Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Greg7579
Greg7579 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,264
Re: Basic questions - wannabe MF user

DMillier wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

DMillier wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

tgltgl wrote:

Satyaa wrote:

I understand your point. My first spend on a digital system was fairly modest with a Rebel Digital XTi and one lens. Five years later, and for next 8 or so years, I have a decent but not a heavy spend into Nikon system. I plan to use them as long as they work.

The next system I buy will probably be my last. The one thing I expect from it is satisfaction. So, I need to consider carefully.

If it means a used 50S with a 45mm prime, or even a Z body with a couple of primes, I am open to all possibilities and am not in a rush.

Thanks.

I own GFX 50R and most of the GFX primes at this point (also a former long time Canon DSLR user), and have been super happy with the system so far over the last couple of years. But even if I could only own 50R + GF 45 for the rest of my life it would still be enough to make me happy. That lens is my all time favorite and to me it was worth switching to GFX just to be able to shoot with it (I will eventually upgrade 50R to some new model down the road). I disagree with those who say it's not worth using GFX if you don't print big - I actually don't print at all but enjoy viewing those glorious files on my huge 43" 4K monitor - more than worth it to shoot MF just for that reason alone as far as I"m concerned. Some of the new FF cameras and lenses are amazing as well, but as far as purely IQ is concerned MF systems are still superior. Of course in most images it's hard to tell the difference, but that is true even if you shoot with high end mobile phones (for casual viewing). But for some of those very special once in a lifetime images (even if only capturing a handful of those every year) it is really worth it to have the best possible equipment - for me that also means always using GF primes over GF zooms.

Good post Tom. I agree with you on the printing big comment. That whole nonsense about how MF is only beneficial if you print big is ridiculous anti-MF FF marketing propaganda.

I totally disagree with you that on most images you can't tell the difference between MF and FF. There is a big difference and you can tell on every image. Not just some.

Greg.

I'm not going to debate the image quality of MF with you this time, but if you think carefully about your comment above (bolded), there is more than a little irony here. You have basically stated that anyone who who doesn't see what you see is spreading anti-medium format propaganda.

Quite apart from this being pro MF propaganda in its own right, what about someone who (say) has an eyesight problem and maybe can't see subtle differences? A bit insulting or thoughtless a judgement on your part, IMO. Unless you can produce some objective evidence that everyone is lying, really the strongest you can legitimately claim is that MF looks so much better to you that you can't understand why anyone wouldn't agree with you.

That is insanely lame. No one agrees with me? I am insulting people with vision acuity problems? LOL!

MF is only beneficial if you print big? Oh indeed that is nonsense and I knew it from my first glance at my first GFX image 30 months ago. That myth is a big and well-known marketing anti-MF talking point. For sure. Absolutely. There is no doubt about that.

I'll double-down on that one. Mark it down. It is a fact.

I already knew it, but any Fuji rep will tell you that, and so will the FF guys after a couple if drinks if you know them well.

It is one of the big easy to throw around marketing talking points in the camera wars. The full frame guys are in a serious war with each other, but they are all united in their amazement of GFX and the damage it is doing to their high-ground.

I have a good friend who works at xxxxx. GFX has them on edge because Fuji captured the high ground and there is not a damn thing they can do about it but try to put a dent in it by trying to convince people that the bigger sensor doesn't make much of a difference.

Good luck with trying to propagate that falsehood.

All you have to do is shoot it and look.

As far as agreeing with me? What makes you think people don't agree with me? Because you don't?

Let me tell you that we were not talking about The Medium Format Look here. We are talking about the myth that MF only helps if you print big - a total falsehood and anti-MF talking point used by SonCaNikon on a daily basis. It really is kind of pathetic and fun to watch.

But if we were talking about The MFL, 85% of this Board would agree with me that there is a Medium Format Look and 95% would agree that you don't have to print big to enjoy the glaringly obvious superior image fidelity of GFX. Bank it. I defy you to prove otherwise.

But the survey has to be people that own and shoot GFX but also own and shoot high-res FF. It can't be people who don't who are spouting talking points and freaking out because their feelings get hurt for some reason, whether it be affordability or IQ.

Too much ad hominum in this post for my taste, sorry.

No worries.  Not aimed at you.  We can leave it alone.  I was addressing the Great Unwashed Masses in order to be generally informative of the well-known truths.

-- hide signature --
 Greg7579's gear list:Greg7579's gear list
Leica Q2 Fujifilm GFX 50R Fujifilm GFX 100 Fujifilm GF 32-64mm F4 Fujifilm 120mm F4 Macro +8 more
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