Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Erik Kaffehr
Erik Kaffehr Veteran Member • Posts: 5,653
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Satyaa wrote:

Erik Kaffehr wrote:

Hi,

Something seldom discussed is that a mirrorless system will yield much accurate focus than a DSLR, due to:

  • The actual sensor is used for focusing.
  • Mirrorless focusing often uses CDAF, which is slow but accurate.
  • CDAF allows for focusing stopped down, that handles focus shift.

That applies to most mirrorless. It also means that some focusing methods are more accurate than others.

Good point. So, this factor would differentiate GFX100S from say, Pentax 645, right? But not a factor if comparing GFX100S to X1D-II-50C?

Probably so.

The benefits of MFD are essentially having more pixels. The GFX 100/100S has the same size of pixels as the Sony A7rIV. The major difference is that the GFX 100 has more of them.

Is the pixel size a major factor in MF? Meaning, is there a major advantage or disadvantage to having 50 or 100MP on the same size sensor? (comparing GFX50S vs GFX100S)

The major advantage of having more pixels is that fine detail is more correctly rendered. Large pixels will cause aliasing. That may be troublesome or not.  Larger pixels may look sharper, as they would normally viewed at lower magnification.

GFX 100 models have phase detection AF (PDAF) which is fast and accurate when combined with CDAF (Contrast Detecting AF). GFX 50 models have only CDAD, which is slow but accurate.

Another good differentiator between 50S and 100S.

It seems that both the Fujifilm GF system and the Hasselblad X1D system offers great lenses. Looking at the lens diagrams, it is quite obvious there is a huge design effort.

When Hasselblad announced the X1D-II-50C, or Fuji announced the GFX50S, I wasn't so interested in MF. The GFX100S just seems very different. I am sure the high pixel count and the new IBIS add to that impression. X1D does have a more modern and sleek look.

The higher pixel count makes a lot of sense. After all, it is the pixels that carry the information. There is probably some optimum pixel size.

But, the same applies to modern 24x36 mm lenses.

It seems that most GF buyers are very happy, but there are also plenty of GF systems on EBay:

Not to discount anything here but I am guessing that this could largely be the GFX50S owners upgrading to GFX100S and not needing the 50S anymore. May be, the improved AF and IBIS are more compelling reasons for this move than the increase in pixel count.

Yes, that is an explanation.
On the other hand, I am aware of a few guys who jumped off the GFX 100 train, don't know why.

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1313&_nkw=gfx+&_sacat=0

From where I stand, the reason to buy into MFD is improved image quality.

  • 29% more detail
  • Same SNR/DR at 168 ISO as 24x36 at 100 ISO
  • To some extent, better lenses

I have been shooting MFD from 2013 to 2015, still doing it now but perhaps 2% of my shooting only. So, I don't think the size difference alone matters, in the sense larger sensor yields better images.

Back in 2013, there was a difference in sensor resolution, but 24 MP on 24x36 mm was quite enough for all my needs.

Best regards

Erik

Thanks for your reply and sharing those points.

Best regards

Erik

-- hide signature --

Erik Kaffehr
Website: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net
Magic uses to disappear in controlled experiments…
Gallery: http://echophoto.smugmug.com
Articles: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD JimKasson
MOD JimKasson
MOD JimKasson
MOD JimKasson
MOD JimKasson
MOD JimKasson
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow