which medium format

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

If you're walking around you want IBIS, which means 50S II or at least 100S.

The files are quite different. Download some RAFs for each and see what you think.

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

What are you using now? What don't you like about it? How big do you print?

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

IMO 'Which camera should I get?' questions cannot be usefully answered without more basic info than this. Putting aside questions like budget (including whatever lenses) and portability:

1. You say you "[h]ave no subject matter in particular in mind" but that's the sort of basic information--and related to it, how much you'll be shooting from a tripod versus handheld, manual focus versus autofocus, etc.--that makes one camera a better choice than another.

2. You don't say what sort of camera(s) you have now, but assuming that your gear list is current and complete and you have a Nikon D4 and a Z6, how you are most interested in improving on them? In what way(s) do you find yourself thinking, after taking or attempting a shot with, or printing a shot from, one of them, 'I probably could have gotten a better photo if only ... ?'

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

50S can be found for cheap now, but keep in mind that it is only Contrast Detect AF, so auto focus will be slower. Also batteries are discontinued, so only a few third parties are making batteries now.

100S will have the faster AF as it has Phase Detection AF as well as Contrast Detect AF. Battery life is better, shutter lag not as high as the 50S, and it has IBIS.

I'd get the 100S if I were you.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

IMO 'Which camera should I get?' questions cannot be usefully answered without more basic info than this. Putting aside questions like budget (including whatever lenses) and portability:

1. You say you "[h]ave no subject matter in particular in mind" but that's the sort of basic information--and related to it, how much you'll be shooting from a tripod versus handheld, manual focus versus autofocus, etc.--that makes one camera a better choice than another.

Click to expand...

He said better focusing of the 100S, so I think he will be using AF. Whatever picks his interest walking around probably means he won't be carrying a tripod around.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

2. You don't say what sort of camera(s) you have now, but assuming that your gear list is current and complete and you have a Nikon D4 and a Z6, how you are most interested in improving on them? In what way(s) do you find yourself thinking, after taking or attempting a shot with, or printing a shot from, one of them, 'I probably could have gotten a better photo if only ... ?'

Click to expand...

I think he wants to dip his toe as he said and was asking about 50S and 100S. Do we really need to know what camera he has and how he wants to improve? Can he not just want a medium format camera?

Your post is very much on point if someone asks what camera should one get. But I think he already decided to get into MF and just wants to know about two specific models.

I think your misunderstanding , i dont dislike what i have. i'd just like to give medium format a go. its a hobby. i like trying different things. Id like to explore that extra detail if its really as bigger thing as its made out to be. I don't have an aim other than enjoying the hobby. Money isn't an issue so why not.

NAwlins Contrarian said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

IMO 'Which camera should I get?' questions cannot be usefully answered without more basic info than this. Putting aside questions like budget (including whatever lenses) and portability:

1. You say you "[h]ave no subject matter in particular in mind" but that's the sort of basic information--and related to it, how much you'll be shooting from a tripod versus handheld, manual focus versus autofocus, etc.--that makes one camera a better choice than another.

2. You don't say what sort of camera(s) you have now, but assuming that your gear list is current and complete and you have a Nikon D4 and a Z6, how you are most interested in improving on them? In what way(s) do you find yourself thinking, after taking or attempting a shot with, or printing a shot from, one of them, 'I probably could have gotten a better photo if only .

Click to expand...

NAwlins Contrarian said:

I'd just like to give medium format a go. its a hobby. i like trying different things. Id like to explore that extra detail if its really as bigger thing as its made out to be. I don't have an aim other than enjoying the hobby. Money isn't an issue so why not.

If i'm really not going to see much difference then maybe it wont be worth it

Click to expand...

Manzur Fahim said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

Manzur Fahim said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

IMO 'Which camera should I get?' questions cannot be usefully answered without more basic info than this. Putting aside questions like budget (including whatever lenses) and portability:

1. You say you "[h]ave no subject matter in particular in mind" but that's the sort of basic information--and related to it, how much you'll be shooting from a tripod versus handheld, manual focus versus autofocus, etc.--that makes one camera a better choice than another.

Click to expand...

He said better focusing of the 100S, so I think he will be using AF. Whatever picks his interest walking around probably means he won't be carrying a tripod around.

Manzur Fahim said:

2. You don't say what sort of camera(s) you have now, but assuming that your gear list is current and complete and you have a Nikon D4 and a Z6, how you are most interested in improving on them? In what way(s) do you find yourself thinking, after taking or attempting a shot with, or printing a shot from, one of them, 'I probably could have gotten a better photo if only ... ?'

Click to expand...

I think he wants to dip his toe as he said and was asking about 50S and 100S. Do we really need to know what camera he has and how he wants to improve? Can he not just want a medium format came

Your post is very much on point if someone asks what camera should one get. But I think he already decided to get into MF and just wants to know about two specific models.

Click to expand...

Spot on, you understand . Its a hobby, have no or need to earn out of it. its just a part of the hobby i'd like to try and see if that extra IQ is worth it? will i really see much difference ? Thats what i'm trying to find out. its a bit like wanting that better car. But dont want a tripod most the the time so the 100s seem the more viable option

petebuster said:

Manzur Fahim said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Spot on, you understand . Its a hobby, have no or need to earn out of it. its just a part of the hobby i'd like to try and see if that extra IQ is worth it? will i really see much difference ? Thats what i'm trying to find out. its a bit like wanting that better car. But dont want a tripod most the the time so the 100s seem the more viable option

Click to expand...

Download the RAW files from the DPR studio scene and compare them to the RAW files of other cameras. You'll be surprised just how small the differences are.

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

I have owned the GFX50s and GFX100 (v1) and now use the Hasselblad X2D.

The files of the GFX50s were very nice. Rich on tonality and highly detailed. AF is accurate, but pretty useless if the subject moves at all.
The GFX50s is prone to green/magenta shifts at very high ISO.

The GFX100 was vastly better with AF and the files are even more detailed, obviously. The later versions of the GFX100 are probably improved further.

Don't expect MF to offer a magical look or feel. That is largely a myth, a hangover from the film days when the 120 film had a finer grain than the 35mm film (when enlarged to the same size in print).

If this a tentative first trial of MF I would source a cheap s/h body and lens and live with that for a while. You can always sell it later for minimal loss.

If you are going for a Fujifilm body then the GF35-70mm lens is both good and affordable.

Macro guy said:

petebuster said:

Manzur Fahim said:

NAwlins Contrarian said:

Macro guy said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Spot on, you understand . Its a hobby, have no or need to earn out of it. its just a part of the hobby i'd like to try and see if that extra IQ is worth it? will i really see much difference ? Thats what i'm trying to find out. its a bit like wanting that better car. But dont want a tripod most the the time so the 100s seem the more viable option

Click to expand...

Download the RAW files from the DPR studio scene and compare them to the RAW files of other cameras. You'll be surprised just how small the differences are.

Click to expand...

Yes i've looked at some i'm now doubting its worth it tbh, seems very little difference even with extreme pixel peeping and a much slower camera as well:-|

Mads Bjerke said:

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

I have owned the GFX50s and GFX100 (v1) and now use the Hasselblad X2D.

The files of the GFX50s were very nice. Rich on tonality and highly detailed. AF is accurate, but pretty useless if the subject moves at all.
The GFX50s is prone to green/magenta shifts at very high ISO.

The GFX100 was vastly better with AF and the files are even more detailed, obviously. The later versions of the GFX100 are probably improved further.

Don't expect MF to offer a magical look or feel. That is largely a myth, a hangover from the film days when the 120 film had a finer grain than the 35mm film (when enlarged to the same size in print).

If this a tentative first trial of MF I would source a cheap s/h body and lens and live with that for a while. You can always sell it later for minimal loss.

If you are going for a Fujifilm body then the GF35-70mm lens is both good and affordable.

Click to expand...

Yes that would defintely the way to go

Hi,

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet. The 100 MP sensor has reduced aliasing v the 50 MP sensor.

A minor point, but one more to put into the 100s column.

Stan

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

That's exactly what I found with the GFX 100s:

the magical look, beautiful tonality, excellent detail and beautiful natural colors that this camera produces.

I've been shooting with a Pentax 67II for many years and couldn't find a replacement. The only GFX 100s convinced me immediately, right from the first shot with the GF23mm F4.
The GFX 100s gave me back the desire to continue photography, because its results are simply great, unrivaled and incomparable to anything.

My experience. Miki.

petebuster said:

Mads Bjerke said:

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

I have owned the GFX50s and GFX100 (v1) and now use the Hasselblad X2D.

The files of the GFX50s were very nice. Rich on tonality and highly detailed. AF is accurate, but pretty useless if the subject moves at all.
The GFX50s is prone to green/magenta shifts at very high ISO.

The GFX100 was vastly better with AF and the files are even more detailed, obviously. The later versions of the GFX100 are probably improved further.

Don't expect MF to offer a magical look or feel. That is largely a myth, a hangover from the film days when the 120 film had a finer grain than the 35mm film (when enlarged to the same size in print).

If this a tentative first trial of MF I would source a cheap s/h body and lens and live with that for a while. You can always sell it later for minimal loss.

If you are going for a Fujifilm body then the GF35-70mm lens is both good and affordable.

Click to expand...

Yes that would defintely the way to go

Click to expand...

Have a look at Greg's Flickr site. There are thousands of full resolution images from the 50MP and 100MP variants, as well as FF shots from his Leica Q, makes a change from test shots and gives you an idea of what you will get in real world shooting.

For what it is worth, IMO, there can be a tendency to over-romaticise medium format, presumably because it is top of the range for digital. Being realistic, the 100MP MF is an incremental improvement over top FF in image quality, while the 50MP models have excellent quality, but barely any improvement over the best FF. I find my 50s very good as a dedicated long exposure camera, nice clean output and no need for awkward cable releases. For general purpose shooting it's debatable whether it has advantages over FF. By all means go for it, but try and keep your expectations realistic.

petebuster said:

Mads Bjerke said:

petebuster said:

Always wanted to dip my toe into medium format and as the prices have dropped so much i feel now is the time. Going with one of fujis. Have been looking at the 50s as i feel that might be a better starting point but then the better focusing of the 100s might make more subjects possible?

Any advice from those that use or have used them much appreciated. Have no subject matter in particular in mind at this point. It will be a case of whatever takes my interest walking around

Click to expand...

I have owned the GFX50s and GFX100 (v1) and now use the Hasselblad X2D.

The files of the GFX50s were very nice. Rich on tonality and highly detailed. AF is accurate, but pretty useless if the subject moves at all.
The GFX50s is prone to green/magenta shifts at very high ISO.

The GFX100 was vastly better with AF and the files are even more detailed, obviously. The later versions of the GFX100 are probably improved further.

Don't expect MF to offer a magical look or feel. That is largely a myth, a hangover from the film days when the 120 film had a finer grain than the 35mm film (when enlarged to the same size in print).

If this a tentative first trial of MF I would source a cheap s/h body and lens and live with that for a while. You can always sell it later for minimal loss.

If you are going for a Fujifilm body then the GF35-70mm lens is both good and affordable.

Click to expand...

Yes that would defintely the way to go

Click to expand...

I have know idea what you are coming from. But for me using a Nikon Df and Kodak SLR/n to Fujifilm 50S (the first one) the difference was nice and apparent. But I mainly used micro four thirds cameras, now switching mostly to Gfx100 (the first one) and 50S.

If money is no object, find out where the YouTuber, Christopher Frost in the UK is borrowing his Fujifilm cameras. Then borrow or rent one for a week. See if it works for you and buy it.

Or just buy a newer gfx100 series, either Gfx100ii or Gfx100Sii as these will have the best IBIS and autofocus.

Manzur Fahim said:

Manzur Fahim said:

1. You say you "[h]ave no subject matter in particular in mind" but that's the sort of basic information--and related to it, how much you'll be shooting from a tripod versus handheld, manual focus versus autofocus, etc.--that makes one camera a better choice than another.

Click to expand...

He said better focusing of the 100S, so I think he will be using AF. Whatever picks his interest walking around probably means he won't be carrying a tripod around.

Click to expand...

Whether / to what extent the AF improvements on the 100S over the 50S matter depends a lot on what and how you shoot. The early AF SLRs in the mid- to late 1980s focused, by modern standards, quite S-L-O-W-L-Y. But they were fine for some purposes.

Manzur Fahim said:

Manzur Fahim said:

2. You don't say what sort of camera(s) you have now, but assuming that your gear list is current and complete and you have a Nikon D4 and a Z6, how you are most interested in improving on them? In what way(s) do you find yourself thinking, after taking or attempting a shot with, or printing a shot from, one of them, 'I probably could have gotten a better photo if only ... ?'

Click to expand...

I think he wants to dip his toe as he said and was asking about 50S and 100S. Do we really need to know what camera he has and how he wants to improve? Can he not just want a medium format camera?

Click to expand...

Sure. It's just that when you come asking a question, it implies that you're engaging in a more than emotional or gut-level buying decision.

Manzur Fahim said:

Your post is very much on point if someone asks what camera should one get. But I think he already decided to get into MF and just wants to know about two specific models.

Click to expand...

The title of the thread is "which medium format", which seems to me to raise the issue of what camera should the OP get.

Hi,

I see plenty of difference between my Df and my P645D. Of course, there are plenty of differences between the two designs to account for that.

And I am sure I'd see plenty of differences between the P645D and a GFX100 (any flavor) for the same reasons.

What I'd like, Full Frame wise is a Nikon of any flavor which sported the Sony 60 MP sensor. Then, after the cropping from 3:2 to 5:4 I'd be in the same resolution territory as the Sony MF 50 MP sensor.

But that doesn't exist. Yetzl, anyway. And I've been dragging my feet at the thought of buying a P645Z with it's variant of the Sony MF 50 MP sensor. I'd prefer the lower aliasing of the 100....

I bought the P645D because it fit the need and was significantly lower price on the used market v the Nikon D850 or Z7 back in 2020.

And what I saw compared to Df was akin to what I saw between a film 645 and a film 135 back in the 1980s. So, that worked for me.

Besides the P645 lenses were dirt cheap, which was a plus.

Stan

Someone asked how big you print, as if moving from FF to GFX or from 50 MP GFX to 100 MP GFX has anything to do with how big you want to print, or even if you print at all.

In my opinion it does not matter.

GFX does not remain viable and such a sought-after choice because of big-printing demand. It thrives because of the big sensor, great glass and absolutely stunning image fidelity.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter how big you print or even if you print at all.

I don't print at all and have owned 4 GFX cameras and now have managed to amass (unnecessarily) 13 GF lenses. I say unnecessarily because I have 5 GF lenses that I don't use anymore but am too lazy to sell (23, 30, 50, 110, 32-64). I don't use them anymore because they were put to death by other Fuji lenses or amazing zooms that killed primes in that range).

Why do I own and shoot all of that GFX gear when I could instantly (in one day) just go buy and shoot the best FF systems in the World and get better prices, less weight, smaller size, better fast AF tracking and much more reach with longer and smaller lenses?

Because the image fidelity is superb and better than anything FF can offer. That is the only reason. There is no other reason. And given that, the image fidelity and latitude in post is better with GFX 100 MP than 50.

So, I would strongly recommend that if the OP is going to make the leap to MF and GFX, shy away from the 50 MP models unless driven only by cost. Just get the GFX 100s, SII or 100 II.

I say that even though I believe that 50 MP GFX image fidelity is superior to FF and sensor size matters. This is just my opinion but one strongly held after shooting top-end high-res FF for many years while shooting GFX 50 MP and 100 MP cameras for the past 6 years. I see what I see and once you see what you will, see you will never unsee it.

So give it a try and start at 100MP if you can spend the little bit of extra money.

You will love GFX. You already know this.