Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Brad P on May 19, 2017, 02:43:27 am
-
OK, OK. Part 1000-something for those following the saga. If you have used the GFX and/or X1D, your comments in particular are welcome. I rented the GFX, the 63 and 120 a few weeks ago. My post here is not so much about the GFX as about what I am finding with my version of the X1D in contrast. Just shot sunset shots with the X1D and that experience may be the final straw for me. I'll sleep on it a few days and keep testing to be sure. The camera physically is a true work of art. I want to love it. I really do. But using it so far leaves me wanting.
Bottom line, I have the feeling that the X1D (and Phocus, as an aside) would be fantastic with studio lighting but can suffer outdoors in landscape or street use. Further, I worry a bit that Hassleblad may not have the same full attention to support X1D owners re firmware updates, supplies and lens roll out as their Fuji or future competitors may. Here are a few major issues for me that I am running into shooting the X1D. Suggestions/comments welcomed. Hopefully I have missed obvious adjustments and will eat some tasty crow.
1. Maximum shutter speed vs minimum ISO is 2000:1/100. The X1D has only a mechanical shutter, and I am unaware of any electronic shutter firmware update promises. Practical landscape consequences, for example, you cannot take pictures of the setting sun without stopping down to at least F16 and still correcting a lot in Photoshop. Advantage, Fuji GFX or just about any contemporary premium FF camera.
UPDATE 5/22/17: This point is not a super bad problem and should be retained, but moved further down the list. The GFX has an EFCS which should gain a stop or two and that helps. One should stop down even more and use exposure bracketing or ND filters to resolve the sun's orb and highlight details around it. Bright lights, same thing.
2. Even with today's updated firmware, the X1D seems still to have bugs, or at least my particular camera does. When trying to adjust the aperture or shutter speed via the LCD, for example, the camera occasionally freezes and flips back to the prior screen without being able to make the adjustment. I simply turn the camera off and back on and it fixes the problem. A nuisance, but it occurs several times a day and isn't confidence inspiring. I don't know whether this is the firmware or my particular camera. Are others having this problem?
UPDATE: These bugs are an issue with the camera as of today. It is not perfect and one has to have confidence the issues can and will be resolved through firmware updates. I'd add they pop up only occasionally when shooting in my camera and are not crippling. A 10 second or so reboot has solved all of my problems with bugs.
3. If you like bokeh, there are issues at least with the XCD 90mm -- the only lens I have so far. I'm waitlisted for the 30 and 120 so can't tell about those. These issues have been well documented so I expected it, but it effectively ruined my favorite image outdoors earlier today (no lights, no sun, just high contrast flowers). There are many good things about this otherwise excellent lens in lower contrast, all-in-focus environments or against my test charts. I worry about wide open bokeh in lenses to be released.
UPDATE. This is a real issue with the 90. It appears to be caused by the facts that the aperture blades are straight and form a visible octagon when one looks down the barrel with the lens wide open. This design could extend to future lenses, we'll have to wait and see. However in natural light (where lightbulbs are not in a deep out of focus background) it appears to be manageable in high contrast scenes. One must take great care reviewing images shot to ensure that no part of the image is overexposed, because any overexposure touching bright bokeh highlights will basically flatten out the colors and tones there and call out the octangular bokeh (we are all spoiled now by Raw Developer highlight recovery sliders - you can't rely on that to save a picture from overexposed octagons and simply need to err toward underexposure in deep out of focus rearward bokeh shots). Actually, if you follow this, the straight blades introduce a pleasing Monet-like feel. For shooting with bright lights in the background, this will likely be a composition issue you will have to keep in mind as depending on the shot, the lights will turn octangular.
4. There is no histogram or highlight blinkies available in the X1D's EVF or in Live View when composing that I have found. I may have missed an obvious adjustment but have double checked and reread the manual. If this is right, it makes ETTR difficult. For landscape use this is almost unacceptable in today's Live View camera world and forces exposure bracketing, and that's even an wholly unreliable blunt tool if one hopes to reliably have a file with the whole dynamic range or manage mechanical wear. Is there an update coming?
UPDATE. If you are an ETTR person, you want highlight blinkies. With the X1D at its firmware state today, one has to review shots just taken to make sure the image isn't overexposed before leaving the scene or otherwise be very safe erring on the side of underexposure (and then even taking a chance). This plays into the octagon issue above, so for me it will force a recheck of images shot against the histogram that is available in review mode. I contacted someone at Hasselblad about this and they are working on a firmware update to install blinkies (and seem optimistic that it can be done), though timing of that seems uncertain.
5. Once the X1D is activated, there appears to be no way to turn on live view except for halfway depressing the shutter button or using the EVF. My particular shutter button is quite trigger happy. Wasteful timewise and in shutter wear if you use Live View to set up.
UPDATE. H is aware of the issue and is working on a firmware update. Hopefully coming soon.
6. Hasselblad advertises the files as something like "14-bit dynamic range, 16-bit color". Check with their website on the words. Fuji's GFX is advertised basically as operating in 14 bits, as all premium camera files do (P1 may have something more). I've stretched both the GFX and X1D files out in post in LR, PS, and several plugins and personally see no difference. Some have attributed this to marketing hype as I'm inclined to do without numbers, graphs and data showing something to the contrary.
UPDATE. There still are no convincing numbers, graphs or data showing anything to the contrary that I have seen, even in another thoughtful post here on LuLa. Only speculation that the camera bakes in some adjustments to 14 bit data in its hardware that could improve what the sensor captures. I imagine that baking in process, if this is right, and I am speculating on this, would better be done in post on a computer.
I hope I am completely wrong about all my observations here with the X1D or that firmware enhancements are certain to come. And hopefully lenses to come won't have the same wide open problem that the 90 has. This machine physically is a work of art. But for my work and my particular copy anyway, I may need to move on. My first thoughts for a substitute, as a photographer that doesn't want a studio, are back to the GFX.
-
So the shutter speed & ISO aren't new or a surprise. Electronic shutter is not a feature of this sensor on any platform. The GFX only gains in their FPS going to 1/4000th (since that's the fastest shutter), so 1 stop of light. I'd rather have that than the 1/125th sync speed on the GFX.
-
GFX has ES on this platform. Platform being the 50MP Sony sensor. And EFC
Works very well also.
Paul Caldwell
-
GFX has ES on this platform. Platform being the 50MP Sony sensor. And EFC
Works very well also.
ES scan time is 1/4 second, which limits its usefulness, but is a endless source of special effects.
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/fujifilm-gfx-50s-electronic-shutter-speed/
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/making-lemonade-from-the-gfx-slow-electronic-shutter/
(http://www.kasson.com/ll/rs6688.jpg)
Jim
-
1/4 is still quick enough for almost everything shot from a tripod. Especially for landscapes. I use my IQ3100 exclusively in ES mode when on the tripod and it has a 1s timing.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
1/4 is still quick enough for almost everything shot from a tripod. Especially for landscapes. I use my IQ3100 exclusively in ES mode when on the tripod and it has a 1s timing.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
Yes can't hand hold it but it's much faster than the ES on the IQ100. Neither version has caused me any problems in landscape work on fact on the IQ100 ES is pretty much all I use now since I am always on a tripod. Great for long glass with both cameras GFX and XF
Paul Caldwell
-
Hi,
I guess it depends on what you shoot. Small things not moving very fast will not show a lot of distortion, long thing moving fast may be a different case.
Best regards
Erik
Yes can't hand hold it but it's much faster than the ES on the IQ100. Neither version has caused me any problems in landscape work on fact on the IQ100 ES is pretty much all I use now since I am always on a tripod. Great for long glass with both cameras GFX and XF
Paul Caldwell
-
1/4 is still quick enough for almost everything shot from a tripod. Especially for landscapes. I use my IQ3100 exclusively in ES mode when on the tripod and it has a 1s timing.
You don't see odd-shaped branches and leaves on a windy day?
Jim
-
At times on a very very windy day, you can see some strange anomalies. But the vast majority of the images I have taken outdoors, with either camera IQ100 and GFX with EX don't show any issues. There is always some wind blowing where I shoot at least most of the time.
But overall the images look very good, surprisingly good consider the time that it takes the IQ to complete a shutter with the ES.
Cars, or people or other similar objects moving across the frame, will show up with movement issues however.
Paul Caldwell
-
Large objects with regular motion…
Best regards
Erik
At times on a very very windy day, you can see some strange anomalies. But the vast majority of the images I have taken outdoors, with either camera IQ100 and GFX with EX don't show any issues. There is always some wind blowing where I shoot at least most of the time.
But overall the images look very good, surprisingly good consider the time that it takes the IQ to complete a shutter with the ES.
Cars, or people or other similar objects moving across the frame, will show up with movement issues however.
Paul Caldwell
-
This image was taken with the IQ100, 35mmLS and ES shutter, shutter speed in the 1/125 to 1/250th range as I recall. There was quite a bit of wind blowing here especially in the foreground, but the images taken show really no issues with ES and movement. It takes a good bit of wind IMO and experience with the ES to show up, but as Jim best described it, when you see it you will see a strange anomaly in a tree or branch. However even on a windy they they seem to be the exception not the rule.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4163/33855060733_d86faf89e4_k.jpg) (http://[url=https://flic.kr/p/TzE34F)Tunnel View Yosemite National Park May 2017 (https://flic.kr/p/TzE34F) by paul caldwell (https://www.flickr.com/photos/145468296@N05/), on Flickr]
Paul Caldwell
-
GFX has ES on this platform. Platform being the 50MP Sony sensor. And EFC
Damn, I stand corrected.
-
BTW, anyone contemplating purchasing an X1D or GFX would be well advised to subscribe to Diglloyd, and for the GFX, read Jim Kasson's masterful GFX series in his Last Word blog (quickly, before he charges!). There is much more useful info there, and I'm just venting my personal frustrations here, some of which are additive.
I'm being advised separately by Lloyd Chambers that my point number 1 ought to be disregarded or at least downplayed, and he's right. An EFC shutter as in the GFX would at most get a couple extra stops in doing so, and its blinkies would assist in composing those shots (which I use in enfused or exposure blended work). And I can use an ND filter. My chief frustration really stems from number 4 (no blinkies/histogram when composing).
Separately, I've visited every page on the internet today with the words "X1D highlight blinkies Hasselblad" and found a statement of Ming Thein (newly appointed to be H's Chief of Strategy) stating that he's testing the next X1D firmware update, and it should have blinkies. See about halfway down at https://blog.mingthein.com/2017/03/29/some-big-changes/comment-page-1/. That may save my X1D from a return flight to NYC.
-
My X1D is with Hasselblad right now for repairs (which I've documented in my X1D First Impressions thread). I'm not optimistic on seeing it anytime soon. Anyhow, I did find the operation of the camera to be buggy. Turning the camera on and off to reset it wasn't a frequent occurrence but it wasn't unusual either. I had issues with it being difficult to get it into f3.5 and the shutter dial not responding. Adjusting LCD brightness was so quirky that I gave up. I didn't know if all this was indicative of my particular camera and its dysfunction or whether it was part of the standard bugginess of this new camera. Seems like it's the latter.
I think it's safe to say that X1D users are unwitting beta testers.
John
-
I have posted my experience with and reasoning against getting the X1D on this forum before, so i won't get into that...
i really have to say that i have rarely seen and held a camera that i wanted to like so much....and maybe that is one of the problems with the X1D....it is almost perfect size...it is beautiful....it checks a lot of professional boxes....but i really feel like it was made with the same mindset as for example the leica SL....whereas the GFX50 is almost the opposite: i almost could not believe the way the rear LCD seems to be patched on with the big battery wedged in and.....but yet after working with it for a month now everything is just where it should be...and all these things are there for a reason....because i do want a tillable rear LCD...i do want to adjust my shutter, f-stop and iso manually and analog...the tilt finder attachment is so great and amazing, i probably won't ever be able to have a camera without one...the menu is fine but most importantly i have to get into it a lot less then with my last 100 digital cameras....the size and weight is great, so is battery life, so is the touch screen....and to top it off so are the files....
nothing is perfect and we are never really totally happy....but i honestly haven't been as happy with a camera in a long time...and maybe part of it is that i did not even really give it a chance when it was announced....
after working with the X1D i felt like hasselblad made a camera not necessarily for professionals...like leicas are these days....and compared to a H6 systems it probably wins most comparisons....size, weight, ease of use, looks, price, IQ,.....and compared to leica it definitely checks a lot of boxes as well....
but leica owners like leicas....and people looking for something like a H6 system will probably stick with that as well.....
and for all the other people (the vast majority of shooters), things like decent AF, price, and most of all basic things we are just used to by now or just don't really want to give up anymore (all the stuff fuji put into the GFX50 that seem "amateur level")....yes...a tilting LCD is just a nice thing to have....
of course hasselblad just does not have the experience with a lot of the consumer grade basics a camera should offer these days....like AF....
i also think that they got a little surprised when fuji came out with a competitor....with the same sensor....the X1D would simply look a lot better if it wasn't for the GFX50....it would be amazing and the only of its kind (i am not counting the pentax)....
we all know that sony support is not the best....and a lot of people like to moan about it for good reason....well i have experienced a lot worse first hand....leica and rolleiflex....nice people, great cameras but paying that much for a premium product and having to wait months (yes) for repair because they are so backed up and understaffed is not pleasant....add in that my only bad experiences with sony (or canon or nikon) have really only been in frustrating couple of hours trying to get something resolved....but funny enough i actually never had a single repair with any of my cheap, lowly sonys, canons or nikons.....or fujis for that matter....
i am getting to the point....fuji has a 500$/year pro support....that includes the usual cleaning and such as well as loaners and 3 day turnaround....and yes they have 7 day a weeks hotline (where a person answers within minutes) and that is actually free....
the only experience with hasselblad support i have had was H system cameras failing on set and the rental house having another one there....
which reminds me of another camera i used to own....RED...easy for a major production to have a couple of bodies on set in case one fails....different situation for single owner/operator....
hasselblad and phase have the commercial market cornered, the GFX won't make much of a dent there....i think the GFX is more a way to nibble on the DSLR market.....a camera, good enough for all around shooting (in terms of speed and functionality), sturdy enough for most conditions and just enough of a difference in IQ to grab a couple of people looking for certain qualities....all for a price close enough to compete with DSLR...i think the GFX solves this better then the X1D....which in turn might attract more people because....well...lets face it: it does look and feel awesome...
as for sync speed: i did not really realize and wrote the GFX off for lack of fast sync speed....there are so many great and amazing HSS solutions out there now, this really isn't an issue anymore....
also: one of the best things about the sonys is the mount.....the ability to accept almost any lens is HUGE....HUGE....i am not talking about otus or the finest glass....i am talking about 50 year old lenses dirt cheap from eBay with tons of scratches and character....and yes, these old lenses do produce amazing images with the latest and greatest sensors.....the fuji can do this.....it also helps that they are pumping out lenses for that line and one seems to be better then the last.....and affordable......
i am really happy that both these cameras are out....fuji has a firmware coming end of may and knowing fuji it will fix things we did not know needed fixing and maybe even give us a new camera or at least make the continuous focus worth considering.....but the idea that this body will have a 100 mpix sensor coming next year is just crazy.....as much as i have been blown away by sony and what they have been doing, this fuji checks more boxes for my work....
right now i would have a hard time making a wish list improving the GFX....ok: AF (never fast enough) and 4K video....
-
BTW, anyone contemplating purchasing an X1D or GFX would be well advised to subscribe to Diglloyd, and for the GFX, read Jim Kasson's masterful GFX series in his Last Word blog (quickly, before he charges!). There is much more useful info there, and I'm just venting my personal frustrations here, some of which are additive.
I can promise you that I will never charge for access to my blog. I am just pleased that I can help people.
Jim
-
Good. I may need to read it again as I may need to buy into the GFX. Testing lenses of course as they come in.
Other readers, I just added an Addendum to my points #1 and 6 in the original post.
-
Yes, the GFX can shoot at 1/4000 of a second v. 1/2000 of a second. At least at some apertures, the X1D 90mm lens doesn't shoot pretty bokeh balls. Yes, the X1D doesn't have an articulating LCD screen. Yes, today the X1D doesn't have blinkies. Yes, during the course of a day shooting with the X1D there will be a few weird little freeze ups. If these are deal breakers for anyone, then the X1D is not for you. On the other hand, the X1D is about half the size of the GFX and, at least for me, is a joy to handle compared to the GFX. And, don't assume that it's all smooth sailing with the GFX like it's a stroll through Candy Land. Try using magnified Live View to manually focus the X1D and then try it with the GFX. Spend the money for a Digilloyd subscription and read his extended analysis and high res examples of the difficulties achieving accurate focus with the GFX. Now, to me, being able to comfortably hike with the X1D and achieve accurate focus are far more important "features" for my work. YMMMV.
Comparing the X1D with its lenses to the Leica SL with its lenses is just childish hyperbole made for the sake of equating those who buy the X1D with Leica owners as rich dilettantes. If a so-called "professional photographer" can't produce compelling imagery with the X1D, I think he has bigger issues than his choice of camera. Have a look here to see what is possible with the X1D in the hands of a really talented professional: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH1GHqP3aj0. Looks pretty good to me. In fact, it's way way better than anything I have seen come out of a GFX. Of course, I would never suggest that it's because the X1D is a "professional" camera and the GFX is not. That's just ridiculous.
-
Spend the money for a Digilloyd subscription and read his extended analysis and high res examples of the difficulties achieving accurate focus with the GFX. Now, to me, being able to comfortably hike with the X1D and achieve accurate focus are far more important "features" for my work. YMMMV.
It is possible to accurately focus the GFX manually. It's just not obvious how to do it:
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/manually-focusing-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/
Jim
-
It is possible to accurately focus the GFX manually. It's just not obvious how to do it:
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/manually-focusing-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/
Jim
As I suggested, anyone actually concerned with the problems with achieving accurate focus with the GFX should carefully examine the analysis and high res examples in Diglloyd's blog. I have no reason to disbelieve what Lloyd's testing demonstrates.
-
As I suggested, anyone actually concerned with the problems with achieving accurate focus with the GFX should carefully examine the analysis and high res examples in Diglloyd's blog. I have no reason to disbelieve what Lloyd's testing demonstrates.
I talked to Lloyd about this. At the time of our conversation, he had not tried the approach I'm recommending, and he didn't have a GFX on hand so that he could try it then.
Jim
-
My X1D is with Hasselblad right now for repairs (which I've documented in my X1D First Impressions thread). I'm not optimistic on seeing it anytime soon. Anyhow, I did find the operation of the camera to be buggy. Turning the camera on and off to reset it wasn't a frequent occurrence but it wasn't unusual either. I had issues with it being difficult to get it into f3.5 and the shutter dial not responding. Adjusting LCD brightness was so quirky that I gave up. I didn't know if all this was indicative of my particular camera and its dysfunction or whether it was part of the standard bugginess of this new camera. Seems like it's the latter.
I think it's safe to say that X1D users are unwitting beta testers.
John
Mine is for repair too :(
The Hasselblad facility in NJ is waiting for a replacement part that should arrive from Sweden next week
May I ask what issue did you have?
-
can somebody clue me in on the GFX focus issues? i shoot moving people and so far (about 5500 frames) i really don't see a focus issue, at least not with the 32-64 zoom (which is the only lens i own right now)....
AF is in no way perfect or comparable to DSLR but it works perfectly fine the way it worked years ago....focus point, shutter half pressed, shoot....
AF-C is useless to me so far, i have been going to manual focus on situations where i shoot someone doing the same thing over and over in a controlled set...just makes it easier but i would do the same with any camera....
i am not disputing anyone's findings but there has not been anything i have seen on my GFX and in my workflow that points to a camera/lens focus issue....
i have noticed that i seem to need faster shutter speeds to freeze motion....for example it looks to me that a foot of somebody jumping looks crisp at 1/500 on (for example) the A7RII but might need 1/1000 or faster on the GFX? i don't have enough technical background to understand why that might be, but it seems to be the case for me.....
-
You can pay for Lloyd, read some great tests, many of which seem to show the camera is just no good. Done.
Or you can rent it, try it and see if its possible for any company to make a camera with so many faults.
It also helps if you have a background in Fuji cameras as their approach is different.
Amazingly on my last trip, I had over 2400 images taken with the GFX, all 3 lenses plus the Mamiya 200mm APO and believe or not the focus on 98% was tack sharp. All but about 20% or less were hand held and AF was used. Hand holding a XF with any lens would not have given me anything close. The only issue did have with AF was when the camera picked an object closer in than I realized, and due to the extremely bright sunlight and how tired I was I did not think to check. Even the 200mm APO could be hand held many times and manually focusing it was easy at least for me.
I consider myself very picky on focus and have been over the 30 or so years I have worked in photography. I have yet to find anything wrong with the AF on the GFX or manual focus (besides the fact that images don't pop into sharp focus as well as they do on other brands), but this is true for all Fuji cameras, always has been. I will state here, I don't worry about focus shift in landscape work, may be a problem in macro work, but all the lenses for the GFX showed excellent clarity and sharpness for me. In fact the GFX saved me on 2 days in Yosemite as I quickly realized that carrying around the XF and 3 lenses and a tripod was more than I could or wanted to do.
For me it's very simple, if I can trust a camera's AF, I tend to get into a rhythm and stay there, not checking that often. I have used Phase gear since early 2008, various bodies and lenses, now on the XF and several Schneider lenses, I still check the focus after using AF, and mainly use Liveview. I rarely did this on the GFX, it worked just fine. The camera continues to impress me daily.
Pay and read Lloyd, no doubt his testing is excellent, rent or try the camera for yourself, I really don't think you will be very disappointed, period. This issue has been totally blown out of proportion and it's a bit sad to see it continue.
Best test is test it yourself, and see what you feel. ONE THING IS FOR SURE, don't preview the files at the default view on the camera as if you do you will immediately think everything is way to soft. The default preview is way past 100% more like 150% for some reason.
Posting a lot of small jpg files which can't show the full 100% view of the image is not worth it. Plus there is a lot of time involved in both such testing and writing. I fully understand why Lloyd charges. I would again ask, just attempt to either rent it or borrow one with the 63mm or 120mm as the 32-64 is next to impossible to find.
It will be interesting to read the full review on the GFX from LuLa. So far they seem to like it except for the cost different between the A7RII @ 42Mp and the GFX and 50MP.
Paul Caldwell
-
can somebody clue me in on the GFX focus issues? i shoot moving people and so far (about 5500 frames) i really don't see a focus issue, at least not with the 32-64 zoom (which is the only lens i own right now)....
AF is in no way perfect or comparable to DSLR but it works perfectly fine the way it worked years ago....focus point, shutter half pressed, shoot....
AF-C is useless to me so far, i have been going to manual focus on situations where i shoot someone doing the same thing over and over in a controlled set...just makes it easier but i would do the same with any camera....
i am not disputing anyone's findings but there has not been anything i have seen on my GFX and in my workflow that points to a camera/lens focus issue....
i have noticed that i seem to need faster shutter speeds to freeze motion....for example it looks to me that a foot of somebody jumping looks crisp at 1/500 on (for example) the A7RII but might need 1/1000 or faster on the GFX? i don't have enough technical background to understand why that might be, but it seems to be the case for me.....
Read these and ask questions; I'll do my best to answer them:
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/fujifilm-gfx-af-accuracy/
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/fujifilm-gfx-with-1204-af-accuracy/
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/fujifilm-gfx63-focus-instability/
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/manually-focusing-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/
You will see that there are three classes of focusing issues with the lenses tested (I didn't test the 32-64 zoom, which is mythological to me, and I've given up on getting one).
1) AF errors at some f-stop/lens combinations (workaround is to avoid those combinations)
2) MF difficulty (workaround is available)
3) MF focus stability with focus-by-wire lenses.
I want to emphasize that in all the cases that I've tested, the focusing errors are quite small, and would remain completely unnoticed in many photographic situations. They could be definitely be a problem for landscape and repro use if the workarounds aren't employed. They are certainly a problem for testers like Lloyd and me. I think that 3) above falls into the category of pretty much only a problem for testers, but I remain leery of focus-by-wire lenses for static and semi-static work where one focusing operation is expected to hold for minutes or hours.
Jim
-
This issue has been totally blown out of proportion and it's a bit sad to see it continue
+1
Incidentally I'm rather glad I purchased the 32-64mm with the GFX. It is a very good lens, I guess Fuji underestimated demand.
-
Jim, i have read your blog and really appreciate your incredibly detailed work, most of which is way over my head....as to the issues you are describing, i simply don't seem to have them...
my focus issues with the GFX:
i don't find i can trust peaking completely.....the same is true foe the A7RII for me....i have used peaking with great success on RED and sony video cameras like FS7 or when shooting motion with A7RII....for 40 or 50mpix stills i just don't think it is exact enough....maybe i am doing something wrong....
i can't use AF-C, it is just too slow...in situations when people are moving too fast for single shot AF, (where i would need them) it is just not fast enough for me.....really looking forward to a firmware upgrade but it might just be a limitation of this camera/sensor combo...not holding my breath to ever have this really resolved....it will never be DSLR speed...
i have never had to use MF to actually focus....if i do use it (and i do quite a bit) i use it to set a focus area to direct my "actors" in and the way i use this is but using AF-S, pick a spot and set the camera to MF.....
i have taken 5500 shots including architecture and landscape and have not had any focus issues with AF-S...at all....and the reason why i have only used the GFX since i got it is because the files are so nice and are a clear step up for me from A7RII and that includes sharpness.....
i am in pretty much complete agreement with Paul on his assessment of the camera....
in regard to the cost difference between A7RII and GFX....there is a difference, clearly visible to me but also a clear difference in size, weight, ease of use, capabilities,....personal style of shooting and what one really needs....then the choice should be pretty clear....
-
Mine is for repair too :(
The Hasselblad facility in NJ is waiting for a replacement part that should arrive from Sweden next week
May I ask what issue did you have?
It's in for a couple of issues. First, the shutter won't release if the shutter release button is depressed half way down and then completely depressed. I have to first release the shutter release and then press it all the one in one motion for the camera to fire. It won't fire from the half way position. Totally weird.
The other issue is that the image in the viewfinder will appear completely posterized from time to time. It's like you're looking at a murky blob of color. It only happens when the exposure preview is turned off. It's more likely to happen when my forehead is pressed against the eyecup. Again... weird.
John
-
Personally, I don't understand the manual focus controversy with the GFX at all. The following is a very quick portrait I shot this week with the GFX and a Nikkor 105 f/1.4E lens. Because the adapter doesn't allow autofocus or aperture control with a E lens, this is hand-held, manually focused and shot at f/1.4, which is about as shallow a depth of field you're likely to get on this camera. The image that follows is a 100% crop of the closest eye (the one I focused on using pretty much the technique described in Mr. Kasson's writings). Looks pretty good to me. The frame of the glasses are out of focus, the eyelashes and eye are in focus (hopefully you can tell at this size).
-
Jim, i have read your blog and really appreciate your incredibly detailed work, most of which is way over my head....as to the issues you are describing, i simply don't seem to have them...
my focus issues with the GFX:
i don't find i can trust peaking completely.....the same is true foe the A7RII for me....i have used peaking with great success on RED and sony video cameras like FS7 or when shooting motion with A7RII....for 40 or 50mpix stills i just don't think it is exact enough....maybe i am doing something wrong....
i can't use AF-C, it is just too slow...in situations when people are moving too fast for single shot AF, (where i would need them) it is just not fast enough for me.....really looking forward to a firmware upgrade but it might just be a limitation of this camera/sensor combo...not holding my breath to ever have this really resolved....it will never be DSLR speed...
i have never had to use MF to actually focus....if i do use it (and i do quite a bit) i use it to set a focus area to direct my "actors" in and the way i use this is but using AF-S, pick a spot and set the camera to MF.....
i have taken 5500 shots including architecture and landscape and have not had any focus issues with AF-S...at all....and the reason why i have only used the GFX since i got it is because the files are so nice and are a clear step up for me from A7RII and that includes sharpness.....
As I said above, for many kinds of photography, the things that I found are not consequential. If you're happy with GFX focusing, go take pictures.
With respect to peaking, I only recommend it in combination with maximum magnification. Otherwise, it's just enough to give you an approximate idea where the camera is focused. And, as I've said, I wish there were weaker peaking settings.
If you look at some of the MTF50 numbers in my AF graphs, you'll see that the GFX can misfocus and still be sharper than an a7RII with many native Sony lenses.
I think the GFX focusing is similar to the a7R shutter shock. Many though it crippling, because it was possible to set up tests where you could see it for sure. Many thought it a myth, because it never bothered them; their images were "tack sharp" as they defined the term. Then there were some who thought that it could be a problems sometimes, but not very often, and sought ways to mitigate it. Then Sony announced the a7RII with EFCS, and the whole issue went "poof".
I'm hoping for a GFX firmware release that makes the whole issue go "poof". But if that doesn't happen, the camera is darned good as it stands, and top-notch with the workarounds.
Of course, as you point out, it's never gonna focus like a D5.
Jim
-
I've updated the original post with my further findings on the issues listed there for new readers. It's getting messy now and I'll not do that anymore.
True story. Yesterday morning I actually boxed up my X1D, cancelled my order for the 30 and 120 with B&H, and prepared everything to ship back. It was a Sunday and the post was closed, so I spent the rest of the day reviewing my test shots from the GFX and X1D to be certain I was making the right decision.
At the end of the day for me, the X1D won out. For me, it came down to the focusing experience and results, and finding some patience in myself to wait for the X1D system to be updated and lenses to roll out. I think with the 30, 90 and 120 (maybe the 60-something), I can do all I really need to with the system. The 30 is backordered, the 120 is now looking like August, and the 60-something probably next year. Focusing the X1D seems just a bit more precise and satisfying, visually, experientially and in the results. Having used the Jim Kasson method to focus the GFX, I found I could focus it satisfactorily. But I noticed in my particular test shots focusing on the same subjects/distance, that the acuity of the X1D images just seemed to nudge out the GFX, probably because of the sharpness of the 90mm lens but maybe there's more in the mix (including user error). That observation in my pictures caused me just now to renew my B&H order for the 30 and 120. I still have 2 weeks left in my return period and I'm a Libra, so I may change my mind.
Both are great cameras to be sure. If you have or can get either one, count yourself lucky.
Oh goodie. A new unboxing!
-
Three weeks after my X1D came in, all I can say is that I've never been so happy as I'm with a camera!
In addition to the quality and balance of the files, portability and accuracy in focusing are its greatest advantages to me. Hasselblad is strongly betting on the X1D and I'm sure they will take care of us owners with continuous firmware updates.
-
Looks pretty good to me. The frame of the glasses are out of focus, the eyelashes and eye are in focus (hopefully you can tell at this size).
Just for contrast, that close-up is nowhere near sharp enough for what I look for. Just sayin...
-
Just for contrast, that close-up is nowhere near sharp enough for what I look for. Just sayin...
Michael, That's what sharpening is for (see attached).
Digital Captures are not sharp by definition. If they are, they are usually riddled with aliased artifacts. One can always add (deconvolution) sharpening (and control the level/type of artifacts) if the purpose of the image requires that.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Michael, That's what sharpening is for (see attached).
Digital Captures are not sharp by definition. If they are, they are usually riddled with aliased artifacts. One can always add (deconvolution) sharpening (and control the level/type of artifacts) if the purpose of the image requires that.
Cheers,
Bart
This is an example of where we can agree to differ and find our differences. No?
-
This is an example of where we differ and find our differences. Not?
Maybe, but aliasing is aliasing, so it's prudent to not overdo it from the start and it helps to have a robust source image to begin working with.
Of course, many people would not recognize aliasing when it stared them in the face, which is then not a problem for themselves, but it might be for others.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Maybe, but aliasing is aliasing, so it's prudent to not overdo it from the start and it helps to have a robust source image to begin working with.
Of course, many people would not recognize aliasing when it stared them in the face, which is then not a problem for themselves, but it might be for others.
Cheers,
Bart
Bart, exactly. The example of the closeup, presharpened is exactly the sort of artefact free file that delivers a natural looking, sharp image, post sharpening. Of course, the whole issue of sharpness is a bit of a bourgeois concept...as we know.
-
Personally, I don't understand the manual focus controversy with the GFX at all. The following is a very quick portrait I shot this week with the GFX and a Nikkor 105 f/1.4E lens. Because the adapter doesn't allow autofocus or aperture control with a E lens, this is hand-held, manually focused and shot at f/1.4, which is about as shallow a depth of field you're likely to get on this camera. The image that follows is a 100% crop of the closest eye (the one I focused on using pretty much the technique described in Mr. Kasson's writings). Looks pretty good to me. The frame of the glasses are out of focus, the eyelashes and eye are in focus (hopefully you can tell at this size).
Stephen, excellent manual focusing job at f1.4. I exclusively use manual focusing on the HD5 for portrait, but don't often drop below f5.6., and I still miss a few. Better to be manually focused, poised and ready, capturing a fleeting, wonderful expression, albeit slightly soft, than miss the crucial 1/4 of a second while the auto focus hunts around.
-
Just for contrast, that close-up is nowhere near sharp enough for what I look for. Just sayin...
I think it is a sharp photo but with some movement of the eyelid of the person.
Also it looks like the sharpening is bit to high ( maybe to compensate)
looking at photograph at 100% is nice and i do it a lot - at the same time it is not common to see photos at 100% in publications.
Print usually 25% and web even smaller.