Basic questions - wannabe MF user

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Greg7579 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,243
Re: A pretty well researched article - from DPReview staff

Erik Kaffehr wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

Erik why drag up controversial 4-year-old DPR opinion pieces from back in the days when DPR was seen by Fuji as unfriendly to the introduction of GFX, and when literally all of the early DPR opinion piece articles were seen as accentuating the negative and were decidedly lukewarm (at best) to GFX while failing to accentuate the far superior image fidelity of the GFX system?

The article doesn't discuss GFX, but medium format in general. It is also fact based.

That was 4 years ago and DPR has changed its generally negative editorial tone regarding GFX (especially in the last 18 months). They had to in order to maintain any level of credibility as GFX took off....

It is not about being positive or negative, it is about demonstrable facts. GFX has developed a lot since 2017, but so has 24x36 mm. Think Canon EOS R system and Nikon Z. Lot of new lens designs. GFX 100 now essentially shares sensor technology with Fujifilm XT4, Sony A7rIV and Phase One IQ 4150.

I read this article and also some early opinion pieces by Richard back about 3 years ago when I was deciding to buy GFX. Those early DPR articles almost convinced me not to go GFX.

The article was not written by Richard Buttler but by Rishi Sanyal.

But several people on this forum told me to ignore those early biased opinion pieces and take the plunge.

It may be that those guys were wrong, have you considered that?

I'm so glad I did.

I am glad you are happy--

Those early opinion pieces were off on what GFX was all about - especially on the IQ / image fidelity / look and anything that could have been perceived as clear advantages vs FF.

Lets put it this way, Rishi mostly discusses physics and those are the same for any system.

But, here is a challenge for you:

Point out any error or mistake in that article, preferably with some associated proof.

But hey - no worries - nothing wrong with digging out old DPR early-GFX opinion pieces, especially if the intent is to dampen someone's enthusiasm for spending that much money on a camera system vs FF.

I don't see it that way. I am just pointing to an article that is well researched.

Just to make a small point, DPR compares DR on the Pentax 645Z and the Nikon D810 using a lighthouse scene.

That comparison was accurately made, in spite of the difficulties doing accurate tests under outdoor conditions.

Best regards


Erik, I'm sure your response (as a non-GFX photographer) will get a lot of likes from the normal non-GFX owning or shooting pro-FF (vs MF) proponents and marketers who drive by this forum and drop likes on anything that shoots an arrow at GFX or has any sort of negative tone about GFX.... Nothing new there and no problem.  That is part of the fun I guess.

This is an opinion forum about camera equipment and we are allowed to share our opinions if done so respectfully and not too rudely.

My opinion of that old opinion piece is what it is, but it is no big deal.  I haven't thought about it in a long time. I'm sure that current GFX shooters can easily pick up on the tone that was used back then and might not agree with many of the comments in that editorial.

But yes, the article is an opinion piece and it is for sure about Fuji and that is OK. Did you check the title and the tone of the title? "Opinion: Thinking about buying medium format? Read this first."  And the lead picture of the 50r....

Right.  I did read it back then and it turned me off to GFX.  I forgot all about GFX and just kept shooting DSLR FF and Fuji X.  The another year or so went by and the 50r came out more and more people starting seeing the image fidelity benefits of GFX.

Anyway, its an old article and I don't agree with a lot of it, but we are allowed our opinions.  I don't even agree with the knock on Fuji X that was right up front in the article either, but that is another subject.  Funny how sensor size can be used to pick on Fuji X when compared to FF  but then you can't use the same argument in FF vs MF discussions.

The article was clearly openly cheerleading for FF at the time and it was a bit of a slam on GFX for sure (my reading comprehension skills are pretty good). It shocked Fuji and woke them up to the power of DPR editorials.  Fuji reps talked about the unfairness of that article and the negative, leading tone for years after that.  But like I said, that was then and this is now and DPR in general is very fair about GFX these days.

It is really kind of funny to read that editorial four years later and after shooting GFX for the past 30 months with 10 GF lenses that I own.  One can easily see where it went off the rails.

But why are we discussing a 4-year-old opinion piece with a guy asking about GFX now?  It has no bearing on what is actually happening with GFX now, and as a guy who has shot tens of thousands of images with the GFX system, I have my own opinions that are very different than the authors were back then.

Besides, that article was written before the GFX 100 came out a year and a half ago and 4 years before this new GFX 100s the OP is interested in.

-- 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