3:25 - I don't think anyone interested in this camera will care about the "only" 3 fps burst rate or slower AF. This isn't an action camera. Nor is it a direct competitor to FF cameras. This is a image quality beast, and compared to the 50S a rather affordable one too.
I beg to differ. I'm very much interested in this camera. Have sold My FF and APS-C cameras and lenses in the hope of purchasing something like this for both in-studio and more casual shooting. Sure, if I was rich, I could buy the GFX 50R (better yet, the 100mp GFX 100s with IS and all that - or the beautiful Hasselblad x1d!) along the imminent Sony A7R IV and a number of fast, Image-Stabilised lenses, as well as a couple of collapsible scrims, large Broncolor Paras (up to the €10.000,- 330!), softbox edge masks and so forth. Unfortunately, some photographers are not commercially successful enough to have a horse per course. Leaves Me with no other choice than settling for a new FF camera (probably the A7R IV some half a year from now) and hoping that one day I'll also buy a 200mp Medium Format workhorse from either Hasselblad or Fuji. I'm sure, there are tens of thousands of photographers that share My sentiments right now.
How can you say that just watching on UA-cam and seeing a few shots inside a house? Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously asking. What stands out to you?
Jeremy There's a quality in the skin tones and white balance that I haven't seen in sub $20K camera - just look at all the GFX 50R stories that Fuji has posted this week that are shot with X-T3 - they all look incredible and feature film quality. It looks more like a RED than a $1500 APSC camera...
For me it's the sharpness. I had the same wow-feeling when the Proper People (urbex channel) switched from Panasonic to Sony FF. I noticed the change in image quality right away while they didn't mention the change anywhere. But the noticable difference can be explained, so it's not just a feeling or subjective judgement... If you want full color information for all pixels at 4K, you need a bayer-sensor with 4 times the 4K resolution. The GH5S uses one sensor pixel per output pixel, so its resolution is only half that of 4K with green pixels and a quarter of 4K in red and blue pixels. And it shows. It's basically the same difference as between bayer and foveon sensors at 100% zoom. The X-T3 is much closer to 4K requirements. Panasonic was very early with their 4K implementation, but they're going to struggle if their MFT sensors keep progressing as slow as they did the previous 10 years.
Thanks guys! My screens are probably a bit too poor quality for me to observe these things directly. But it’s great to hear such high praise for the X-T3. I just hope they fix some of the simpler issues like flickering exposure adjustments using auto ISO or auto aperture, and the focus hunting that results when sitting in front of the camera with AF-C on.
I disagree. I find it too contrasty, which leads to poor dynamic range. It seems like a stylistic thing from Fuji and RED. I guess Fuji went this way for B&W reasons. But I prefer the clean look from Arri and Canon.
How can you say that just watching on UA-cam and seeing a few shots from inside a house? Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously asking. What stands out to you?
ooof. something’s been completely lost here. this camera occupies a specific niche that hasn’t been explored for 20 years; relatively inexpensive medium format range finders like the bronicas rf645 mamiya 6 and 7 makina bessas and all the wonderful and interesting folding and fixed lens 6x7 6x8 6x9 cameras from fuji... but wait, we’re comparing this latest fuji camera to one to the worlds most boring camera, sony alpha. good one.
Well I waited years for a digital mamiya 7 but this is not it. Skipping. Plus, I could afford mamiya 7 with 3 lenses back in the old days but doing the same for 50R system, no, too costly. It is NOT cheap.
@@chongleebnw see your point. However if you are no Anselm Adams, meaning you shoot a certain number of photos a year, say over 500, you'll soon be breaking even on saved film / lab cost
Fuji is kicking ass and finally I have some options for upgrading. The GFX-50S was amazing to use, but the lack of C1 support is my only major negative and why I never went for it. Now with C1 support, looks like I'll be dumping my 1Dx and making the switch - esp for my studio work!
Most worthy of hype camera of 2018. Fuji is smart to uncompetitive markets, no one makes apsc lenses and bodies anywhere near the x series and now they’re making the first somewhat affordable medium format digital camera. It isn’t quite perfect yet, phase detect points would make it more versatile outside of the studio
I'm thinking about it for a travel cam, but the lenses are really quite big and heavy... And no IS... The sensor in this is 5 years old and will be preceded no doubt by 50mp+ full frame cameras next year...
that old sensor = blows away any given top of the line FF sensor including the D850. So at this point, you say that Fuji should have used a different "newer" sensor just to increase price and please fanboys and trolls?
No not at all. There is no affordable sensor alternative for Fuji to use at this price point. But high end Full frames give more for less in my opinion and the image quality difference isn't enough to outweigh the lack of proper focusing, stability, and versatility. It's still an interesting camera for people who absolutely want MF in a lighter more affordable package. I'll review it fully when we get production cameras but this is how I initially feel about it.
Just be sure to include links to full raw's or at least full jpegs, from what i've seen the image quality comparing a gfx to the D850 is massive. like absolutely massive. People talk about all the time how full frame has better IQ than APS-C, the same theory should apply to MF. I get that it's not all sensor size, not even close. But in this case Fuji has the tech still to make it an awesome sensor. It's not about all out dynamic range but tonality and microcontrast, and the native gain the larger photo sites offer gives precisely that. I know most people seem to be blind to the microcontrast/tonality difference and only judge image quality primarily on the 2:1 detail levels. I really do respect Chris as a reviewer though, I do trust that he also has the eyes and photography experience to see the difference when you compare the IQ side by side.
@@niccollsvideo I actually see this as a very good mf camera that is actually affordable (compared to other digital mf cameras in the market that cost over $6k body only), also the sample images I've seen beats any high end ff camera hands down, you can't expect a mf camera to ace 10 out of 10 for portability/versatility however fuji pushed the bar and this camera is very portable, not a point and shoot portable but portable to the point that you can take it with you everywhere without the feel of the weight or size, also mf was never that fast when it comes to af, you don't buy mf to shoot sports or action
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture. Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180). I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences. Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost. So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you. I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people. However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'. *Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
This sensor is still a winner for me. I have access to good 35mm, but keep going back to my GFX 50S. Deeper, more lush, just "more." If I'm doing sports or video, of course not. But for portraits, landscape, etc, I go to it every time.
I don’t give a lick about a camera I’ll never be able to afford, but I do love hanging out with the fellas. Can I purchase a hard copy of the Jordan / Hamlet Pumpkin shot?
Cameras that we can’t afford now is a often fun insight of cameras that we can afford in the future. As time progresses, tech improves and prices drop. ☺️
Been shooting for about 40-years with Nikon, Canon, Leica, and Sony A900. I regretted ditching my Leica gear, but I still shoot with the old sensor A900, and I still love it. Never have used a Fujifilm, but when I stumbled upon the 50R information on DPReview, I became interested. Even with my pithy MacBook Pro, I can easily see the difference in dynamic range vs. a full frame file. I've always wanted a Medium Format but could never justify the cost. However, this one is doable, and regarding IQ, the 50R paired with the G-mount lenses are better than just functional; especially the 2.0f 100 as an example. The way I shoot these days' I only need three lenses to be happy. BTW, I found your review to be helpful, although I interpreted the negatives to be more of positives.
Did not expect an incomplete review from dpreview... these opinions could actually drive some of your followers away from a great camera... I’ve compared the output from 45mp cameras with this one and this one stands out.. the detail is simply amazing!! If other FFs are comparable then the bigger sensor doesn’t matter at all for image quality? Isn’t too much megapixel a bad thing for smaller sensors? 50mp on an MF has to deliver far better than a 50mp on an FF and it does.. like others mentioned, if they cared about fps we would surely be seeing >=5fps... this is a landscape and portrait camera to capture super detail and that’s about it.. I have a Pentax 645z as well and the detail on that is unbeatable by the awesome but wannabe high megapixel DSLRs.. if FF is better than APS-C, MF > FF and that’s about it... I love your reviews but this one was slightly unsettling :(
That old sensor beats the crap of any latest FF sensors. This review completely missed the point of having a portable MF camera. Crazy actually! For ultimate IQ, the GFX 50S/50R will provide the best results...
People who don't get won't get it. As for me, FUJI TAKE MY MONEY! I've seen what people do with this camera and it's impressive regardless of the autofocus speed. I shoot manual 95% of the time.
I wouldn't call it pocket sized. It is an interesting design but it needs a new sensor to shine. It feels like a simpler and ever so slightly smaller GFX 50S
I know this is a video about the 50R but only 2 things got my attention 1)Damn that turntable looks awesome 2)Jordan holding a pumpkin in awesome lighting
I dont wanna be a hater, so take this feedback from a place of love. To review a medium format camera, and not actually take the camera to an environment where you are going to get the maximum benefit from it, or even use the M.F camera to produce medium format images for viewing, and compare it to full frame frame and APS-C systems is a complete waste of time. I find myself siding with the commentators. This review has entirely missed the point. it really comes across like you taken a M.F system and tried to use it as a full frame and/or APS-C system and somehow expected it out perform those systems based on their comparative prices. Can you compare the x-t2 vs the x-t3...sure....can you compare the x-t3 vs the GFX50R..no, you can't...they are different systems and formats with entirely different end uses. You may as well have said, Ansel Adams wasted his time with medium format, and should have just used a full frame camera, because it would have cost him less and he would have gotten better burst landscapes and 4k video..and he could have saved a lot of time cropping for Instagram.
I actually find this an interesting camera, more interesting than the GFX 50S; the price-point is still a bit high for me (I would rather buy a Leica M10, already having the lenses … ;)). It looks as if Fuji does want to stay out of the highly competitive full-frame market by doing its "own thing" (high-end APS-C and Medium Format). Interesting strategy, and it seems to work for them.
Ashleyapples Fujifilm is smart to stay out of the full frame mirrorless market. The industry has been shrinking year by year and that’s why Canon and Nikon have been reluctant until now to release mirrorless full frame cameras. They mainly did it to stop users from jumping over to Sony and it’s even more crowded with Panasonic-Leica-Sigma joining. So shrinking industry and full frame sells to those who are already heavily vested in photography. Fujifilm has instead opted to compete in medium format and APS-C. One thing I will say about this review is Chris missed the point why they are releasing a rangefinder medium format with the old sensor from the 50s. It is to offer a more affordable option and the 100MP camera is going to be the update. While Sony neglects their APS-C line, Fujifilm continues to get ahead especially with the release of the XT-3. Will they remain silent or is there actually an a6700 or a7000 as rumored that can compete?
For the average civilian, or a hard working high volume pro, your conclusions make sense. If, however, you can afford the more thoughtful pace and (most importantly) you can see and appreciate the delicious tonality, sparkle and snap that is shown by many of the sample images available , then this may be for you. I will spare you my long history, but I have ordered three lenses and will pre-order the body. I have been waiting a long time for this camera. It fits my style perfectly. (Currently using an original model Sony A7 with adapted old Leica R lenses.)
Yes, I saw his great review. His style does suit the camera well. Some people prefer a faster pace and higher frame rate. I certainly fall into Kevin's camp.
The point of this camera really is to supplement the X- System with your unique high res needs. For the most part the X system can take on the Sony’s Canon’s Nikon’s of this world. But if you need to add that fashion/studio/interiors/landscape high resolution larger sensor option the GFX may just be it. At the end of the day if you’re going to have a high res camera and one that is lower res - you could fo for the a7iii and the a7riii ... or you can save a lot on the lenses and weight using a XT3 and invest those savings into the GFX and a lens or two. You get better portability using the XT3 and better resolution using the GFX...
So you think this takes better pictures than the X1D? That's interesting, when the X1D is $10,000? I think this product line has more growth potential because it's new, while the 35 mm seems to have reached its peak? Just how much more can you improve on that sensor? Better ISO and low light? Even more dynamic range? Itll be hard, right? But perhaps with a new sensor from Fuji they may be able to eliminate the need for HDR and exposure blending altogether? I think it still needs time to mature. Lenses are super expensive, too, so... and things like continuous shooting and videos are not good... they got work to do, and I think they know what they're doing and eventually will get it right, like they did with the XT3, which is really nice.
It is understood that the resolution advantage (for this sensor) may not be much over current FF, but what about the colour depth? Surely the 645 sensor is collecting far more colour info. Considering Medium format was such an astronomical cost 10 years ago, this body at just over $4000 USD is incredible. Finally...it has 2 card slots....Just saying...
I found this camera by chance on your web page because it's noise looks way better than what other cameras do. It has a magenta color shift but otherwise very detailed and clean
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture. Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180). I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences. Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost. So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you. I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people. However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'. *Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
I completely agree with everything you said, well put. :) But for me, the MF & FF both have there places depending on what your shooting, both systems are more than capable of providing excellent results, but the MF also has a different look to the image, a different aesthetic that is very pleasing to the eye, whether that's the 3d pop, color tonality/depth, shallow depth of field or whatever, for those who know and appreciate quality, the difference can be seen between FF & MF. But in general they are pretty close overall, its just Fuji is doing something magical with the dynamic range at high iso's. something no other brand is able to do & that's keep high dynamic range at those high iso's, that's super important to me. But Fuji is turning the MF digital world on its head with the latest GFX 100Mp Dslr style MF camera!!! Its going to give us the speed and ergonomics of a dslr and the IQ of a MF camera!!! Exciting times!
@@iris-studios yes, also to say you shouldn't buy an MF Camera because it doesn't offer much more Image Quality than an FF Camera, is pretty ignorant. One could also argue that (in that case) you shouldn't buy a Full Frame, because it doesn't offer a significant improvement in Image Quality compared to APSC
How about the new 47mp FF Panasonic? Dont get me wrong the bigger the sensor the better but this 50mp MF sensor is nearly 5 years old? A modern full frame sensor offers almost the same IQ
I think it’s probably just a case of suppliers dragging Fujifilm. This is a sony sensor and I don’t think there is a better one for 50mp medium format right now. The clue is on the 100s that will have phase detection AF and seems to be a leap forward. If the 100s is going to be priced at 10k as rumors say it will be a game changer. How much does cost a 100mp MF camera?! The cool thing on the 50R is that it’s a step in the right direction. Let’s not forget that building amazing cheap medium format cameras is no new thing for Fuji. 20 years ago I had the Fuji GA645 and it had autofocus and a killer fixed lens. If the plan for Fuji is to make MF affordable and accessible then this is surely the right step in the right direction. If people like full frame for the looks of the lens focal distance and DOF... MF is a step up from that as well
- Damn, I expected the same sensor, but I was expecting the new processor and its nifty tricks. - Square format is a favourite of mine, and 33mm x 33mm affords the full use of M-mount lenses. - Very pleased to see a tilting screen for this form-factor (coming from the X-Pro1.) - For the moment the Panasonic S1 is the clear forerunner for adapting, for me, as it's more versatile and will probably take Sigma lenses with a new MC-11 adaptor. - I am wondering if Samsung and Fuji are part of the "imaging ecosystem" partnerships Panasonic were referring to, though.
I agree, negative and always chasing after that next sensor. It’s an incredible landscape camera, incredible, might want to look at some of the prints from professionals using this camera before sending the sensor to the graveyard.
@@dinkobilic9078 for sure but it's really cool to see great reviewers cross over to different platforms. I just really enjoy Chris and Jordans very genuine reviews. They're enthusiastic like kids in a candy store but they've been around a bit to know some ish lol.
Congrats on the video! Perfect! Would be great if DPreview would show the advantages of Medium Format in general... Specially with challenging high Dynamic Range situations and tonalities... I know the D850 and 5DsR are very close(I am happy with my D800e so far), but it would be great to see where MF excels...
@@PeterKoperdan Better thing for him to do is test out, full frame and mf in real world, they are world apart when it comes sharpness and dynamic range plus depth of field.
These are still the very early generations of consumer, mirrorless small-medium format. What’s most exciting is the amount of development in this space, including some fast lenses, and the price point. In a couple of generations, these will be superb systems. My main gripe with digital medium format is that, unlike film medium format, the sensor size isn’t that much better than Full Frame. With current fabrication technology, digital sensors just don’t scale economically in the way that film (still) does.
I think the most important thing to take away from this is the C1 support. No other MF (if "true" or sort of cropped) has that. That is some compelling sales point. Plus if Fuji releases this one, they will do another one, with the upcoming 100mpix sensor. So there is that. Plus lenses. More than the small Hasselblad has. Plus you could own the big & this body with same lenses. But still, the current 35mm mirrorless are just too equal. This is all complicated
Finally capture one support!! Does it use the same RAW format as the old GFX 50S so that is supported too? There is also a fujifilm express and a fujifilm only pro version just like for Sony. The sad thing is that these are not available as perpetual licenses. The standard pro version is still available with a pertpetual license
For the majority of camera enthusiasts, your conclusion is reasonable. However, I priced out an A7RIII with premium lenses to match the focal range I wanted and with the current prices, the Sony wound up being about one thousand dollars less expensive. Add up all the lenses you want and both systems are up in the ten thousand dollar range or more. I currently shoot a Sony A7 original version with old adapted lenses, so the slower, non video, shooting style fits me perfectly. :) If you take the time and have good shot discipline, using native Fuji glass, the image quality available from the GFX series is superior, visible even in downsized images. This is not to say that you can not find some very average looking samples out there, but you can take a poor picture with a Phase One IQ 150 if you are not diligent. :) So, for the majority of people, your conclusions are reasonable. I have my pre-order in place, and have already picked up the GF 110 and GF 250 lenses in anticipation. The GF 45 will arrive with the camera. Very different style of shooting - exactly my cup of tea. :)
the GF 110mm F/2 has an aesthetic that really could be the killer app for this camera for portrait studios. Google image search that lens and you'll see a look that I've never seen from full-frame no matter what the lens.
Superman's CGI mouth A detachable grip could do the same things. Lets say that higher frame rates were only allowed with the grip attached, XT-2 style. The way things look now, you have no option to have a lightweight camera. You always have the grip there.
Good enough/ Close enough, sorry but that won't cut it. Every time I remember how those pics looked on Hasselblad, No matter how sexy the hardware gadgets are, I simply can not tolerate inferior images, no matter how many times you try to convince yourself they are good enough. They just aren't. I wonder if I can fit my Hasselblad lenses using the fuji adapter?
Who the hell shoots 4k or video for that matter on a medium format camera? And who needs fast AF on a MF camera? There's just so many people that love specs but in the real world, lack creativity. Additionally so, the majority are laughable when they point their fallible skinny fingers what cameras should and don't have when most of them still shoot with their phones or a point and shoot camera. Needless to say, if you don't know what a medium format is supposed to do, then it's out of your league.
A Fujifilm usual business strategy - buying sensor and processor in bulk, topping down from high end to lower end camera. This also giving them sufficient time and experience for firmware development until next product cycle. You should mention how competitive the price it is, as a Medium Format Camera. What was the cheapest MF before Fujifilm entering the market? Nikon FF had the picture quality close to current MF as its sensor is packed with the latest BSI technology. But it still couldn’t beat MF. You always pay higher price in proportion for achieving the top 10% performance.
The 50R image quality... color, contrast and tonal balance is stunning... the male model in dark room and a pumpkin. Pancake lens for this body would be really amazing... looking forward to that lens review.
Seams like it is PERFECT for landscapes. When you just need much dynamic range, a lot of details, perfect lens, but don't need any fancy video stuff or advanced auto-focusing etc.
The end reminded me of my first time of getting out of a Lotus Evora. Second time was slightly easier but I haven't needed to try it again since then. Nice car but I can't afford it... and the same goes for the Fuji GFX. XT3 seems interesting though.
First of all, I'm glad that the first official news of this camera comes from you guys :-) Yes, this this camera is definitely for me. Secondly, this camera came too soon. Now I'll have to sell my kidney for it...
Thank you for the video! Quality was stellar and i love your new accommodation Chris. I'm thinking of the jpg-comparison test you guys did a while ago at tcstv right now. What about something similar for different sensor sizes? Maybe from MF down to Smartphones. Not similar images but comparable situations. And with each camera / system you give yourselves a good amount of time (like some days) to get some keepers. Then edit and print (big). Let people vote and get multiple opinions on each print. I know it will be a big project but maybe it's going to be a good marker on how big of a sensor does one has to have.
Chris makes a good point about dslr ff cameras, however this is a 50mp sensor which is still bigger than the a7r3 and z7. Plus fujifilm slipped ff, so... yeah. This will be epic for studios on a budget or serious enthusiasts. Like Chris also said there’s the lens map which looks compelling. Give this camera a year and the used prices will be excellent!
I've checked on dpreview the gallery for this camera Fuji GFX 50R and I was blown... Honestly, Apc's sensors suk, some full frames are good but not this good. This one (GFX50R) and the higher end brother GFX100 looks really good. I mean even Leica Q2 that sells so expensive, I've found weird compression stuff in the photos due to low light (mostly perception of combined colors and pixels).
Thanks Chris for another unbiased critique, I always wanted to enter the medium format world, but found the cameras to be a bit clunky, heavy, and expensive. With Fujifilm’s introduction of the GFX-50R, it makes me want to re-think about the medium format system. I’m not looking to make money shooting photography or to depend on the camera to survive, but there are photo enthusiasts out there that likes to keep up with technology and try a different format.... I’m looking at the prices for the 50R and it seems affordable, I’m thinking since I already have the Nikon D850, I can trade in my Nikon D750 (which I was going to trade for the Z6) for a chance to experience the medium format system.... what do you think?
I think if I was deciding between this or the 50S, I would've gotten the 50S. That being said, I'm waiting to see what Hasselblad does with their next iteration of the x1d before I finally drop money in 2019.
DJI owns a majority stake of Hassy and that hardly means they're dead. Especially since Hasselblad continues to move on with the same crafting model as always. In fact, they made worse products at one point before being acquired by DJI. Do a little bit of research before generalizing something like your statement.
No medium format camera that I am aware of purpose is to compete with a digital full frame camera. From some of the videos I’ve watched on the review of this camera I get the impression that some of the reviewer’s are not sure of the difference.
Actually the new GF 100-200mm is not the second GF lens with OIS, it's the third. The GF120 and GF250 both have OIS. BTW, this four-year-old sensor still blows away modern FF sensors. As for lens selection, those who know medium format know that a huge selection of lenses isn't necessary given what medium format is used for.
Jordan always does a video review on new cameras, and there's always someone wondering what the video features are like. This camera doesn't have very good video features, so it's swiftly pointed out with very little time spent dwelling on the subject.
This might be an exercise in managing expectations. When say, Samsung comes out with a new Galaxy S phone, they usually release a J series phone for the budget minded, having features of the older flagship. I kind of expected this to be that, and therefore didn't expect any new features or behaviors beyond the original GFX. One could argue price isn't quite budget, but maybe it is to the medium format folk. I do wonder why they bothered putting video on it at all. Probably because the market simply can't comprehend the concept of a camera made just for stills photography anymore.
Great video and summary. I'm an existing GFX50s user and I wouldn't change to this camera. One major reason is that I make a lot of use of the tilt swivel adapter (I basically shoot the camera as if it were an old style Hasselblad film body which is where I came from). One point I would respond to is the ability to crop square with more content. Again, given where I started from, this is important to me and I love the square mask you can bring up in the EVF to help frame. I think you underestimate the dynamic range and beauty of the 50mpx sensor in these cameras. The results I get from the GFX50s are the most satisfying I've ever had from a digital camera. For the first time, I really cannot get too excited about shooting film, which is probably the greatest accolade I can give the 50s. Whether that is down to the size of the sensor, or just the sensor and Fuji's processing, I don't know. At the other end of the spectrum I shoot wildlife and for that I use the Panasonic m43rds system, so if I were to ever go FF I'd probably now be interested in the new Panasonic system (which I hope you will review soon). Bottom line, the GFX50s and especially the Fuji lenses deliver outstanding image quality and I would expect the 50R to (obviously) do the same but with different handling - which again I emphasise won't work for me.
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture. Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180). I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences. Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost. So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you. I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people. However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'. *Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
Peter Koperdan I do not care about your long story since I use Apsc, FF and MF to make money.The question for these two smart guys is to name MF camera in the range of 4500$.
eagleeye photo Out of curiosity, if you make money with and can afford to shoot 3 different systems, why do you care about 1000$ difference between this and GFX 50S? And photographers who need the 1000$ price drop to be able to afford to buy into this system, should they really be considering this camera? What are they gaining? Small image quality increase over 5DSR/D850 in specific conditions. I'm not sure if that's money well spent for them.
Peter Koperdan It is 2000$ difference and w.r.t GFX50s there is delta in portability and size. For 2 grand you can buy studio strobes, lens, adapter or other equippment. If you compare d850 and GFX photos they are not the same, as apsc is not the same as FF. It is close up to the point when you need to crop or to print big, that is where FF and apsc start to lack behind MF. Other than that color, tonality, dynamic range and detail sharpness MF is superior to the FF. The price of the digital MF is high if you exclude latest Fujifilm and go with digital backs like Mamiya , Phase or Hasselblad so if you don't have tax write off or a lot of job which require MF then you can rent it (as I did over the years). The point of going in to MF is that most of the users who are buying or using MF are FF high mpix users already but there job require to use MF. The good thing for those users is that Fujifilm is making the MF entery level affordable. However if you looking to allround usability you should stick to the FF. MF is usable for anything then sport, fast moving subjects , birding , wild life where you need fast burst , long glass and speedy AF. It is complimentary tool and not jack of all trades.So if you doing commercial , high end fashion, corporate, landscape or architecture work you might need on some point MF resolution , otherwise for travel,street , sport and hybrid (video) I would recommend apsc or FF. It is a tool for certain job and what people are discussing on some forums does not make a lot of sense.If you need to drive your caravan across the country you probably not going to do that with Ferrari , you can but this would be not ideal car to pull the caravan around.
@@eagleeyephoto8715 If you read my initial 'long story' you would see that analysis shows that Fuji MF offers relatively little image quality advantage over top FF. One can easily check for themselves following the links provided. Which leads to the question: If you really really need noticeably higher quality, why not go for high end system such as Phase One? Or do clients not care about real quality and only want to see your exif data to show 'shot on MF'?
3:25 - I don't think anyone interested in this camera will care about the "only" 3 fps burst rate or slower AF. This isn't an action camera. Nor is it a direct competitor to FF cameras. This is a image quality beast, and compared to the 50S a rather affordable one too.
I beg to differ. I'm very much interested in this camera. Have sold My FF and APS-C cameras and lenses in the hope of purchasing something like this for both in-studio and more casual shooting. Sure, if I was rich, I could buy the GFX 50R (better yet, the 100mp GFX 100s with IS and all that - or the beautiful Hasselblad x1d!) along the imminent Sony A7R IV and a number of fast, Image-Stabilised lenses, as well as a couple of collapsible scrims, large Broncolor Paras (up to the €10.000,- 330!), softbox edge masks and so forth.
Unfortunately, some photographers are not commercially successful enough to have a horse per course. Leaves Me with no other choice than settling for a new FF camera (probably the A7R IV some half a year from now) and hoping that one day I'll also buy a 200mp Medium Format workhorse from either Hasselblad or Fuji. I'm sure, there are tens of thousands of photographers that share My sentiments right now.
I have to say, watching in 4K, this is the highest image quality I've ever seen in your reviews - the X-T3 is ridiculous!
How can you say that just watching on UA-cam and seeing a few shots inside a house? Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously asking. What stands out to you?
Jeremy There's a quality in the skin tones and white balance that I haven't seen in sub $20K camera - just look at all the GFX 50R stories that Fuji has posted this week that are shot with X-T3 - they all look incredible and feature film quality. It looks more like a RED than a $1500 APSC camera...
For me it's the sharpness. I had the same wow-feeling when the Proper People (urbex channel) switched from Panasonic to Sony FF. I noticed the change in image quality right away while they didn't mention the change anywhere.
But the noticable difference can be explained, so it's not just a feeling or subjective judgement... If you want full color information for all pixels at 4K, you need a bayer-sensor with 4 times the 4K resolution. The GH5S uses one sensor pixel per output pixel, so its resolution is only half that of 4K with green pixels and a quarter of 4K in red and blue pixels. And it shows. It's basically the same difference as between bayer and foveon sensors at 100% zoom. The X-T3 is much closer to 4K requirements. Panasonic was very early with their 4K implementation, but they're going to struggle if their MFT sensors keep progressing as slow as they did the previous 10 years.
Thanks guys! My screens are probably a bit too poor quality for me to observe these things directly. But it’s great to hear such high praise for the X-T3. I just hope they fix some of the simpler issues like flickering exposure adjustments using auto ISO or auto aperture, and the focus hunting that results when sitting in front of the camera with AF-C on.
I disagree.
I find it too contrasty, which leads to poor dynamic range.
It seems like a stylistic thing from Fuji and RED. I guess Fuji went this way for B&W reasons. But I prefer the clean look from Arri and Canon.
The thing that stood out the most had nothing to do with the content. The video quality of this video is AMAZING. The xt3 is unreal
Bob Barnett agreed!
How can you say that just watching on UA-cam and seeing a few shots from inside a house? Not trying to be a jerk, I'm seriously asking. What stands out to you?
Jeremy fair question. The video looks exceptional to me but I bought it so I’m basing it off of that as well
Bob Barnett yes I agree look so clean and the skin colors where perfect.
ooof. something’s been completely lost here. this camera occupies a specific niche that hasn’t been explored for 20 years; relatively inexpensive medium format range finders like the bronicas rf645 mamiya 6 and 7 makina bessas and all the wonderful and interesting folding and fixed lens 6x7 6x8 6x9 cameras from fuji... but wait, we’re comparing this latest fuji camera to one to the worlds most boring camera, sony alpha. good one.
Except the Fuji GF670 and 670W, which came out circa 2009.
Well I waited years for a digital mamiya 7 but this is not it. Skipping. Plus, I could afford mamiya 7 with 3 lenses back in the old days but doing the same for 50R system, no, too costly. It is NOT cheap.
@@chongleebnw see your point. However if you are no Anselm Adams, meaning you shoot a certain number of photos a year, say over 500, you'll soon be breaking even on saved film / lab cost
@@mackrun7029 Interesting!
Exactly, plus now it’s on discount, I neeeeeeeeeeed it
Fuji is kicking ass and finally I have some options for upgrading. The GFX-50S was amazing to use, but the lack of C1 support is my only major negative and why I never went for it. Now with C1 support, looks like I'll be dumping my 1Dx and making the switch - esp for my studio work!
Agreed all the way!
Most worthy of hype camera of 2018. Fuji is smart to uncompetitive markets, no one makes apsc lenses and bodies anywhere near the x series and now they’re making the first somewhat affordable medium format digital camera. It isn’t quite perfect yet, phase detect points would make it more versatile outside of the studio
Dude do you have the blinkers on? They just said it has almost no advantage over modern Full frame mirror less cameras just a lot of disadvantages
Yeah... 4k for not a lot... Too many card slots... Lol...
I have a feeling Fuji knows exactly who is buying this camera, and Chris touched on it in the video: travel photographers.
I'm thinking about it for a travel cam, but the lenses are really quite big and heavy... And no IS... The sensor in this is 5 years old and will be preceded no doubt by 50mp+ full frame cameras next year...
Why so angry? For some the difference is not worth chasing. And who cares you don't need to buy it.
Still a niche camera like the 50S, and even a bit more so. But... I really, really dig the big black brick aesthetic.
that old sensor = blows away any given top of the line FF sensor including the D850. So at this point, you say that Fuji should have used a different "newer" sensor just to increase price and please fanboys and trolls?
No not at all. There is no affordable sensor alternative for Fuji to use at this price point. But high end Full frames give more for less in my opinion and the image quality difference isn't enough to outweigh the lack of proper focusing, stability, and versatility. It's still an interesting camera for people who absolutely want MF in a lighter more affordable package. I'll review it fully when we get production cameras but this is how I initially feel about it.
Just be sure to include links to full raw's or at least full jpegs, from what i've seen the image quality comparing a gfx to the D850 is massive. like absolutely massive. People talk about all the time how full frame has better IQ than APS-C, the same theory should apply to MF. I get that it's not all sensor size, not even close. But in this case Fuji has the tech still to make it an awesome sensor. It's not about all out dynamic range but tonality and microcontrast, and the native gain the larger photo sites offer gives precisely that. I know most people seem to be blind to the microcontrast/tonality difference and only judge image quality primarily on the 2:1 detail levels. I really do respect Chris as a reviewer though, I do trust that he also has the eyes and photography experience to see the difference when you compare the IQ side by side.
@@niccollsvideo I actually see this as a very good mf camera that is actually affordable (compared to other digital mf cameras in the market that cost over $6k body only), also the sample images I've seen beats any high end ff camera hands down, you can't expect a mf camera to ace 10 out of 10 for portability/versatility however fuji pushed the bar and this camera is very portable, not a point and shoot portable but portable to the point that you can take it with you everywhere without the feel of the weight or size, also mf was never that fast when it comes to af, you don't buy mf to shoot sports or action
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture.
Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180).
I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences.
Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost.
So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you.
I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people.
However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'.
*Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
This must be how Sony and Nikon marketing departments really work.
I love this form factor and I wish they'd make a GFX 100R, even if it was a little larger to fit IBIS.
This sensor is still a winner for me. I have access to good 35mm, but keep going back to my GFX 50S. Deeper, more lush, just "more." If I'm doing sports or video, of course not. But for portraits, landscape, etc, I go to it every time.
I don’t give a lick about a camera I’ll never be able to afford, but I do love hanging out with the fellas. Can I purchase a hard copy of the Jordan / Hamlet Pumpkin shot?
i second that..
So why tell us about your financial problems?
Maybe you could try crowdfunding :)
Cameras that we can’t afford now is a often fun insight of cameras that we can afford in the future.
As time progresses, tech improves and prices drop. ☺️
If you think the cameras expensive Jason, wait till you find out how much this transcendental photo is worth. :)
Been shooting for about 40-years with Nikon, Canon, Leica, and Sony A900. I regretted ditching my Leica gear, but I still shoot with the old sensor A900, and I still love it. Never have used a Fujifilm, but when I stumbled upon the 50R information on DPReview, I became interested.
Even with my pithy MacBook Pro, I can easily see the difference in dynamic range vs. a full frame file. I've always wanted a Medium Format but could never justify the cost. However, this one is doable, and regarding IQ, the 50R paired with the G-mount lenses are better than just functional; especially the 2.0f 100 as an example. The way I shoot these days' I only need three lenses to be happy. BTW, I found your review to be helpful, although I interpreted the negatives to be more of positives.
Did not expect an incomplete review from dpreview... these opinions could actually drive some of your followers away from a great camera... I’ve compared the output from 45mp cameras with this one and this one stands out.. the detail is simply amazing!! If other FFs are comparable then the bigger sensor doesn’t matter at all for image quality? Isn’t too much megapixel a bad thing for smaller sensors? 50mp on an MF has to deliver far better than a 50mp on an FF and it does.. like others mentioned, if they cared about fps we would surely be seeing >=5fps... this is a landscape and portrait camera to capture super detail and that’s about it.. I have a Pentax 645z as well and the detail on that is unbeatable by the awesome but wannabe high megapixel DSLRs.. if FF is better than APS-C, MF > FF and that’s about it... I love your reviews but this one was slightly unsettling :(
That old sensor beats the crap of any latest FF sensors. This review completely missed the point of having a portable MF camera. Crazy actually! For ultimate IQ, the GFX 50S/50R will provide the best results...
Of course it does. Anyone who thinks different is a complete idiot. FF is shit.
People who don't get won't get it. As for me, FUJI TAKE MY MONEY! I've seen what people do with this camera and it's impressive regardless of the autofocus speed. I shoot manual 95% of the time.
you missed the point. MEDIUM FORMAT POCKET SIZED
I wouldn't call it pocket sized. It is an interesting design but it needs a new sensor to shine. It feels like a simpler and ever so slightly smaller GFX 50S
What kind of gigantic pocket are you rocking?
Maybe ridiculous looking cargo pants pockets...
Dang it!! Lol 😂
Chris why would it need a new sensor? What's wrong exactly with it?
This is a perfect landscape camera. Lots of pixels, good sealing, great DR and light to carry. I have an a7riii, and the best lenses are *heavy*!
I can't wait to buy this camera! It will never leave my tripod.
I know this is a video about the 50R but only 2 things got my attention
1)Damn that turntable looks awesome
2)Jordan holding a pumpkin in awesome lighting
I dont wanna be a hater, so take this feedback from a place of love.
To review a medium format camera, and not actually take the camera to an environment where you are going to get the maximum benefit from it, or even use the M.F camera to produce medium format images for viewing, and compare it to full frame frame and APS-C systems is a complete waste of time.
I find myself siding with the commentators. This review has entirely missed the point. it really comes across like you taken a M.F system and tried to use it as a full frame and/or APS-C system and somehow expected it out perform those systems based on their comparative prices.
Can you compare the x-t2 vs the x-t3...sure....can you compare the x-t3 vs the GFX50R..no, you can't...they are different systems and formats with entirely different end uses.
You may as well have said, Ansel Adams wasted his time with medium format, and should have just used a full frame camera, because it would have cost him less and he would have gotten better burst landscapes and 4k video..and he could have saved a lot of time cropping for Instagram.
I actually find this an interesting camera, more interesting than the GFX 50S; the price-point is still a bit high for me (I would rather buy a Leica M10, already having the lenses … ;)). It looks as if Fuji does want to stay out of the highly competitive full-frame market by doing its "own thing" (high-end APS-C and Medium Format). Interesting strategy, and it seems to work for them.
tho i would still go fullframe. i hear they do color well
Ashleyapples Fujifilm is smart to stay out of the full frame mirrorless market. The industry has been shrinking year by year and that’s why Canon and Nikon have been reluctant until now to release mirrorless full frame cameras.
They mainly did it to stop users from jumping over to Sony and it’s even more crowded with Panasonic-Leica-Sigma joining. So shrinking industry and full frame sells to those who are already heavily vested in photography.
Fujifilm has instead opted to compete in medium format and APS-C. One thing I will say about this review is Chris missed the point why they are releasing a rangefinder medium format with the old sensor from the 50s. It is to offer a more affordable option and the 100MP camera is going to be the update. While Sony neglects their APS-C line, Fujifilm continues to get ahead especially with the release of the XT-3. Will they remain silent or is there actually an a6700 or a7000 as rumored that can compete?
For the average civilian, or a hard working high volume pro, your conclusions make sense. If, however, you can afford the more thoughtful pace and (most importantly) you can see and appreciate the delicious tonality, sparkle and snap that is shown by many of the sample images available , then this may be for you.
I will spare you my long history, but I have ordered three lenses and will pre-order the body. I have been waiting a long time for this camera. It fits my style perfectly. (Currently using an original model Sony A7 with adapted old Leica R lenses.)
Yes, I saw his great review. His style does suit the camera well. Some people prefer a faster pace and higher frame rate. I certainly fall into Kevin's camp.
Medium format lenses give a unique perspective and depth of field
No they don't.
@@cescudify There's something called optics. Look it up. lol.
@@PeterKoperdan
They do not give you unique depth of field but they do give you more depth of field.
most interesting thing about this was deciding which one was jonathan and which the punpkin
Oh, that Jonathan...
Ayy, my man Chris is a cool dude. He still rocking those LPs on that LP60. Awesome!
The point of this camera really is to supplement the X- System with your unique high res needs. For the most part the X system can take on the Sony’s Canon’s Nikon’s of this world. But if you need to add that fashion/studio/interiors/landscape high resolution larger sensor option the GFX may just be it.
At the end of the day if you’re going to have a high res camera and one that is lower res - you could fo for the a7iii and the a7riii ... or you can save a lot on the lenses and weight using a XT3 and invest those savings into the GFX and a lens or two. You get better portability using the XT3 and better resolution using the GFX...
So you think this takes better pictures than the X1D? That's interesting, when the X1D is $10,000? I think this product line has more growth potential because it's new, while the 35 mm seems to have reached its peak? Just how much more can you improve on that sensor? Better ISO and low light? Even more dynamic range? Itll be hard, right? But perhaps with a new sensor from Fuji they may be able to eliminate the need for HDR and exposure blending altogether? I think it still needs time to mature. Lenses are super expensive, too, so... and things like continuous shooting and videos are not good... they got work to do, and I think they know what they're doing and eventually will get it right, like they did with the XT3, which is really nice.
It is understood that the resolution advantage (for this sensor) may not be much over current FF, but what about the colour depth? Surely the 645 sensor is collecting far more colour info. Considering Medium format was such an astronomical cost 10 years ago, this body at just over $4000 USD is incredible. Finally...it has 2 card slots....Just saying...
"Surely the 645 sensor is collecting far more colour info." Nope.
I found this camera by chance on your web page because it's noise looks way better than what other cameras do. It has a magenta color shift but otherwise very detailed and clean
But the IQ from the GFX cameras is excellent, the dynamic range stays high even at high iso's, better than any other camera out there!
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture.
Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180).
I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences.
Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost.
So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you.
I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people.
However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'.
*Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
I completely agree with everything you said, well put. :) But for me, the MF & FF both have there places depending on what your shooting, both systems are more than capable of providing excellent results, but the MF also has a different look to the image, a different aesthetic that is very pleasing to the eye, whether that's the 3d pop, color tonality/depth, shallow depth of field or whatever, for those who know and appreciate quality, the difference can be seen between FF & MF. But in general they are pretty close overall, its just Fuji is doing something magical with the dynamic range at high iso's. something no other brand is able to do & that's keep high dynamic range at those high iso's, that's super important to me. But Fuji is turning the MF digital world on its head with the latest GFX 100Mp Dslr style MF camera!!! Its going to give us the speed and ergonomics of a dslr and the IQ of a MF camera!!! Exciting times!
@@iris-studios yes, also to say you shouldn't buy an MF Camera because it doesn't offer much more Image Quality than an FF Camera, is pretty ignorant.
One could also argue that (in that case) you shouldn't buy a Full Frame, because it doesn't offer a significant improvement in Image Quality compared to APSC
@@PeterKoperdan
Bunche of rubbish, mf do outperform full Fram when it comes to sharpening plus depth of field and crop factor.
@@frankeinstein1570
Yup, panasonic g9 80 megapixel hi res photos look similar to d750 until we put that on billboard. It's world apart.
Finally, a worthy replacement to my A7rIII.
Capture One can handle RAW conversion through tethering? Does this mean C1 can off-load to the camera the way X RAW Studio does?
As soon as the 50mm pancake lens is out, I am going to rent this camera and lens for a day, and it will be a beautiful day
Gfx50r for landscapes and XT3 for everything else. Perfect!!
Or just the A7riii for everything lol.. your be cropping most MF sensor if shooting landscapes.
Nope. Not going back to Sony. I had an a7rii. Fujifilm knows how to make cameras systems. Sony doesn't.
How about the new 47mp FF Panasonic? Dont get me wrong the bigger the sensor the better but this 50mp MF sensor is nearly 5 years old? A modern full frame sensor offers almost the same IQ
@Damon Mason , so Sony is better?
@@labito5364
No, he is saying mf is better.
I think it’s probably just a case of suppliers dragging Fujifilm. This is a sony sensor and I don’t think there is a better one for 50mp medium format right now. The clue is on the 100s that will have phase detection AF and seems to be a leap forward. If the 100s is going to be priced at 10k as rumors say it will be a game changer. How much does cost a 100mp MF camera?! The cool thing on the 50R is that it’s a step in the right direction. Let’s not forget that building amazing cheap medium format cameras is no new thing for Fuji. 20 years ago I had the Fuji GA645 and it had autofocus and a killer fixed lens. If the plan for Fuji is to make MF affordable and accessible then this is surely the right step in the right direction. If people like full frame for the looks of the lens focal distance and DOF... MF is a step up from that as well
- Damn, I expected the same sensor, but I was expecting the new processor and its nifty tricks.
- Square format is a favourite of mine, and 33mm x 33mm affords the full use of M-mount lenses.
- Very pleased to see a tilting screen for this form-factor (coming from the X-Pro1.)
- For the moment the Panasonic S1 is the clear forerunner for adapting, for me, as it's more versatile and will probably take Sigma lenses with a new MC-11 adaptor.
- I am wondering if Samsung and Fuji are part of the "imaging ecosystem" partnerships Panasonic were referring to, though.
What about the great standard old school cable release?
Your reviewing style has changed since you moved to DPReview, you concentrate far more on the negatives than the positives of new cameras.
They now aren't trying to sell those cameras and have more accountability to portray a balanced review
Good point, but I liked him better when he was a nice Canadian boy.
He still is 😊
Dakman DotCom No the reason is they have to sale Amazon recommended camera and not what they think they should sale.
I agree, negative and always chasing after that next sensor. It’s an incredible landscape camera, incredible, might want to look at some of the prints from professionals using this camera before sending the sensor to the graveyard.
I'm so happy that Chris and Jordan joined the DPreview team.
Me too!
But it feels nostalgic to watch the old TCSTV videos :(
I miss the beautiful scenery of Calgary
@@dinkobilic9078 for sure but it's really cool to see great reviewers cross over to different platforms. I just really enjoy Chris and Jordans very genuine reviews. They're enthusiastic like kids in a candy store but they've been around a bit to know some ish lol.
Hi great video on my GFX when I take a photo it does two images one normal one slightly warmer what my doing wrong thanks Matt
This video featured _CRISP_ Niccolls! Christ, that's a beautifully sharp image.
For a long time he said his name quite fast and I thought he was Chris Tickles
Congrats on the video! Perfect! Would be great if DPreview would show the advantages of Medium Format in general... Specially with challenging high Dynamic Range situations and tonalities... I know the D850 and 5DsR are very close(I am happy with my D800e so far), but it would be great to see where MF excels...
www.dpreview.com/opinion/2341704755/thinking-about-buying-medium-format-read-this-first
@@PeterKoperdan
Better thing for him to do is test out, full frame and mf in real world, they are world apart when it comes sharpness and dynamic range plus depth of field.
Test out hasselblad h6d 100c for yourself, if your friends own one. Result will show you what you want.
Whats your turntable and soeaker setup? That looks dope
These are still the very early generations of consumer, mirrorless small-medium format.
What’s most exciting is the amount of development in this space, including some fast lenses, and the price point.
In a couple of generations, these will be superb systems.
My main gripe with digital medium format is that, unlike film medium format, the sensor size isn’t that much better than Full Frame.
With current fabrication technology, digital sensors just don’t scale economically in the way that film (still) does.
Thank you for the Preview Chris. How do you think the Fujifilm GFX 50R will fare compared to Leica's new 60MP S3?
Is contrast detection really bad comparing to phase detection? I'm considering if I shall go for 50s or this new 50r. =]
Neither one has phase detection
I think the most important thing to take away from this is the C1 support. No other MF (if "true" or sort of cropped) has that. That is some compelling sales point. Plus if Fuji releases this one, they will do another one, with the upcoming 100mpix sensor. So there is that. Plus lenses. More than the small Hasselblad has. Plus you could own the big & this body with same lenses. But still, the current 35mm mirrorless are just too equal. This is all complicated
N.B. Kevin Mullins refers to a boost mode that increases AF speed at the expense of EVF refresh-rate.
can you upload a video about GFX50R
Finally capture one support!! Does it use the same RAW format as the old GFX 50S so that is supported too?
There is also a fujifilm express and a fujifilm only pro version just like for Sony. The sad thing is that these are not available as perpetual licenses. The standard pro version is still available with a pertpetual license
Man has always been enamored with "the larger canvas". why we shoot 6 x 7 and 8 x 10 and film. Still.
I notice the shutter dial only goes to 1/4000, does it have an electronic shutter that goes faster?
Pack this with Fujis upcoming pancake 50mm 3.5 and voila! Who wouldve thought that in 2018 you'd have a travel-friendly medium format camera.
Hot damn, the xt3 video looks amazing.
And a nearly affordable medium format. Fuji kicking ass.
For the majority of camera enthusiasts, your conclusion is reasonable. However, I priced out an A7RIII with premium lenses to match the focal range I wanted and with the current prices, the Sony wound up being about one thousand dollars less expensive. Add up all the lenses you want and both systems are up in the ten thousand dollar range or more. I currently shoot a Sony A7 original version with old adapted lenses, so the slower, non video, shooting style fits me perfectly. :) If you take the time and have good shot discipline, using native Fuji glass, the image quality available from the GFX series is superior, visible even in downsized images. This is not to say that you can not find some very average looking samples out there, but you can take a poor picture with a Phase One IQ 150 if you are not diligent. :) So, for the majority of people, your conclusions are reasonable. I have my pre-order in place, and have already picked up the GF 110 and GF 250 lenses in anticipation. The GF 45 will arrive with the camera. Very different style of shooting - exactly my cup of tea. :)
Best part of this review is looking at the unbelievable IQ of the X-T3. It is amazing!
the GF 110mm F/2 has an aesthetic that really could be the killer app for this camera for portrait studios. Google image search that lens and you'll see a look that I've never seen from full-frame no matter what the lens.
I would buy this with the 100MP sensor.
It's coming soon, with IBIS and phase detect
Sacha Martin And a humongous completely unnecessary built-in vertical grip.
@@marianpalko2531 it's makes the camera much, much thinner than the Gfx50s and better for heat distribution... It's great. Stop complaining.
Superman's CGI mouth A detachable grip could do the same things. Lets say that higher frame rates were only allowed with the grip attached, XT-2 style. The way things look now, you have no option to have a lightweight camera. You always have the grip there.
Superman's CGI mouth And the 50R is also thinner than the 50S.
Good enough/ Close enough, sorry but that won't cut it. Every time I remember how those pics looked on Hasselblad, No matter how sexy the hardware gadgets are, I simply can not tolerate inferior images, no matter how many times you try to convince yourself they are good enough. They just aren't.
I wonder if I can fit my Hasselblad lenses using the fuji adapter?
0:18 "and what could be safer than a house inside a house?"
That was actually cute.
Why the heck they didn't put the X-T3 internals in it?
Cost saving
Really like the color of this video, good job.
Here's to Jordan's color grading (who recently said that he likes the Eterna for sooc video: bit.ly/2DrgRso)! :P
Can I get a link to the webpage shown at 07:47?
Dpreview.com
If prices drop to 2000-2500 with lens included, I’m buying
Who the hell shoots 4k or video for that matter on a medium format camera? And who needs fast AF on a MF camera? There's just so many people that love specs but in the real world, lack creativity. Additionally so, the majority are laughable when they point their fallible skinny fingers what cameras should and don't have when most of them still shoot with their phones or a point and shoot camera. Needless to say, if you don't know what a medium format is supposed to do, then it's out of your league.
Exactly, its a camera for photographers. I shoot a lot of travel landscapes and street portraits, and am ready to lay down the money for one now.
it would still be very awesome to shoot a video on a gigantic sensor though. I don't care that much about 4K, would love to test it anyways
Well said.
I agree to disagree
The video thing, I sort of agree on, but definitely not on the AF matter
@DPReview - which are those speakers with your turntable?
When will fuji release a full- frame ??
WOW, I was so fixated on the Panasonic FF announcement that I totally missed this!!!
A Fujifilm usual business strategy - buying sensor and processor in bulk, topping down from high end to lower end camera. This also giving them sufficient time and experience for firmware development until next product cycle.
You should mention how competitive the price it is, as a Medium Format Camera. What was the cheapest MF before Fujifilm entering the market?
Nikon FF had the picture quality close to current MF as its sensor is packed with the latest BSI technology. But it still couldn’t beat MF. You always pay higher price in proportion for achieving the top 10% performance.
The 50R image quality... color, contrast and tonal balance is stunning... the male model in dark room and a pumpkin. Pancake lens for this body would be really amazing... looking forward to that lens review.
Seams like it is PERFECT for landscapes. When you just need much dynamic range, a lot of details, perfect lens, but don't need any fancy video stuff or advanced auto-focusing etc.
Totally agree! This camera will shine in the studio or for travel landscapes. It's much lighter and the price point is welcome.
What happened to the xpro2 succeser, xpro 3? Isn't it coming?
the GFX 50R does work with CaptureOne? This is pretty big imho.
Not here for the camera, but as usual the guys deliver! Great video, best decision dpreview ever made!
Should they have waited until the next generation of sensor+processor to release this?
The end reminded me of my first time of getting out of a Lotus Evora. Second time was slightly easier but I haven't needed to try it again since then. Nice car but I can't afford it... and the same goes for the Fuji GFX. XT3 seems interesting though.
First of all, I'm glad that the first official news of this camera comes from you guys :-)
Yes, this this camera is definitely for me.
Secondly, this camera came too soon. Now I'll have to sell my kidney for it...
Thank you for the video! Quality was stellar and i love your new accommodation Chris.
I'm thinking of the jpg-comparison test you guys did a while ago at tcstv right now.
What about something similar for different sensor sizes? Maybe from MF down to Smartphones. Not similar images but comparable situations. And with each camera / system you give yourselves a good amount of time (like some days) to get some keepers. Then edit and print (big). Let people vote and get multiple opinions on each print. I know it will be a big project but maybe it's going to be a good marker on how big of a sensor does one has to have.
How do I get a raw file of that pumpkin portrait
Chris makes a good point about dslr ff cameras, however this is a 50mp sensor which is still bigger than the a7r3 and z7. Plus fujifilm slipped ff, so... yeah. This will be epic for studios on a budget or serious enthusiasts. Like Chris also said there’s the lens map which looks compelling. Give this camera a year and the used prices will be excellent!
What is the program used at 8:42?
I've checked on dpreview the gallery for this camera Fuji GFX 50R and I was blown... Honestly, Apc's sensors suk, some full frames are good but not this good.
This one (GFX50R) and the higher end brother GFX100 looks really good.
I mean even Leica Q2 that sells so expensive, I've found weird compression stuff in the photos due to low light (mostly perception of combined colors and pixels).
This video shot with a gh5 ? Looks great.
It has its place and it beats any FF camera for what you would use it for.
By how much? www.dpreview.com/opinion/2341704755/thinking-about-buying-medium-format-read-this-first
@@PeterKoperdan
By testing them in real life, they get beat by real lengthy margin.
If a future version of this camera delivers 16bit raw instead of the common 14bit I will buy it immediately.
Thanks Chris for another unbiased critique, I always wanted to enter the medium format world, but found the cameras to be a bit clunky, heavy, and expensive. With Fujifilm’s introduction of the GFX-50R, it makes me want to re-think about the medium format system. I’m not looking to make money shooting photography or to depend on the camera to survive, but there are photo enthusiasts out there that likes to keep up with technology and try a different format.... I’m looking at the prices for the 50R and it seems affordable, I’m thinking since I already have the Nikon D850, I can trade in my Nikon D750 (which I was going to trade for the Z6) for a chance to experience the medium format system.... what do you think?
I think if I was deciding between this or the 50S, I would've gotten the 50S. That being said, I'm waiting to see what Hasselblad does with their next iteration of the x1d before I finally drop money in 2019.
Alain Hassy is Chinese owned now buddy move on they’re dead! They are not the same company just in name!
DJI owns a majority stake of Hassy and that hardly means they're dead. Especially since Hasselblad continues to move on with the same crafting model as always. In fact, they made worse products at one point before being acquired by DJI. Do a little bit of research before generalizing something like your statement.
Angry photographer is pissing himself right now 😃
Please don't summon the thumb.
Who cares about this idiot!
Someone should open a rumour website debating what he's doing while watching gfxr videos.
Good. Then he’ll be angry, wet, and stinky.
He is definitely working on a video regarding this review lol
No medium format camera that I am aware of purpose is to compete with a digital full frame camera. From some of the videos I’ve watched on the review of this camera I get the impression that some of the reviewer’s are not sure of the difference.
i don't care about video, so medium format in that body, for that price, well i think it will have an impact.
link to that camera compare?
Oh yes, I so wanted to see Chris get outside that small cardboard house haha
pierdes de vista lo compacta que será la cámara, barata, y nadie compraría una cámara de formato completo para grabar vídeo...
Actually the new GF 100-200mm is not the second GF lens with OIS, it's the third. The GF120 and GF250 both have OIS. BTW, this four-year-old sensor still blows away modern FF sensors. As for lens selection, those who know medium format know that a huge selection of lenses isn't necessary given what medium format is used for.
haven't seen the exact specs but doesn't seem to me that the new Nikon and Canon offerings are smaller than this.
who cares about video!!!! it's for Photographers!
Hence why the video part of the review lasted only 10 seconds
logitech4873 With heavy sarcasm! They made it feel like it's less than a camera because of it. Thats all i meant.
Jordan always does a video review on new cameras, and there's always someone wondering what the video features are like.
This camera doesn't have very good video features, so it's swiftly pointed out with very little time spent dwelling on the subject.
@@tjs0179 kinda is too tho
Chill the fuck out. It is important to know.
Those modeling pics of Jordan and the pumpkin lmao!
This might be an exercise in managing expectations. When say, Samsung comes out with a new Galaxy S phone, they usually release a J series phone for the budget minded, having features of the older flagship. I kind of expected this to be that, and therefore didn't expect any new features or behaviors beyond the original GFX. One could argue price isn't quite budget, but maybe it is to the medium format folk.
I do wonder why they bothered putting video on it at all. Probably because the market simply can't comprehend the concept of a camera made just for stills photography anymore.
Great video and summary. I'm an existing GFX50s user and I wouldn't change to this camera. One major reason is that I make a lot of use of the tilt swivel adapter (I basically shoot the camera as if it were an old style Hasselblad film body which is where I came from). One point I would respond to is the ability to crop square with more content. Again, given where I started from, this is important to me and I love the square mask you can bring up in the EVF to help frame. I think you underestimate the dynamic range and beauty of the 50mpx sensor in these cameras. The results I get from the GFX50s are the most satisfying I've ever had from a digital camera. For the first time, I really cannot get too excited about shooting film, which is probably the greatest accolade I can give the 50s. Whether that is down to the size of the sensor, or just the sensor and Fuji's processing, I don't know. At the other end of the spectrum I shoot wildlife and for that I use the Panasonic m43rds system, so if I were to ever go FF I'd probably now be interested in the new Panasonic system (which I hope you will review soon). Bottom line, the GFX50s and especially the Fuji lenses deliver outstanding image quality and I would expect the 50R to (obviously) do the same but with different handling - which again I emphasise won't work for me.
There are better option out there.....is that the smartest conclusion you can make?Name one option ,it must be MF,compact, new and 4500$.
When you take a good look at DPReview comparison tool goo.gl/8EeTpr, you can indeed see that there is little difference in terms of resolution between 50S and Canon 5DSR. Do remember that some differences come from RAW processing sharpening settings, lens focus, depth of field, different lens, different aperture.
Focus on 3 areas: small text, money and the b&w picture on the left. You can see that both cameras produce similar artifacts. Moire is present on both and is particularly nasty in the b&w picture (compare it to the 80Mpix Phase One IQ180).
I would say that Fuji has a LITTLE bit more resolution than Canon. However, it's not going to be noticeable in most cases. What IS going to be noticeable is the moire, and it's going to be equally bad on both cameras' photos. So if you are going to print them at huge sizes or crop them, moire becomes a problem that overshadows any small resolution differences.
Regarding image quality, there is the question of noise, dynamic range, lenses etc.. This topic is greatly explored in an excellent DPReview article goo.gl/sy1WA8. TLDR current 50Mpix Fuji and Hasselblad cameras don't offer any major image quality advantages over top FF cameras. On the other hand, FF cameras do offer major advantages in terms of handling, speed, size and cost.
So in the end, current Fuji MF cameras are superior to their alternatives only in some very specific scenarios. If your photography happens to be part of those scenarios, then you can benefit from Fuji MF cameras. If you understand that reality, then you can judge for yourself how much is that worth to you.
I think that most people who are interested in these cameras want them not because of the advantage over other alternatives. I think that most people just WANT a medium format camera and that's it. Fuji for 5500$ with a lens can fulfill that dream for many people.
However, as is the usual case, people need justification for their expensive purchase and shooting with the limitations current MF cameras bring with them. This FALSE justification is predictably simple - MF offers better image quality, better dynamic range, better lenses, moar '3D look', better colors, and that intangible but nevertheless present 'MF magic'.
*Just for the record - I can afford neither Fuji MF nor Canon 5DSR. I'm not a brand/format fanboy. I'm just looking at the data as it is, out of curiosity. If I happened to shoot a commercial project that required the highest image quality possible, I would rent Phase One IQ4. If I shot landscape photography and sold prints, Canon/Nikon/Sony would be more than enough in that scenario. If I shot landscape photography at such a high level that I could actually sell those 150Mpix, I would certainly have money to buy Phase One IQ4.
Peter Koperdan I do not care about your long story since I use Apsc, FF and MF to make money.The question for these two smart guys is to name MF camera in the range of 4500$.
eagleeye photo Out of curiosity, if you make money with and can afford to shoot 3 different systems, why do you care about 1000$ difference between this and GFX 50S?
And photographers who need the 1000$ price drop to be able to afford to buy into this system, should they really be considering this camera? What are they gaining? Small image quality increase over 5DSR/D850 in specific conditions. I'm not sure if that's money well spent for them.
Peter Koperdan It is 2000$ difference and w.r.t GFX50s there is delta in portability and size. For 2 grand you can buy studio strobes, lens, adapter or other equippment. If you compare d850 and GFX photos they are not the same, as apsc is not the same as FF. It is close up to the point when you need to crop or to print big, that is where FF and apsc start to lack behind MF. Other than that color, tonality, dynamic range and detail sharpness MF is superior to the FF. The price of the digital MF is high if you exclude latest Fujifilm and go with digital backs like Mamiya , Phase or Hasselblad so if you don't have tax write off or a lot of job which require MF then you can rent it (as I did over the years). The point of going in to MF is that most of the users who are buying or using MF are FF high mpix users already but there job require to use MF. The good thing for those users is that Fujifilm is making the MF entery level affordable. However if you looking to allround usability you should stick to the FF. MF is usable for anything then sport, fast moving subjects , birding , wild life where you need fast burst , long glass and speedy AF. It is complimentary tool and not jack of all trades.So if you doing commercial , high end fashion, corporate, landscape or architecture work you might need on some point MF resolution , otherwise for travel,street , sport and hybrid (video) I would recommend apsc or FF. It is a tool for certain job and what people are discussing on some forums does not make a lot of sense.If you need to drive your caravan across the country you probably not going to do that with Ferrari , you can but this would be not ideal car to pull the caravan around.
@@eagleeyephoto8715 If you read my initial 'long story' you would see that analysis shows that Fuji MF offers relatively little image quality advantage over top FF. One can easily check for themselves following the links provided. Which leads to the question: If you really really need noticeably higher quality, why not go for high end system such as Phase One?
Or do clients not care about real quality and only want to see your exif data to show 'shot on MF'?