadows to remain as clean as the 645Z. That’s the (scientific, not baloney) reason we claimed the Nikon D810 to have medium format-like image quality. Because its dynamic range and overall signal:noise performance at ISO 64 rivals many current medium format cameras their base ISOs (though not the huge new 100MP MF Sony sensor in the new Phase One). Just look at its massive SNR advantage (read: image cleanliness) for all tones at ISO 64 over the Canon 5DS R at ISO 100 – we intend to plot the Fujifilm GFX 50S on the same graph, and don’t expect it to show any advantage to the D810. Because science.
Read about this all more in-depth in our D810 review here, and check out Bill Claff’s quantitative data that shows a 0.22 EV base ISO dynamic range difference between the D810 and 645Z – hardly noticeable, much less something to write home about.
Fair enough, there’s a little more to the story. ISO 64 does require more exposure than ISO 100, either via a brighter lens, or longer exposure time. But one might argue that under circumstances where you care about dynamic range – i.e. high contrast scenes – you’re typically not light-limited to begin with, and can easily give the camera as much light as needed. Either because you’re shooting on a tripod, you’re using studio lights and can just crank them up, or because there’s so much light to begin with (it is a high contrast scene, right?) You’re working at or near base ISO anyway, so you shouldn’t have trouble adding 2/3 EV exposure by opening up the lens or lengthening the shutter speed a bit.
But, yes, if you’re in a light-limited situation (i.e. you’re not shooting at base ISO) and it’s high enough contrast that you care about dynamic range (have to expose for highlights then push shadows), then the GFX 50S will have the upper hand here. But dare I say, that’s quite the niche use case: keep in mind that most situations demanding higher ISOs tend to be in lower light, where you care more about general noise performance, not dynamic range (since low light scenes tend to have lower contrast). And if that’s what you care about, there’s the a7R II which, although it may clip highlights a bit earlier, can give you as good, or better, low light noise performance… [link back to Noise section above].
But I’ll concede – if you want both the base ISO dynamic range of the D810, and the low light noise performance of an a7R II (albeit with F2 or slower lenses), then the GFX might be your ticket.
As we calculated in our ‘Low light (noise) performance’ section above, the fastest lens on Fujifilm’s roadmap is ~F1.6 full-frame equivalent, with most current available lenses being F2.2 equivalent or slower. Since full-frame routinely has F1.4 (equivalent) lenses available, you actually get more subject isolation, and blurrier backgrounds, with full-frame than with medium format.
And, no, the ‘but larger formats have more compression because you use longer focal length lenses for the same field-of-view’ argument is false. Just say no to the compression myth. For equivalent focal lengths/apertures, there’s no extra compression. Compression is relative only to equivalent focal length and subject distance (or subject magnification), and its relative distance to the background. Not the format you’re shooting on. Don’t believe us, have a look for yourself:
 |
|
|
Full Frame (70mm F4.5) |
APS-C (46mm F2.8) |
46mm F2.8 on APS-C is roughly equivalent to 70mm F4.3 on full-frame – meaning the two shots above should be virtually identical. And they are, save for a tiny bit more DOF in the full-frame shot because F4.5 was the closest I could get to F4.3. Now, of course, you can get shallower DOF on full-frame, for example by shooting at F2.8. But that’s because those faster lenses are available for full-frame.
They’re not in Fujifilm’s lineup, which includes two F2.8 lenses, one F2 lens, and a few F4 lenses – which are equivalent to F2.2, F1.6, and F3.2 in full-frame terms, respectively.
Without brighter lenses, there’s just no reason to get excited about medium format for subject isolation and blurry backgrounds. If you’re a bokeh fanatic, full-frame’s arguably the sweet spot.
OK, finally, some good news. Well, theoretically anyway.
If you have two differently sized sensors with the same pixel count, the smaller one will be more demanding on its lens (it samples the lens at more lines per mm for the same scene frequency). Manufacturing larger lenses is also slightly easier, since the same relative tolerance level can be achieved, despite a larger absolute variance.
So if you’re looking for true 50MP of detail across the frame, you’re more likely to get it with the GFX 50S than with a comparable 50MP full-frame sensor, simply because of the realities of lens design and tolerances. That said, we’ve been told that some of the newer full-frame lens designs were designed with 80 to 100MP in mind, on full-frame sensors. And with the eye-popping performance of some of the newest full-frame lenses we’ve seen, from varied manufacturers, we’re not inclined to disagree. We’ve seen some 50MP files from the 5DS R paired with truly stellar lenses where we simply can’t imagine anything better, resolution-wise. In fact, at ~F5.6-6.2 equivalent, I’m not seeing a major resolution advantage of the medium format cameras over the full-frame cameras in our studio scene comparison tool, and the 50MP full-frame image below isn’t exactly starved for resolution, is it?
 |
| 50MP Canon 5DS R image, shot with a Sigma 24-35mm F2 lens at F2. At F2 full-frame equiv., this image would have been impossible to shoot on the Fujifilm GFX 50S without a 44mm F2.5 lens, which doesn’t exist, nor is on Fujifilm’s roadmap. And despite the 5DS R’s smaller pixels for the same total pixel count sensor, this image isn’t exactly starving for resolution and sharpness at 1:1 viewing, thanks to modern lens design. Photo: Rishi Sanyal |
Put another way: if you’re seeing eye-popping resolution at F2 above and here and here (and even at F1.4 on some new lenses) when viewing a Canon 5DS R 50MP full-frame file at 100% (do click on the above image and view at 100%), do you want or need a truer 50MP? Or do you want even more than 50MP, particularly if it’ll come at the cost of more depth-of-field, since there are hardly any F2 equivalent lenses that’ll give you the subject isolation and background bokeh you see in the full-frame shot above?
Only you can answer that question, but it is true that physics being physics, larger sensors will always tend to out-resolve smaller sensors with equivalent glass. And so this is the area where we most expect to see an advantage to the Fujifilm system, especially over time as we approach 100MP, and beyond. It’s probably easier for an F1.8 prime paired with the GFX 50S to out-resolve an F1.4 prime on a 5DS R when both systems are shot wide open, but whether that will be the case (or if Fujifilm will even make an F1.8 or brighter prime for the system) remains to be seen. I certainly don’t think it would be a cheap combination.
Still excited about the Fujifilm GFX 50S and Hasselblad X1D? Perhaps you still should be. You get Fujifilm ergonomics and color science in a body capable of far better image quality than Fujifilm’s APS-C offerings. But remember you can emulate much of that color science in Raw converters with proper profiles (we’re looking into a separate article on this). More importantly, remember that equivalence tells us that an F1.8 medium format prime is what the GFX 50S actually needs to at least match the performance from modern full-frames paired with F1.4 lenses, from the perspective of noise and shallow depth-of-field. And that’s before you consider the advanced silicon technologies we’ve seen in different full-frame (and smaller) sensors that we haven’t yet seen in any medium format sensor. These advances have, for example, allowed a Nikon D810 to catch up to the dynamic range of the Pentax 645Z at base ISO, and the BSI, dual-gain a7R II sensor to catch up to the GFX 50S in low light noise performance.
Still, as I’ve said, physics is physics. For equivalent apertures and final output resolutions, we do expect medium format to yield a slight resolution advantage, thanks to its lower demands on resolving power of lenses. But the extent of this advantage, especially given some of the tremendous progress we’ve seen in recent lens designs, remains to be seen: I’m not starving for eye-popping detail at 1:1 viewing of 50 and 42MP files when pairing a 5DS R or a7R II with stellar modern prime lenses.
Of course, as medium format evolves, the same gains we see in full-frame over smaller sensors might find their ways into the format. But this will require both the silicon to keep up, and for the development of faster lenses. At least as fast as the fastest lenses full-frame offers. One thing does make us hopeful – recent conversations with some forum members alerted us to the fact that certain full-frame lenses, like the Zeiss Otus primes, actually project an image circle large enough for at least a square crop on Fujifilm’s new MF format. That would essentially get you high quality F1.1 equivalent glass on the GFX 50S. Cool, if you can focus it, anyway… (the GFX focus even with native lenses is anything but fast or intelligent, by the way). But if we see more and more fast full-frame lenses able to cover the image circle of the GFX G50S, then we’re more likely to actually experience the benefits of the larger sensor format, though native fast lenses (that aren’t slow unit focus, please) are really what we need.
Else, the potential advantages may be outweighed by the disadvantages: the extra weight, heft, price and severely lacking autofocus. And the GFX 50S has given up some of the noise and false color advantages their X-Trans cameras show…
For now, we hope that looking at the problem through the lens of equivalence at least gives you an idea of how big (or small) you can reasonably expect the differences to be. Maybe it even saves you a dime or two. Or makes you want to yell at us for bringing up equivalence, again.
But at the end of the day, equivalence has left me rather equivocal about medium format digital. What about you? Let us know in the comments below.
Editorial note: The headline of this opinion article has been updated to make it clearer that the points expressed are not intended to be taken as being specific to a single product, but represent discussion of the pros and cons of the emerging enthusiast medium-format camera class as a whole.
Footnotes:
* It’s also why ‘multi-shot’ modes yield cleaner images than single shots: these modes essentially capture more total light, averaging out shot noise. It’s also why brighter scenes generally look cleaner than low light scenes: more light = more photons captured = less relative shot noise = higher signal:noise ratio (SNR, or ‘cleanliness’ in laymen terms).
** The GFX 50S’ 44x33mm sensor has an effective 0.78x crop factor, so you can multiply the MF lens’ f-number by 0.78 to get the equivalent full-frame f-number.
*** We don’t control for T-stop, which could partially explain the drastic exposure difference. This doesn’t affect our experiment though, as we applied well-vetted ‘Expose to the Right’ (ETTR) principles for a fair comparison
**** Blind test: our ISO 12,800 studio scene shots of the GFX 50S and the a7R II have both been resized to 42MP, and a 576px wide 1:1 crop has been taken. Can you tell which is which?
 |
|
|
a7R II or GFX? |
GFX or a7R II? |
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
| Toshihisa Iida, General Manager of Fujifilm’s Optical Device and Electronic Imaging Products Division, posing with the new medium-format GFX 50S. |
We’re at the CP+ 2017 show, in Yokohama Japan where Fujifilm is preparing to ship its long-awaited medium format GFX 50S.
We sat down with three Fujifilm executives, Toshihisa Iida, (general manager of Fujifilm’s Optical Device and Electronic Imaging Products Division), Makoto Oishi, (manager of Fujifilm’s Sales and Marketing Group, Optical Device and Electronic Imaging Products division), and Shinichiro Udono, (Senior Manager for the Sales and Marketing Group of the Optical Device and Electronic Imaging Division), to learn more about the GFX, some of the challenges of creating a medium-format system, and future plans for GX and X series development.
Yes, absolutely. For the past four or five years we’ve been concentrating on the APS-C format, and a lot of people were asking us when we’d enter the larger format market. Once some time had passed, and we’d produced a good number of APS-C lenses, we started to look more seriously at large format to attract more customers. That was about two years ago.
 |
| The GFX 50S is a mirrorless medium-format camera built around a 43.8 X 32.9mm CMOS sensor. Although the camera borrows a lot of design cues from its smaller X Series cousins, the GFX offers a very different handling experience. Despite being based around such a large sensor, the combination of camera and 63mm prime lens is surprisingly lightweight and very well-balanced. |
Since the development announcement at Photokina we’ve received a lot of positive feedback from photographers. We started a program called the ‘GFX Challenge’, where we loaned GFX cameras to photographers from various fields, in order to get feedback. Based on that feedback we refined the camera’s software. Now that we’re almost ready to ship, I can’t wait to get feedback from customers.
Most feedback was more or less as we’d expected. Photographers were surprised by how small and light the camera was. We made a few changes on the firmware side, mostly small refinements, like how the dials work, for example, to make it less likely that you’ll make an accidental control input (etc.)
The sensor size is 4X as large, so speed and responsiveness were two major challenges. Readout speed, processing and autofocus.
 |
| Makoto Oishi shows off the 50MP medium-format sensor used in the GFX 50S. |
Yes, definitely.
We don’t know. Obviously, the other brands are focusing on full-frame at the moment. Obviously though we’d welcome any brand that joins this category, because it will increase awareness, and help the category as a whole.
At the moment we’re just focusing on making the best product we can. We hope that the GFX will change how people view medium format, and this will help to grow the entire category.
Obviously the sales volume will be lower, so the product life cycle will probably be longer. But whenever we have the right combination of the right hardware, the right sensor and the right processor, we’ll introduce a new camera.
After our experience with the GFX challenge, we actually see a much wider potential audience than we’d originally thought. It will depend on what kinds of lenses we introduce. For example, we didn’t think that street photographers would use medium format much, but [based on feedback] we hope that we can reach a broader audience.
After the announcement of the GFX we started to get a lot of requests from photographers about other lenses. For example a lot of photographers are asking us for telephoto lenses, in the 200-300mm range. Nature photographers for example. Also people are asking for a wide-angle, like a 15mm equivalent, and an equivalent to the 70-200mm on full-frame.
 |
| Fujifilm’s recently updated lens roadmap for the APS-C X Series, including new lenses coming next year. We’re told that ultra-wide and fast tele lenses have been requested for the GFX platform, too. |
The autofocus algorithm in the GFX is the same as in the X Series, but performance is different. The readout speed of the sensor is critical, and that’s not the same. Compared to the X Series, the speed is more limited.
Yes absolutely.
When we started studying the possible design, we were aware that some of our customers wanted a rangefinder-style camera. ‘It’s a Fujifilm medium-format, it has to be a rangefinder!’ However, at least in our first-generation camera, we wanted to reach a wider audience. We concluded that a mirrorless design would be much more versatile. Mirrorless gives us more freedom, and more flexibility.
 |
| The GFX’s 50MP sensor is 4X larger than the APS-C sensors in Fujifilm’s X Series cameras. This entails a lot of extra processing power, which is one of the reasons why the GFX sensor has a conventional bayer pattern filter array. |
There are fewer mechanical parts, which is simpler. No mirror or pentaprism also means smaller size and weight.
Yes of course. We made the flange-back distance short enough to accommodate mount adapters for legacy lenses. We are making two adapters, one for H (Hasselblad) mount, and one for view cameras.
There are several things that mirrorless manufacturers need to focus on. Number one is speed, still, to attract sports photographers. Also viewfinder blackout, we need to innovate there. Maybe one more processor and sensor generation should be enough to make mirrorless beat DSLRs in every respect.
I think so, yes.
Hopefully!
Yesterday we announced new Fujinon cine lenses, in what we’re calling the ‘MK series. Fully manual zooms, and manual focus. Initially we’re introducing them in E-Mount versions, but X mount will follow. They’re designed to cover Super 35. The flange-back distance of E and X mount are very similar, so we can use the same optics.
 |
| The new Fujinon MK18-55mm T2.9 and 50-135mm T2.9 cover the Super 35 imaging area (~APS-C) and are being released in Sony E and Fujifilm X mount. |
We have an optical devices division, which markets broadcast and cinema lenses, and I really want to maximize synergies between the broadcast and photography divisions.
Fujinon is well-known in cinema lenses, but until now, the lenses have been very big and very expensive. But now we’re looking at a new kind of video customer, who’s getting into the market via mirrorless. Mostly they’re using SLR lenses, which aren’t perfect. So a lot of those customers are looking for more affordable cinema lenses.
Yes, we think so. But obviously we’re releasing these lenses in X-mount too, and increasing movie quality in the X Series is very important. Traditionally, Fujifilm has been more of a stills company, but when we introduced the X-T2, we had a lot of good feedback about the 4K video, especially about color. Of course we need to do more, and we need to develop more technology, but I think there’s a lot of potential.
 |
| For now, Fujifilm tells us that they see most potential in videographers using Sony’s E-mount mirrorless cameras, but the company has ambitious plans to expand the video functionality of its X Series range. |
A lot of customers wanted improved one-handed operability. So we moved all the buttons to the right of the LCD, like the X-Pro 2. And the integrated ISO and shutter speed dial, for instance.
We looked into whether we should change it, but it would have affected the size of the camera, and we concluded that the form-factor is one of the most important selling-points of the X100 series. Of course we evaluated the image quality, with the new 24MP sensor, but concluded that it was still good.
 |
| If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The X100F features the same 23mm F2 lens as its predecessors, but Fujifilm ran the numbers and saw no reason to update the lens for 24MP. We do wish there was a 28mm version, though. |
Yes, of course. That’s why we have the 28mm wide converter for the X100, and the X70. And there’s potential to expand the fixed-lens APS-C camera range more.
For APS-C, definitely. For the GFX format, we’ll probably continue with the conventional bayer pattern. If you try to put X-Trans into medium format, the processing gets complicated, and the benefit isn’t very big.
X-Trans is a 6×6 filter arrangement, not 4×4, it’s something like a 20-30% increase in processing requirement.
Editor’s note:
It’s exciting to pick up and use a production-quality GFX 50S, after writing about it for so many months, and Fujifilm’s senior executives are understandably keen to get the camera in the hands of photographers. Due to ship in just a few days, the GFX looks like a hugely impressive product,. We’ll have to wait for Raw support to take a really detailed look at what the camera can do, but our early shooting suggests that image quality really is superb.
$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_3125129958″,”galleryId”:”3125129958″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });
It was interesting to learn a little about the feedback process, by which Fujifilm gathered notes, impressions, and suggestions from professional photographers after the launch of the GFX last year. The end result is a very nicely balanced camera, both literally (it’s surprisingly lightweight) and figuratively. Although obviously very different to the X series APS-C models, the GFX is simple to figure out, and easy to shoot with. When Mr Iida says that he hopes that ‘the GFX will change how people view medium format’, part of this comes down to handling.
It was also interesting to hear that Fujifilm considered other types of design for the GFX. Are there concept renderings somewhere of an SLR design, or a rangefinder? Probably. Will we ever see a medium-format SLR or mirrorless from Fujifilm? Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if the company releases a rangefinder styled medium-format mirrorless. An X-Pro 2-style camera with a medium-format sensor and a hybrid viewfinder? Yes please.
For now though, the GFX is quite enough camera to be getting on with. Beyond medium-format, indeed beyond still imaging, Fujifilm is eyeing the video market. While Fujinon cine lenses have been popular in the film industry for decades, Mr Iida has his eye on a new generation of videographers, who are growing up using mirrorless cameras like Sony’s a7S and a7R-series. This makes sense, but it’s interesting that the new Fujinon zooms will also be manufactured in X mount versions. This level of confidence from Fujifilm in its X series’ video capabilities is good to see, and bodes well for future product development.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
Toshihisa Iida, Fujifilm’s General Manager of the Sales and Marketing Group talks us through the new GFX medium format mirrorless camera, who it’s for and why it features a Bayer sensor.
We’ll be publishing details of a more in-depth interview conducted without the camera running, next week.
Click here to read a transcript of this video interview
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
Forget full-frame, Fujifilm is diving head first into the world of digital medium format and we’re frankly pretty excited. The GFX 50S will make use of a 51.4MP CMOS sensor and X-Processor Pro imaging processor. In terms of surface area, the sensor is 43.8 × 32.9mm or about 4 times the size of sensors used in the company’s APS-C cameras (and 1.7x larger than a full-frame sensor.) And if 51.4MP sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the same pixel count as the Pentax 645Z and Hasselbled X1D (though Fujifilm says their sensor is newly developed.)
 |
The GFX 50S is a mirrorless camera and the body itself looks a bit like a jumbo-sized XT-2. Set to launch in early 2017, several accessories will be available including a pretty cool clip-on accessory EVF ‘prism’ that can be tilted and rotated once affixed.
 |
Other accessories include a vertical battery grip, which adds an additional shutter release for use in the vertical orientation, control wheel and additional power. Like the camera, the grip is weather and dust-sealed by design. The camera is also freezeproof down to 14°F. Though we’ve yet to hold it, Fujifilm claims the GFX 50S is much lighter than traditional digital medium format cameras and also a good bit smaller.
 |
The GFX 50S’ default aspect ratio is 4:3, however the camera can be set to shoot in a variety of other aspect ratios including: 3:2, 1:1, 4:5, 6:7 and 6:17.
 |
New sensor size, new lens mount: The GFX 50S uses Fujifilm’s new G-Mount, which has a flange distance of 26.7mm. When the camera launches (sometime in early 2017), three G-Mount lenses will be available. The GF 63mm F2.8 WR, shown above, is one of them. It offers a 50mm equiv. field-of-view (due to a 0.79x crop factor). There’s a possibility Fujifilm will kit that lens with the camera body and according to Fujifilm reps, that kit should cost ‘well under $ 10,000.’
 |
Also in early 2017, Fujifilm will be releasing a GF 32-64mm F4 LM WR wide to normal zoom with about a 25-50mm equiv. field-of-view. Like the 63mm F2.8 WR (and actually all G mount lenses) the 32-64mm is weather-resistant.
 |
The third lens to ship around the same time as the camera is the GF 120mm F4 Macro R LM OIS WR lens (bottom, left of center). It offers a 95mm equiv. field-of-view and optical image stabilization.
It’s obviously no small task launching an entirely new system with new lens mount. But as far as glass is concerned for the GFX 50S, a normal fast prime, wide to normal zoom and a macro lens feels like a good start. And there are other lenses that will be coming later in the year, more on that on the next page…
 |
In mid 2017, Fujifilm hopes to ship the GF 23mm F4 R LM WR and GF 110mm F2 R LM WR lenses. The former offers an 18mm equiv. field-of-view and the latter an 87mm equiv. Also, in late 2017, the company will release the GF 45mm F2.8 R WR lens with a 35mm equiv. field-of-view.
That’s all we’ve got for now. We’ll update this article with more information and images once available. But for now, what do you think, is the Fujifilm GFX 50S a camera you’d buy?
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
Phase One has announced a 100MP back for its modular XF medium format camera system, with a CMOS sensor co-developed with Sony. Despite being described as ‘full frame’ the sensor is 53.7 x 40.4mm, making it two and a half times larger than the 135 format to which the term is most often applied. The ‘full frame’ MF sensor guarantees that the full field-of-view of MF lenses can be realized, compared to the cropped fields-of-view a number of previous MF backs, such as the IQ250, yielded. The Phase One XF 100MP camera system offers 16-bit color output and a claimed 15 stops of dynamic range, presumably at the base (native) ISO setting of 50. The camera body, back and 80mm Schneider Kreuznach lens (~50mm equiv.) will set you back around $ 49,000.
Press Release:
The Ultimate Camera System has arrived
COPENHAGEN, January 4, 2016 — Phase One today announced that in collaboration with Sony it has designed a new 100MP CMOS full-frame sensor for the Phase One XF 100MP Camera System. Engineered to perform well beyond 100MP imaging, the modular Phase One XF Camera System platform was designed for expansion – offering hard-working professional photographers tangible investment value.
The XF 100MP Camera System with this new full-frame, medium format 100MP CMOS sensor combines high resolution with high dynamic range and exceptional wide angular response. The Phase One XF 100MP offers photographers unprecedented power to realize their visions. It delivers true 16-bit color, 15 f-stops of dynamic range, live view capturing with HDMI output, ISO flexibility from 50 to 12800 and exposure times of up to 60 minutes.
“For more than 20 years, we at Phase One have been pushing the limits of digital image quality to help top photographers stand out,” said Niels Knudsen, Vice President of Innovation and Phase One’s ‘Image Quality Professor.’ “With the XF 100MP Camera System, everything we have been working toward for our customers comes together in one system: ultimate image quality and ultimate creative freedom.”
“The XF 100MP Camera System delivers unparalleled dynamic range, retaining unmatched detail in both highlights and shadows, packing 101,082,464 active high quality pixels,” said Henrik Håkonsson, Phase One’s CEO. “This is the highest performing system that we have ever created, benefitting from a multitude of Phase One exclusive innovations developed to support our amazing customers in creating the ultimate images.”
Introduced in June, 2015, the Phase One XF Camera System has been built with optimal 100MP performance in mind. As such, features like the Honeybee Auto Focus, Vibration Tracking, Electronic First Curtain Shutter, and Vibration Detection technology have all been developed to ensure the ultimate 100MP performance. The Phase One XF Camera System was also designed for future growth with regular feature upgrades, incorporating new features and unique customizations. Coupled with new Schneider Kreuznach Leaf Shutter lenses, interchangeable Prism Viewfinder and Waist Level Finder, the Phase One XF 100MP Camera System is sure to set the standard for professional photography for many years to come.
High-resolution files produced by the new Phase One XF 100MP Camera System, when processed with Capture One 9, benefit from the software’s advanced algorithms that have been fine-tuned over decades of engineering investment, rendering superior image quality and superior results.
Availability and Pricing
Shipping immediately, the XF 100MP Camera System is available through Phase One photography partners worldwide: www.phaseone.com/partners.
The XF 100MP Camera System comes with Phase One’s unique 5-year warranty and uptime guarantee including personalized 24/7 support and assistance.
The price of the Phase One XF 100MP Camera System (with Schneider Kreuznach 80mm LS lens) is 48,990 USD.
Attractive camera system upgrade offers are available for all Phase One photographers. Please contact our Phase One photography partners for further details: www.phaseone.com/partners.
For a demo of the Phase One XF 100 MP Camera System, please sign up here: www.phaseone.com/demo
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
Chinese lens manufacturer Kipon has announced that next year it will make available a reducing adapter that’s designed to allow medium format lenses to fit on full frame cameras. The adapter will have a magnification factor of 0.7x which it says will both widen the effective focal length of the lens in use and widen its effective aperture.
The first adapter will be designed to mount Hasselblad lenses on Sony E-mount cameras, but the company says it is working on other mounts for a wider range of both lenses and host cameras.
The lenses in the adapter channel the light from the exit element to create a tighter covering circle. This means light that would otherwise fall outside the sensor area is directed to land on it to be recorded.
When a 50mm Hasselblad lens is mounted on a current Hasselblad digital body it produces a similar image area to a 35mm lens on a full-frame camera. That calculation though is a factor of the sensor size of the Hasselblad camera, and the same lens would not deliver that apparent angle of view were it mounted on a full frame camera or in front of the 6x6cm film frames Hasselblad lenses were designed to be used with.
The 0.7x magnification of the Kipon adapter has the effect of canceling out the crop factor, turning that 50mm Hasselblad lens back into a 35mm-equivalent on a full-frame camera.
The adapter will have to be very good quality to make the most of the resolution of Hasselblad lenses, otherwise the exercise will be a bit pointless. It is expected to retail for $ 415 when it becomes available in February.
For more information visit the Kipon website.
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
 |
Ricoh has announced it is to offer an infrared-sensitive version of its 645Z medium format camera, the 645Z IR. Sadly, the new model is not intended for public consumption, but will be aimed at museums and scientific establishments who will have to sign a usage agreement before they can make a purchase.
The camera will be made sensitive to infrared by removing the IR-cut filter that sits in front of the sensor. The photographer will then need to fit a filter over the lens to cut visible light according to the requirements of the occasion. With a hot mirror in place the camera will operate as a normal 645Z, but without one the sensor will be able to record wavelengths of up to 1100 nanometers.
Ricoh says that there is no provision for auto focusing when the camera is working with infrared light as the light focuses at a different distance to visible light, and advises owners to use the magnify function of the live view display on the rear tilting-LCD screen.
Other than the removal of the IR cut filter the 51.4MP camera will operate in exactly the same way as the normal version – including the scene modes, compatibility with Flucards, wireless control from a smartphone and the ability to shoot HD video.
Ricoh is offering the Pentax 645Z IR to museums, libraries, government agencies and research institutions for specialist operations, often involving forensic work or recording detail in artworks concealed by layers of paint or faded with time. Shooting with infrared sometimes makes visible what can’t be seen with the human eye.
The company hasn’t made public the price, but says the camera will be available from 15th January next year.
For more information see the Ricoh website (Japanese)
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
Phase One has announced its new modular medium format XF camera system. The body features a new ‘Honeybee’ autofocus platform (created ‘in-house’), touchscreen interface, and your choice of optical viewfinders. It supports the company’s IQ1 and new IQ3 digital backs, with the latter supporting resolutions of up to 80MP. Also announced today are a pair of Schneider lenses and an updated version of Capture One software. Read more
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)
Phase One has announced official details of its new A-Series medium format cameras after information about the new pairing of the company’s digital backs with an Alpa body and lenses was leaked in November. As was reported at the time, the series will comprise Phase One 50MP, 60MP and 80MP backs, combined with the Alpa 12 TC body and a choice of three lenses – the Alpagon 5.6/23mm, Alpar 4.0/35mm and the Alpagon 5.6/70mm. Read more
Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)