Jump to content

Revisiting MF systems


erlingmm
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Now that both the Fuji GFX50 and the Hasselblad X1D are out, it would be very interesting to have a real-world comparison of these new systems towards the Leica S-system, both on IQ and use. I see digilloyd is hammering the Fuji AF system, and X1D users report that images are "not sharp", among the anomalies discovered from actual use.

 

I am not looking for confirmation of my own S system superiority, which I am happy with anyway ;-) Just a real-world comparative test, either from a lab/review, or preferably from people who have some experience with all systems, evaluating both camera, optics and usage.

 

Real world counts more than product sheets.

 

Anyone?

Edited by erlingmm
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don't like the X1D because it relies on Leaf Shutters only... meaning max shutter speed of 1/2000? Also not very compatible with many other lenses.

 

I like the Fuji because of its versatile form factor, even being able to mount lots of Leica R lenses which have a large enough image circle. etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I look at the form factor alone the S looks much more appealing to me than the Fuji, which looks boxy and ugly IMO.

The X1D smaller size could be appealing, but I am too happy with the S (OVF, lens options, wide open performance,...)

I dont believe any of the 3 would disappoint in regards of IQ and user interface and handling and lenses are the more important factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the S OVF will blow away those EVF's. You only have to get away from it to appreciate it.

I agree, but the big OVF comes at a cost with that big mirror in terms of potential camera movement handheld (as well as the absense of EVF focus aids).

 

The SL, albeit with the smaller sensor, has a far better EVF (than the GFX and X1D) and further adds superb OIS with its native zooms, providing for potentially sharper pics handheld, even under poor lighting conditions. Handhold-ability in less than ideal light was one of the limitations I experienced during my week long S006 demo, especially with the slow S zoom. And with the optional split image finder in place, half of the screen would go black at the long, slower end in less than ideal light.

 

I'm sure the S007 would provide an improvement over my S006 experience, but that too would come at cost.... literally.

 

Trade offs.

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have compared the GFX to my S007 and I also own a Pentax 645Z. I have held an X1D but no real world experience shooting it.

 

IQ wise the 44x33mm sensor is *slightly* better. Maybe a 1/3 stop in DR and more resolution. But it probably comes down to whether you want the aspect ratio of the Leica or 4:3.

 

The Fuji lenses are excellent as are the newer digital lenses for the Pentax. But they're still behind the primes made for the S when wide open. The S zoom is a dog though. A 20 year old Pentax beats it handily in the corners.

 

The S is the best built. It has 4K video. It's the only one with both leaf and normal lenses. The S is incredibly weather resistant. Battery lasts forever. Has the best OVF (if you want an OVF. I don't). S lenses are almost all faster than the competition (except the upcoming 110mm f2 Fuji) and usable from wide open. Plus the S lenses just have a different look. One I really like.

 

The Hasselblad has portability. The Fuji is light as are the lenses. The S and Pentax are bricks relatively. The Fuji and Pentax have flippy rear screens, which is nice. The Fuji and HB can be focused anywhere on the screen, easily.

 

Only the Leica has stupid restrictions on bulb mode and LENR. So it's the least capable for a landscape shooter. Only the Leica has a full set of true native leaf shutter lenses so it's the most suitable in studio.

 

Bottom line though is that the Fuji and Hasselblads aren't a *system* yet. They don't have the lenses I want. I've done the adapting thing and for MF adapting 35mm lenses holds no interest at all. In a year when they have 6-7 lenses each I'll take another look. Hopefully by then Leica will have released a mirrorless something that I can use the special S lenses on. That's what I want.

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fuji and HB can be focused anywhere on the screen, easily.

 

Is that really true for the Hasselblad?  Similar to eg. the Leica TL the Hasselblad X1D with its touch screen has no joystick or 4-way controller which (at least on the TL) makes changing the focus a slow and cumbersome process...

 

This is probably the thing I like least about the Hasselblad, otherwise it all sounds very promising IMO.

 

Both the Hasselblad and the Fuji have a lot of momentum.  Last week they were the most popular cameras on dpreview.  Who would have predicted a few years ago that medium format cameras would become competitive and popular again?

 

I own 7 HC lenses, so I am very interested in the X1D, but it is still too early, perhaps when the 22mm is released...

 

I am curious to see what Leica will come up with.  I won't be easy though to get that momentum going again with the increased competition on the market...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The X1D's touch screen can be used to focus. Otherwise you'd use the shutter and aperture scrolls to move the focus point, which really is cumbersome.

 

I don't think it's a camera for fast-paced photography. And the lens selection is still limited unless you use an adaptor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that really true for the Hasselblad?  Similar to eg. the Leica TL the Hasselblad X1D with its touch screen has no joystick or 4-way controller which (at least on the TL) makes changing the focus a slow and cumbersome process...

 

This is probably the thing I like least about the Hasselblad, otherwise it all sounds very promising IMO.

 

Both the Hasselblad and the Fuji have a lot of momentum.  Last week they were the most popular cameras on dpreview.  Who would have predicted a few years ago that medium format cameras would become competitive and popular again?

 

I own 7 HC lenses, so I am very interested in the X1D, but it is still too early, perhaps when the 22mm is released...

 

I am curious to see what Leica will come up with.  I won't be easy though to get that momentum going again with the increased competition on the market...

 

 

I use the touch screen on my T and Olympus cameras without a second thought. I don't have enough experience with the X1D to see if it's the same or worse. But the S has a single focus point and the 645Z has a central cluster so neither offers dead accurate AF at the edges of the frame.

 

I would think the X1D would be incredibly tempting to existing HB shooters as you can just buy the adapter. I don't and my hope is for a new S body or a couple of new Pentax digital zoom lenses for the 645Z. Either would make me very happy indeed.

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the touch screen on my T and Olympus cameras without a second thought. I don't have enough experience with the X1D to see if it's the same or worse. 

 

Do you use Touch AF on the T?  

 

I use Spot AF which I find very accurate but changing the focus via the screen is just too slow...  

 

You need to get your eye of the EVF, touch the focus point for a few seconds and then change the focus, way too slow.  Or even worse via the menu.  Because of that I tend to focus and recompose...

 

I thought the X1D worked in a very similar way but I might be wrong.  Perhaps I should also give Touch AF another try on the T.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Owned 006, 007 and now GFX, haven't really look at X1D.

 

My initial thoughts are:

1. Build Quality: Leica of course is going to be better cause of the price and brand ideology. But, Not to say that Fuji is some rusty steel plate nail together by a smithy. It's pretty good standard for any camera nowadays.

2. Ergonomics: I will say both has strong point and weak point. The natural holding position and posture of the S is very very good. But the weight leave something to be desire especially when combine with the large mirror box and mirror slap. I have not much confident to shoot handheld even when using the faster 007. Fuji ergonomics is very strange or rather I am not used to it. The thumb position is too far back and make pushing some of the buttons hard, and believe me, they have lots of buttons!!!! But it's lack of mirror box and lower weight makes it rather pleasant as a street walker.

3. Menu/Function/Feature: Well, Leica's very clever and minimalistic menu system is what I like, it in terms of feature and function, it's lacking somewhat. Fuji has some very very good in body JPEG engine as well feature such as the XPAN crop that I think is really really useful, the in body sensor cleaning is a must for fuji, but I think Leica actually need it more than Fuji. I have fit fuji on Cambo Actus with exposed sensor and I don't get as much dust or oil on the sensor as Leica... That oily shutter box is really annoying when out shooting.

4. IQ/Color: IQ, goes hand in hand with the lens. So far, I have resisted going for the prime lens as not so much of the focus shift issue that I am worry about (which I think is bull, cause it happens on most lens anyway) but for reason I will talk about later. On the zoom lens, it is superior to leica S zoom lens, which as most of you know is an unstable lens. The sensor quality and technology is also superior to Leica older tech which I think should really change to make them relevant again in the MF world. Colour of the Fuji is incredible. It is way better than and of the 50meg sensor digital back that I have used processed in C1. The profiles in LR is surprisingly good. But I heard X1D is even better (X1D not a camera, but a glorified digital back). Leica S's colour is very special, so both has its appeals and I like both of them.

5. Versatility: this is the reason why I don't buy the prime lens. Hands down, the Fuji is the most versatile MF digital market on at this moment, it will adapt any lens, and camera system on the market as long as the flange distance is enough or the image circle is enough. I have just made order of a modified 11-24mm Canon lens that will take out the lens shade to get larger image coverage. And use it to shoot XPAN crop mode to mimic 30mm XPAN lens.... That 11-24mm is a masterpiece with sharpness all the way to the edge of the image circle. I have fitted enlarging lens to the Cambo Actus + GFX to do shifting and stitching. The whole kit fit (GFX+Zoom+ACTUS+4 enlarging lens)  in my Billingham Hadley pro shoulder bag and it doesn't weight that much. With the GFX, possibility is boundless. With the S, however, it's traditionally a SLR, and true, that it has Video function, but have you seen people use it to take anything serious videography? it can adapt some other lens, but truly, it's ultimately hinder by that glorious OVF and mirror box. GFX is the future...

 

Sunrise at the bund with GFX + Cambo Actus + Rodenstock APO-Rodagon-D 120mm f/5.6 (3 image stitched to be about 80mp)

Edited by xiaubauu2009
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you use Touch AF on the T?  

 

I use Spot AF which I find very accurate but changing the focus via the screen is just too slow...  

 

You need to get your eye of the EVF, touch the focus point for a few seconds and then change the focus, way too slow.  Or even worse via the menu.  Because of that I tend to focus and recompose...

 

I thought the X1D worked in a very similar way but I might be wrong.  Perhaps I should also give Touch AF another try on the T.  

 

I tend to see the shot and touch the af point I want as I raise the camera to my eye. Been doing it for a while with Olympus cameras and it's pretty natural to me. Also do the same with the SL. Sometimes I'll need to move the camera a bit after AF but not as much as if the focus point is in the centre.

 

Gordon

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody said the S24mm was not so sharp in the corners. Oh, well. Sorry, just low res here.

Edited by erlingmm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Usinf SL and S hand in hand I have one more comment: In low light or for manual focus the evf is an advantage IMO. In very bright and coontrasty light the EVF can be a pain compared to the OVF. In the end I still believe in OVF because you see the real color, light, contrast. But yes, a matter of taste.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fujifilm GFX 50s + Cambo Actus GFX + Schneider Kreauznach 28mm f/2.8 L

Image circle can't really made it. Cropped to take out the vignette.

 

 

Fujifilm GFX 50s + Zoom lens 32-64mm f/4

Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody said the S24mm was not so sharp in the corners. Oh, well. Sorry, just low res here.

I think I am the only one claimed S24 weak corner at f3.4 here. If I didn't read Vieri's nice little review about that lens, I would think I got a poor copy, but obviously not. The lens is well centered and behave beautifully with a few stop down.

 

Please show 100% crop before f4, we can't judge from web image for lens performance.

 

After F8 is fine. Nowadays, I assume people talk about high performance lens, the caliber has to be raised given so many great optics introduced just last few years, OTUS, Sigma Art, and Canon 16-35III, 35L2, Nikon105G, even new Fuji120 etc...

 

For given price, I put quite high expectation for this raved glass, hence for my not rave comments about it.

 

But talk is not enough, truth is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the extreme corners wide open. I just don't care. Other systems actually do have better glass and more MP. I don't want to use them. If specs matter more to you, get tech camera lenses and a 100MP back or an XF and blue ring lenses or a Sony and Otus. If they help you take better pictures, great. For many photographers, those systems do work better. I do better with the S. Especially with the 24.

 

--Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about the extreme corners wide open. I just don't care. Other systems actually do have better glass and more MP. I don't want to use them. If specs matter more to you, get tech camera lenses and a 100MP back or an XF and blue ring lenses or a Sony and Otus. If they help you take better pictures, great. For many photographers, those systems do work better. I do better with the S. Especially with the 24.

 

--Matt

It is not spec matter to whom or not butabout accuracy of the information and fact of certain lens. It is for everybody's benefit.  

 

Yeh! 24S could be a great lens if you shoot portrait at f3.5 or landscape after f8 but it may not suitable for shooting night sky or if you think 9K should give you a lens with good or better corner than some recent 135 format WA lenses, you will be disappointed.  

 

I had or have all the old R,M glass include 80/50 Summilux, 40 years 35mm Summilux M, Summaron M etc... along with OTUS55/85, 135 APO and most of the S glasses. I use lenses for whatever reason it attract me or system need and I don't care spec sheet but I don't make false or blank claim either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...