$50k Phase One XF vs $6k Fujifilm GFX 100s - Thoughts and Comparison Follow Up Video
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 лип 2024
- Note: The information about compression in lenses is incorrect. Apologies for spreading misinformation!
In this video I talk about my thoughts comparing the Phase One Camera system and the new Fuji GFX100s, this video is a follow up to my earlier video, First Week Impressions which you can watch here: • Fujifilm GFX 100s - Fi...
This video is entirely a talking head as I go through my thoughts regarding the two systems. There are no pictures or video of use just near non-stop talking, so if thats not for you, you're probably not alone. Please excuse my poor editing, this video was so long I missed some parts that should have been cut out.
00:00 Intro
01:37 Fuji Intro
02:03 Phase One Intro
03:22 Size Comparison
06:14 Lens Compression and Crop Factor
09:04 More Crop Factor Discussion
12:34 Why Medium Format
14:24 Phase One Pros and Cons
19:07 Fuji Ergonomics and Info
22:10 Flash Sync Speed
23:49 Conclusion
So I did make a mistake in this video regarding the compression and perspective of medium format lenses. I was mistaken on how they affect the image but I'm glad I know better now. I'm still going to leave the video up because I think the rest of the information is still valuable. Thank you to those who pointed out my mistake, I do get lost in technical details sometimes. It does bring up an interesting point on what exactly is the medium format look? Just a myth? Perhaps something to dig deeper into in another video.
Medium format look can be many things. Fidelity, resolution, clean shadows, better colour, natural sharpness.
So these things are real. And then there was the CCD look, which was a thing, as far as direct output was concerned. I believe that CCDs have, or had, naturally better microcontrast than CMOSes used to have.
Lots of people still believe in the notion that lenses affect compression, so you weren't the only one.
Full marks for transparency and integrity 👍 although I’m not in the market for a Phase One it’s good to understand the market and the legitimate niche that each fulfills so a really interesting review too - thanks for that. I still think you are right about the flatness of the image in the sense that medium format glass is higher quality and has less optical distortion and less light bending from the longer focal length but other people did probably make the true point about observer to subject distance affecting perspectival distortion which would correspond more to the effective field of view of a lens rather than its focal length.
I think things like the “medium format look” and “3D/Zeiss pop” are too poorly defined and subjective to have any real meaning. My guess is the phrases were coined by folks seeing really good photos by photographers with really good, medium format cameras. Or by marketing teams.
Anyway, light, bokeh, composition, FOV… it all contributes to image quality and you can make high quality photos with anything from m43 up to large format.
No you did not make any mistakes. You are correct about that. I made comparisons with my own cameras. You are correct about compression and the look of the lenses with a larger sensor.
It was very interesting to watch this comparison. And thanks for your very practical thoughts! Even though I likely will never own Phase One :) but it just fascinating to learn how both cameras work differently. Makes me appreciate my GFX50R
Great video. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
Regarding the X-Sync speed. You can shoot with Hasselblad HC leaf shutter lenses (they are Fujinons btw) with the Fujifilm H Mount adapter. You loose autofocus but for me it is not a problem at all as i usually need a fast X-Sync when doing commercial works outside. One added bonus is that you can switch from leaf shutter to camera shutter with one push of a button. This is a great feature to save your lens leaf shutter when you don't need max X-Sync.
also with the x-sync you can , as on Sony, Nikon, etc. mirrorless cameras, use the E-shutter option, which scans the image, the curtains get out of the way, like the "blinds" in the hasselblad v film cameras, so should sync right up to 1/4000th of a second.
Thanks for the video! Lots of great info.
Thank you, much appreciated.
just a thought, if flash matters that much, you can also use the GF-X on a view camera like the Cambo actus allowing a leaf shutter lens to be added to the front, and the fuji is just a "sensor package", it is set for "recording"{shutter latency setting, like on other digital MF backs} and waits for the shutter to fire, you insert the camera in-between the lens' Pc-sync port, and the flash trigger, the camera uses this as the 'remote shutter' button, so Yes, you can use leaf shuttered lenses on this, with the benefits of the long flash sync.
You are clearly an experienced and talented photographer who knows how to get what he wants out of his equipment, but your explanation on perspective and compression is flat out wrong. You don’t get more compression out of the 80mm on the Phase than a 50mm on a full frame body if the subject distance is the same. That’s simply not accurate. Compression is determined by subject distance in relation to background distance and is just a matter of geometry. The only way the 80mm has more compression is if you tend to shoot it from farther away than you would shoot a 50mm on full frame (which is certainly possible given the change in aspect ratio).
Otherwise, an informative video that doesn’t bogged down in technical details over image quality differences. Thanks for doing the comparison.
Hey, thank you for writing this out. You're absolutely right, that's what I get for getting too into a technical rant. I did have to do some research and what I thought I learned had turned out to be incorrect. Other factors were at play.
Refreshing to see humility on the net.
Thank you for the video. I have been hiring both systems and am thinking about a purchase. Logically it would be the GFX. But not yet decided. Question: at this early stage have you now decided that the GFX gives you enough to let go of your P1 XF? Or conversely is there something about the P1 (Flash synch speed, something in the feature set, client reactions) that is important enough for you to keep it, rather than switch entirely to the GFX?
Thanks Ian, so you pretty much hit the nail on the head with reasons to keep the Phase One, client reaction unfortunately is a big part of the business at this scale and the Phase One is ‘that’ camera. Flash sync is also huge, that could make or break a shot in specific environments. I don’t use the majority of the special features other than the Profoto Air Remote but many people do. If it was entirely up to me I would probably switch, but only if I knew I was in charge of every detail of any potential shoot, which is rarely the case.
waiting for the actual comparison of fujifilm and phaseone side by side image test that are done on tripod so we accurately understand whats going on.
I am changing a GFX100 (not the S) for a Phase IQ4, and i think the reasons are similar to yours but going the other way. When i use medium format one of the things I need is size on a wall; the other is optical perfection, and I couldn’t care less about the camera being stabilized, cause I can shoot on a tripod . In those respects the IQ4 is much better in detail resolving, focus stacking, frame averaging … than the Fuji (the sensor moves slightly between shots). I think both are great, and definitely couldn’t afford the Phase if I was buying new, but they are made for different lines of work. The Fuji might be interesting for fashion or weddings, the Phase is a camera made to sit on a tripod and take your time. Thanks, I really liked your video.
Agreed. I wanted a larger CCD sensor so I went with a Phase One IQ280 & XF kit. I always wanted a Phase One. The Fujifilm is too similar to my Sony A7rIV.
Explanation with crop factor is wrong ( it was reverse crop factor). Explanation about compression is just wrong . Compression is just due to the distance of the subject (perspective) . 80mm phase one compresses plans excatly like a 50mm FF.
You are correct, I pinned a comment for anybody that sees this. Hopefully the rest of the video is still somewhat useful. Thank you!
Phase one is Phase Detect AF. Phase One has Frame Averaging on IQ4 which I believe is unique to it. You can also attach a waist level finder on the Phase One. It’s much lighter than the prism. But you lose metering.
You can get 1/1000s flash sync if you adapt Hasselblad H lenses via the GFX adapter. Btw, best in class is 1/2000s with Hasselblad H6D-100 with Orange Dot H lenses.
You can also get 1/1000s flash sync (and even faster) with the GFX and just about any lens via HSS using the Profoto TTL-Air remote. Of course this would limit you to modern Profoto equipment only, but it's not like high-speed flash sync is an easy task for easily achieved. First you need a flash system able to deliver enough power during such a short duration to properly illuminate your subject. Then your connection has to support it as well. Most wireless flash sync methods don't go beyond 1/160-1/200 - unless you use HSS - so your best bet would be a x-sync cable. Doable but cumbersome, especially tethered having to wrangle two cables all the time.
I couldn’t understand the name correctly at 3:56. Please add a link the the video description, thanks.
Good job bro, hey slowing down is good, don’t like to waist time or shoots, I still shooting with my rb67 and love it every time. Was wondering about the Fujifilm 100s . Thanks for sharing
Thanks for your feedback and thank you for watching!
Enjoyed the video, some minor technical mistakes but nobody’s picky. Sold my Phase one since clients are now familiar with other systems, and MF look is a myth an expensive one 😢.
Thank you. Interesting and to the point. I do own a GFX system but not the Phase One and the comparison was educational for me. I am an amateur and mostly a landscape photographer. I am lucky enough to have the budget to own the GFX and that allows me to shoot with the best image quality producing system for that purpose (in my mind). I have carried the GFX 100 around in harsh conditions and I am happy to shed some weight the 100s. I am sure that for some circumstances the Phase One is the way to go but not for me.
The GFX series is hard to beat, especially for landscapes. Thanks for watching!
The 44k price difference buys a pretty swanky Broncolor flash setup with extremely short flash duration to get around some of the flash sync speed with a good chunk of cash left over. The only thing it won’t help with is suppressing ambient light.
Thanks.. I chose to go with a Phase One XF CCD kit.
They are both great cameras. I personally love GFX100 over the s model.
I hope Fuji can make FF 645 sensor medium format camera in the close future.
How can they. Sony makes their sensors
Serious question:
New GFX100s with a lens vs. used XF with IQ250 and a lens for roughly the same price (8-10k) which one would you choose? (Let's forget about the megapixels for the moment - question is about enjoy to work with it, color, system in general, lenses and stuff and image quality)
Sorry this reply is so late but if you're still up in the air, I would choose the Fuji hands down. I actually sold my Phase One system not too long after I made this video.
You're spot on about how comparing digital cameras is splitting hairs (esp. in today's day and age), and how a camera (system) renders, usabilty, etc. are the more imporant factors. I purachased the GFX100S and multiple GF lenses, and sold it all after 6 months. GFX is a great system, but I got better results (in terms of what appeals to me) with a different system that I enjoy shooting more. That said, for anybody who gets off on pixel peeping, you can't beat the GFX100S for the price -- the level of detail at 400% is breathtaking (assuming you nail your focus).
Hi, could you please give more explanation on this other system that you prefer ? What system and why ? Thanks
@@jean-marcfroehlinger8749I found myself preferring the SL2, a camera I already had, to the GFX100s, and the GFX100s did nothing but collect dust after the initial novelty of 100MP wore off. In practical terms, IQ isn't any better on the GFX100S than the SL2 (splitting hairs, as you say), and, IMO, the GFX does not come close to the SL2 in build quality and shooting experience. It is also very disruptive to switch between systems (differences in menus, controls, etc.), and I've reduced the number of systems I shoot with to just two (Leica, Canon). The Canon is for anything that requires fast, accurate A/F and Leica for everything else. With the GFX, it was just one more system to adapt to, with its own set of lenses -- it just didn't make sense. On the other hand, I have several M lenses that pair nicely with the SL2. So ultimately, what best works for me is something that a specification sheet cannot express.
After selling the GFX, I purchased a second-hand S3 and S lenses. Frankly, it's a camera I'd never consider looking at a spec sheet (nor would I ever consider paying full price as new). However, the S lenses adapt very nicely to the SL2 (using the native mount adapter, so all functions are supported), and the S3 IQ bests anything I've shot with when evaluated holistically (colors, render, the malleability of files in post, etc.). The GFX is the more technical camera of the two, as is the SL2, but the S3 IQ has a more organic feel, which I prefer in many cases, while also maintaining a high level of detail and sharpness (but, admittedly, not at the same level as the GFX100s). In a nutshell, I prefer the images and shooting experience of the SL and S systems to GFX. IMO, the GFX images look just like a higher MP version of something you get from a Sony. Nothing wrong with that, but not different or to my taste.
@@RolandAyala Hi. Thanks a lot for this very detailed and interesting answer. I fully understand your points. My main system is based on Sony cameras (A7 R IV) with the best lenses but after some time I realized that this very clinical look was not really for my taste. So, I went back in film days with a Leica M7, Nikon D4s, Canon EOS 1V and Fuji gx680. Not an easy way (I relearned how to develop B&W and color and also scanning process, as I'm doing my own prints since 10 years on large printers, at the moment a Canon Program 2100, and I want to follow that even with my film images). In an other hand, I have added to my set of GM lenses some manual Voigtlander lenses and this was also a very nice surprise as the process is much more nicer now with these slowing down lenses.. S3 looks really great for results even if some spec sheets are really out of date. Wish you the best.
@@jean-marcfroehlinger8749 Thanks. and I agree with all your points. Photography is an art form, and there's too much emphasis on tech specs and DXO scores, etc., because, IMO, they're easy to compare, it gives the gear-oriented tubers and DPR, etc., something to talk and write about. In terms of stills, sensor tech has reached the point (several years ago, actually) where other things matter much more. IMO, people should find a camera they love to shoot with and work back from what they're trying to achieve in terms of how the images look (color, render, etc.). Post-processing is a good and necessary thing, but if consistently tweaking images to achieve a different look than what the camera provides (as I was with the GFX), that's a signal that other systems beckon. Lenses can solve the problem too, but, IMO, best to say with GF lenses if shooting GFX system and, while adapting FF lenses can be found to provide sufficient sensor coverage, options are limited, and for this that exist, most won't have the resolving power that likely drove somebody to GFX system in the first place. The S is a great option for me because it delivers the results I'm seeking using native MF glass.
Thank you for writing about your experience. It's certainly subjective to a point, especially when it comes to usability. I have an SL2-s that I use for extreme low light situations and it is difficult sometimes to move between systems.
Die Phase One erinnert sehr an meine analoge RF Mamiya RZ 67 mit AE Sucher und 120 er Rollfilm-Kassette, auch sehr groß und schwer. Benutze die Objektive gelegentlich per Adapter an der GFX.
Although I'd choose the Fuji (if I had to go MFD), I still appreciate the discussion. The Phase One is very sexy for sure. And it pays to know why we make our choices.
But, here's some food for thought: the Fuji can accept way more lenses overall than the Phase One, thanks to being mirrorless.
I don't use flash so that isn't a factor. But a lot of people do. Then there is the Hasselblad X1D to make things more interesting.
Thanks for the video!
I think you nailed it regarding the MF look.
Shuda used the GFX system BEST lens the 45mm 2.8.
I think I would just go with the fuji.