Digital Medium Format Thread

Messages
6,079
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
Unless you are welded to a DSLR style camera, the Fujifilm GFX range must be at the top of any prospective Digital MF shooters list.

In the last few years we have had several bodies (and getting more affordable all the time - and currently the offer the cheapest Digital MF body) and a dozen lenses released, no other manufacturer has made this level of recent commitment.

There has been a significant take up on the GFX system, with pre-orders each time exceeding Fujifilms expectations, now resulting in a lot of second user bodies available where people have upgraded.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Are the Pentax lenses weather sealed?
I know the body most definately is - it's a Pentax thing. Although I am a "fair weather" photographer so unlikely to require it.

I think the newer 28-45 is - but the older ones probably not as they are scew drive AF (doesn't bother me) and they let in dust bunnies (not a sign of great sealing). Still - they are quite cheap on eBay and optically they are pure class.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Unless you are welded to a DSLR style camera, the Fujifilm GFX range must be at the top of any prospective Digital MF shooters list.
I would say so - but ultimately the 645z is a) cheaper new and b) not mirrorless - if that matters to you.

In the last few years we have had several bodies (and getting more affordable all the time - and currently the offer the cheapest Digital MF body) and a dozen lenses released, no other manufacturer has made this level of recent commitment.

There has been a significant take up on the GFX system, with pre-orders each time exceeding Fujifilms expectations, now resulting in a lot of second user bodies available where people have upgraded.
I agree - it looks amazing what Fuji are doing - but the used Pentax lenses are significantly cheaper and IQ wise I can only say the very most complimentary things about them. If you are a landscape photographer looking at a high end high res full frame system I'd say you'd be a fool to buy FF now given what Fuji, and indeed Pentax are offering.

Even new though the Pentax gear is cheaper bar the 28-45. Quite frankly if I was not so against the mirrorless format I'd have dug deeper and probably gone with it just to get the 100-200 zoom and new 45-100. But used or new - I reckon it's a more expensive system but not hideously so. And yes - I think Pentax will continue the 645 system.

+1 for checking out the fuji GFX, I switched to it from Hasselblad a couple of years ago and much prefer it.
I think if you are going Hasselblad you gotta go the full modular H series system....but £30k plus....

Surely diminishing returns.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,079
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
What's the difference between the GFX50R and GFX50s...

Lens wise the GF system probably works out more, bar the wide zoom. And if you go used the 645z system works out very cheap indeed
Different body styles, essentially the same guts inside, 50S has a few more add-on features

Good condition 50S's are rapidly heading towards 2K, around £2.5K at the moment, but with the expected launch of a Mk2 later this year, and the flood of bodies due to people upgrading to the 100S, expect them to be under 2K by the end of the year.

Yes the Fuji glass isn't cheap, and s/h its likely to hold its price well for the foreseeable future due to demand

Yes Pentax may well continue the 645z system, but Fuji are on a roll, and are more likely to be launching more products

My ex-demo 50S (with full warranty) and two lenses (primes and both new) and tiltable EVF and spare battery was pretty much bang on half your 11K cost.
 
Messages
200
Edit My Images
No
The 28 - 45 is weather resistant, that's the newest of the 645 lenses, the rest of the range isn't.

I've had my Z for around 5 years and apart from the 28 - 45 which I purchased in the UK new, the rest have been sourced from Japan / USA at very good prices even taking into account import duty and customs charges, iro 2/3rds of the UK price.

I've always gone for boxed versions and particularly with the Japanese, I've found the seller to describe the lens as excellent++ but the actual is mint, even the box is un-marked !!
 
Messages
1,644
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
I think if you are going Hasselblad you gotta go the full modular H series system....but £30k plus....

Surely diminishing returns.
Right, it was an H system albeit older. GFX has been much better all around and lower cost. I've not used the current H system backs so can't compare with those. Lens wise I thought I would miss the leaf shutter. In practice, it's been no issue.

One of the reasons I think I prefer the results with GFX over Canon is the slower workflow. I take more time to plan and execute the shoots. If I did the same with Canon I'd think it would be very close, the only key difference is the potential print size which I why I went for the GFX.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
So about the same then.....he's got 2 bodies and 4 lenses...
True, but mine wasn't ex demo discounted.

To be fair though had I gone for a GFX50r x2 new and 32-64, 45-100 and 100-200 I reckon £11k would cover it. Eventually I'd have weakened to the 23mm prime.

Its the best mirrorless system going and had the 645z not existed I'd be in the GFX stuff no doubt. More interestingly is 3rd party lenses are coming on stream for GFX users.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Well, I did it.
Officially out of cash.
GFX 50S with the GF45

Just a grab, yet to get out and play with a bit of time to use it.
Hoping I'll never have to visit.

DSCF0022-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr
It's the subtlty on offer that really shows these larger sensors off. Look at the blacks on the door and guttering - delicious.

Nice image and welcome to the fold :D
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
6,475
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
No
Messages
6,475
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
No
Messages
18,464
Edit My Images
No
With a nod to @macvisual @snerkler

Again with the GFX and GF45
Image quality is extraordinary
But really not sure it's for me.
Shot it yesterday alongside my little X-S10, thinking I prefer the smaller kit.

1
DSCF0106-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr

2
DSCF0081-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr

3
DSCF0078-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr

4
DSCF0111-Edit.jpg by Trevor, on Flickr
Nice, got to love the breakout. I had a ride through Matlock Bath yesterday, CRAZY CRAZY busy. I didn't stop as there's no way I'd have been able to maintain social distancing.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Messages
6,079
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
With a nod to @macvisual @snerkler

Again with the GFX and GF45
Image quality is extraordinary
But really not sure it's for me.
Shot it yesterday alongside my little X-S10, thinking I prefer the smaller kit.
Trevor, looking at the selection of bike images on flickr, some of them have a real 'depth' to them, something IMO you can't get with the APS-C sensor, liking 82 and 86

For me the IQ benefits are the tonal resolution and the depth to the images - and the added bonus is that editing them compared with X-Trans Images is a lot quicker - they are more right out of camera.

Today I printed 'Desert Rose' at A3 as an exercise in whether the benefits of MF translate onto a relatively small print, I am very pleased (Canon Pro-1000/Fotospeed Platinum Baryta) - the more I use this camera the more impressive it is. If I didn't need the X-H1/16-55/50-140 for some projects myself and my wife have, I would be chopping that lot in for another GF lens

 
Messages
6,475
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
No
Trevor, looking at the selection of bike images on flickr, some of them have a real 'depth' to them, something IMO you can't get with the APS-C sensor, liking 82 and 86

For me the IQ benefits are the tonal resolution and the depth to the images - and the added bonus is that editing them compared with X-Trans Images is a lot quicker - they are more right out of camera.

Today I printed 'Desert Rose' at A3 as an exercise in whether the benefits of MF translate onto a relatively small print, I am very pleased (Canon Pro-1000/Fotospeed Platinum Baryta) - the more I use this camera the more impressive it is. If I didn't need the X-H1/16-55/50-140 for some projects myself and my wife have, I would be chopping that lot in for another GF lens

Thanks David. You’re not Bl**dy helping..lol..
 
Messages
1,644
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Has any tried Astrophotography with MF? My canons still have the edge with sharp f1.4 lenses.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Has any tried Astrophotography with MF? My canons still have the edge with sharp f1.4 lenses.
No - but actual speed isn't an advantage of MF. Not sure of any MF lens faster than F2.8 but you could try and just increase the ISO to compensate.

The 50mp CMOS chip should out perform the BSI chips in cameras like the R5 at very high ISOs.
 
Messages
8,495
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
First try with the GFX:

Lovely smooth tones, great exposure yet a ton of detail in that sky which compliments the scene and really works well in this instance. It's a very interesting picture which keeps me looking at it. :)
 
Messages
358
Name
Steven
Edit My Images
No
I've been researching the GFX cameras, eps the 100s and have come across a possible problem with their use in landscape. In most of the youtube videos I've watched everyone seems to have to focus stack to get a reasonable depth of field in the image. Does anyone know if this is really always required to or is the technique just being overused?

Regards...
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been researching the GFX cameras, eps the 100s and have come across a possible problem with their use in landscape. In most of the youtube videos I've watched everyone seems to have to focus stack to get a reasonable depth of field in the image. Does anyone know if this is really always required to or is the technique just being overused?

Regards...
I'd have thought stopping down and focusing in the right part would be fine. I've got the 645z - so only the 50mp not the full phat 100mp 44x33 but not seen any issues getting focus correct - and no visible softening at F16 either.

FG pretty close here - and sharp front to back

_IMG0219 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr

No real immediate FG here so no need.

_IMG0239 by Stephen Taylor, on Flickr
 
Messages
6,079
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been researching the GFX cameras, eps the 100s and have come across a possible problem with their use in landscape. In most of the youtube videos I've watched everyone seems to have to focus stack to get a reasonable depth of field in the image. Does anyone know if this is really always required to or is the technique just being overused?

Regards...
I'd agree with @SFTPhotography - different sensor sizes/lens systems have optimum sharpness apertures - typically (and there are always exceptions) M43 is around F5.6, APSC around F8, FF around F11 and Medium Format around F16 - all of these roughly equate to F11 on FF - some lenses/systems will be slightly away from these values but its a good guide to get started with.

The issue then with MF (and to some extent FF) is that in the UK you can very easily start to run out of light, so exposures have to be longer to compensate - not a problem with a tripod, but significant winds can then start to have an effect with foliage. Can be solved by bumping the ISO (acccepting the negatives that come with that) to keep shutter speeds up.

Part of the current 'trend' with focus stacking (and this applies to any system) is the 'desire' to have significant foreground interest driven by the fact that many people have UWA lenses and feel the need to use them as wide as possible at lot of the time (and get a super clickbait dramatic shot). This then presents huge depths of field which to get a consistent sharpness on a high MP sensor requires the image to be stacked. If this is your target landscape type shot then you'll need to focus stack whatever camera system you use.

The reality is that many 'landscape' images don't need the use of an UWA lens (I don't own anything that is wider than 24mm on FF equivalent) and Steve's images above were both narrower than that.

I have a GFX50S and have spent a lot of time using it handheld, and I've been impressed with the front to back sharpness even at wider apertures than F16, obviously the higher MP of the 100S may show up a slight lose of sharpness used the same way, but if one was to print the image rather than zoomed in and pixel-peeped I'd be surprised if anyone can tell the difference.
 
Messages
386
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
I'd agree with @SFTPhotography - different sensor sizes/lens systems have optimum sharpness apertures - typically (and there are always exceptions) M43 is around F5.6, APSC around F8, FF around F11 and Medium Format around F16 - all of these roughly equate to F11 on FF - some lenses/systems will be slightly away from these values but its a good guide to get started with.

The issue then with MF (and to some extent FF) is that in the UK you can very easily start to run out of light, so exposures have to be longer to compensate - not a problem with a tripod, but significant winds can then start to have an effect with foliage. Can be solved by bumping the ISO (acccepting the negatives that come with that) to keep shutter speeds up.

Part of the current 'trend' with focus stacking (and this applies to any system) is the 'desire' to have significant foreground interest driven by the fact that many people have UWA lenses and feel the need to use them as wide as possible at lot of the time (and get a super clickbait dramatic shot). This then presents huge depths of field which to get a consistent sharpness on a high MP sensor requires the image to be stacked. If this is your target landscape type shot then you'll need to focus stack whatever camera system you use.

The reality is that many 'landscape' images don't need the use of an UWA lens (I don't own anything that is wider than 24mm on FF equivalent) and Steve's images above were both narrower than that.

I have a GFX50S and have spent a lot of time using it handheld, and I've been impressed with the front to back sharpness even at wider apertures than F16, obviously the higher MP of the 100S may show up a slight lose of sharpness used the same way, but if one was to print the image rather than zoomed in and pixel-peeped I'd be surprised if anyone can tell the difference.
That would be my assessment of the situation as well. (y)
 
Messages
1,644
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been researching the GFX cameras, eps the 100s and have come across a possible problem with their use in landscape. In most of the youtube videos I've watched everyone seems to have to focus stack to get a reasonable depth of field in the image. Does anyone know if this is really always required to or is the technique just being overused?

Regards...
At the same aperture, the depth of field of the GFX is shallower due to the larger sensor size. As Steve says, stopping down is the normal solution. It may be the videos are situations requiring extreme depth of field in which case focus stack would likely be needed with full-frame sensor camera too. In those situations, my preference is for tilt-shift as usually there is something moving in the scene that makes focus stacking a pain.
 

SFTPhotography

Ranger Smith
Messages
19,191
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
The issue then with MF (and to some extent FF) is that in the UK you can very easily start to run out of light, so exposures have to be longer to compensate - not a problem with a tripod, but significant winds can then start to have an effect with foliage. Can be solved by bumping the ISO (acccepting the negatives that come with that) to keep shutter speeds up.
Yep - and the 50mp CMOS sensor does high ISO's like it just don't care :D

Try yours out at a higher ISO - so clean. I took a couple at ISO400 in the wind - still movement but played with the PEF file. Just so clean, nothing like a full frame file.
 
Messages
6,079
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
Yep - and the 50mp CMOS sensor does high ISO's like it just don't care :D

Try yours out at a higher ISO - so clean. I took a couple at ISO400 in the wind - still movement but played with the PEF file. Just so clean, nothing like a full frame file.
I've been happily shooting handheld up to ISO800, noise is minimal even at ISO1600 (and can easily be cleaned up) - not played with it at higher ISO's yet :)
 
Top