OVF MF bodies...

[BernardLanguillier]

Considering the X1D and more importantly the Fuji, I am wondering whether the XF and H6D as bodies still make any sense at all for pro work.

The superior AF of the EVF bodies will result in the 50mp sensor delivering more real world resolution in 99% cases compared to poorly focused 100mp images.

This pretty much leaves only static subjects such as landscape, architecture or product where tech cameras are the preferred optin anyway.

The XF and H6D, and more importantly the matching lenses, very much look like a dead end to me.

As an amateur I still far prefer the shooting experience of the H6D optical viewfinder, but this is about fun, not about productivity.

Now, many XF and H6D owners are non pros, but considering their average age outside China, I believe that the appeal of lghter EVF bodies will soon over write the fun of the great OVFs. The amateurs will buy a X1D or Fuji along their XF/H6D and stop buying any P1/Schneider or HC lenses. They will buy one or two more lenses for their tech camera to benefit a bit more from their 100mp sensor bought at high cost... and will hardly ever use their XF/H6D body and lenses.

Few pros will continue to use those also due to the much higher consistency of EVF AF.

Thoughs?

Cheers,
Bernard

P.s.: coming from a H6D-100c owner.

[E.J. Peiker]

Probably the H6D more so than the XF due to it being a more integrated, less modular system.  At least with the XF, if Sony were to produce a sensor with OSPDAF and Phase were to produce a clip-on EVF one could get those benefits with the Phase system, although at far greater weight.  Of course this assumes that the pinout to the viewfinder and the body supports sending the sensor image to an EVF - it does have 16 pins so it seems that that capability may be in there, why else would you need 16 electrical contacts to an OVF?  Heck, if Phase just developed a CDAF capability for use in live view you wouldn't even need a new sensor and you''d have the larger format 100mp sensor.

I, for one, would gladly pay some money to go to a full featured EVF with all the trimmings on the Phase system.

[william]

The superior AF of the EVF bodies

Do you have some support for this proposition or at least a reason to think it's universally true? It has not been my experience at all that EVF necessarily equals superior AF or focus accuracy. 

[E.J. Peiker]

Do you have some support for this proposition or at least a reason to think it's universally true? It has not been my experience at all that EVF necessarily equals superior AF or focus accuracy.

I'm sure he is referring to on sensor AF vs off sensor AF and the inherent higher accuracy of that...

[william]

Perhaps: even if so, I'd still disagree.  The AF accuracy of my OVF bodies (including the XF) compared to my EVF body (just picked up a Leica SL) seems to vary much more by virtue of lenses, AF motor speed, # of focusing points, shooting technique, etc.   In my experience, the accuracy of AF has little to do with whether one is using an OVF or EVF. 

Now, *manual* focus, I would agree that in many situations (but not all) focus accuracy can be (but isn't necessarily) higher with an EVF.

I'm sure he is referring to on sensor AF vs off sensor AF and the inherent higher accuracy of that...

[E.J. Peiker]

   In my experience, the accuracy of AF has little to do with whether one is using an OVF or EVF. 

I said nothing about OVF vs EVF in my response...  the entire point of my response was that if you are focusing on the sensor, there is an inherent focus accuracy advantage to focusing in some other place in the camera whose accuracy depends on many factors including, lens to body calibration, temperature, light wavelength, etc, etc...  These new mirrorless cameras do all of their focusing on the sensor plane.  The H6D and XF do not so they they are more prone to the variations above - at least in static object photography, on sensor CDAF isn't really well suited for moving objects.

[calindustries]

First, having not used either of these new bodies, I can only guess, but:
As much as the EVF experience is quickly improving (after spending a month with the XT2 I can say it's the first EVF I actually enjoy using), the biggest thing missing from using them in a professional capacity is the lack of stellar tethering software (C1Pro). I don't care how much some of you will say Lightroom, or even Phocus, are good software. I have not experienced tethering experience that is a smooth/organized/client facing friendly as C1Pro. Looking at it from a digitech point of view, the speed of C1Pro completely trumps Lightroom. As far as Phocus, I'm not completely sure, but the last I checked, there isn't a viewer window option, for the second (or third) display. The tech will usually be watching more than just the preview and have other software running that the client/photographer facing display doesn't need. Usually we just have the viewer window on those extra displays.

[JoeKitchen]

I shot with the X1D in studio with a model about 3 months ago during NYC Fotoworks and I was not impressed in the least. 

The autofocus was horrible and inaccurate at least 50% of the time.  Additionally, there is about a half second delay in the view finder, which makes any kind of serious handheld work impossible. 

A very good lifestyle shooter once told me, his commodities are expressions and expressions are fleeting commodities.  If you need to capture that perfect expression, by the time you see it in the view finder, it will already be gone. 

I tested the X1D against the H6D and found that to be much better, especially when using true focus. 

Also, if you switch to manual focus, the view finder automatically zooms 100% to the center of the frame, which make composing your shot kind of hard.  By the time you nail focus, then stop moving the focusing ring, wait for the view finder to return to full frame, and recompose your focus will probably be off due to you or the subject moving. 

Personally, I think this could be a very nice feature if they programmed it to just zoom to 100% in the center 1/3 of the view finder.  Then you could accurately focus and still know what your frame is. 

Ergonomically, the camera felt really good in hand.  I also like the the lighter weight, however those do not make up for what I listed above.

All the other pros who attended NYC Fotoworks, which there were about 50 to 60, had the same thoughts.  Ot at least all those I spoke to, which was a lot. 

As a professional, I just will never be able to deal with any kind of delay in the view finder for handheld work.  It is a deal breaker!

I know the latest fad are EVFs, but they still do not render the view better then a prism and your own eye, especially in low light or high contrast scenes.  (Remember, the sensor is interpreting the view and making adjustments based on how it is programmed, then communicating it to the EVF.  The problem though is the sensor has a significantly lower DR then the human eye, which does not work with contrasty scenes and is very different then a mirror and prism.) 

The only advantage they have for now is they allow for a smaller camera.  Not to say that won't change. 

Recently I bought an XF system and I am using it for construction documentation of LGA.  I really like the camera. 

It is heavier then a 35mm, but with primes lenses nothing that is too cumbersome.  On the days that I am at La Gaurdia, we are on our feet for about 10 hours (with a break for lunch of course).  I have yet to feel weighed down due to the camera. 

Also, Phase did a great job of damping the mirror shake.  With some practice, I am able to get sharp images at a 1/50 with a 110 mm.  If I turn on the mirror delay, I can get to a 1/30. 

[BernardLanguillier]

Interesting, thanks.

Now that I think of it, another body that may suffer significantly from the Fuji/X1D is the Leica SL. More expensive, just as big, fewer lenses options, less features, a lot less image quality,... the only thing going for it is pretty much the ability to mount M lenses.

And the more I think of it the more I feel that some guys at Canon and Nikon must be feeling very very bad about having the tiny Fuji camera division release a camera like this. Really stunning.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Osprey]

Canon and Nikon seem totally uninterested in anything that will cannibalize their DSLR golden geese. So they appear happy to wait for someone to do it for them.

Interesting, thanks.

Now that I think of it, another body that may suffer significantly from the Fuji/X1D is the Leica SL. More expensive, just as big, fewer lenses options, less features, a lot less image quality,... the only thing going for it is pretty much the ability to mount M lenses.

And the more I think of it the more I feel that some guys at Canon and Nikon must be feeling very very bad about having the tiny Fuji camera division release a camera like this. Really stunning.

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I was considering that, but I am under the impression that Phase One is more about high end, 100 MP cameras.

Hasselblad is more vulnerable, but they have the X1D which is a similar product.

Pentax may be affected - the GFX seems to have an excellent lens line. But, the GFX lacks long lenses where Pentax excels, or used to excel.

For Leica the GFX would be a strong competitor, but they do not have a red dot.

Best regards
Erik

Could it be that every other manufacturer and camera currently in the medium format digital sector will suffer as a result of Fuji's entry into the market?

[razrblck]

I'll happily take care of all the unused XFs and H6Ds, for free!

[scyth]

At least with the XF, if Sony were to produce a sensor with OSPDAF

all PDAF on sensor are "on sensor", except Canon (where it is "in sensor"), and are function of a simple modified CFA topping over some sensels - so all sensors can do PDAF, if a client simply pays to manufacturer put such CFA on top of the sensor ( https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2151234617/fujifilmpd ) ...