Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Theodoros on September 23, 2016, 10:49:01 am
-
Notice that Fuji on Fuji's web page http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n160920_03.html?_ga=1.27858876.1437440237.1474640400 they speak for the introduction of the GFX system... GFX-50s being only the "entry" level....
Now given that:
1. The mount can accompany a 54X40mm FF sensor,
2. The system is compatible with leaf shutter lenses,
3. The price is promised to be the best around,
4. The system is compatible and provides shutter for use with bellows cameras,
5. Sensors are claimed to be optimized for best performance,
6. Fuji lenses are considered to be second to none,
Here is the questions for discussion:
1. What other maker MF system can compete?
2. What systems that can't compete as they are should do (IYO), as to "face" Fuji?
3. Will the MF market expand considerably?
4. Will the Fuji attract customers from the Hi-end FF DSLR market?
5. Will the bellows camera market benefit from Fuji's entrance to the market?
6. Will the tech camera lenses sales be affected (negatively) and larger circle lenses from FF & MF DSLRs benefit?
7. Will the adapter market expand further with new entries/suggestions as it happened with the Sony α7 mirrorless?
8. Will T/S adapters interest Fuji users?
-
1. As we haven't seen anything of the Fuji yet it is hard to tell. There are even reports it does not support leaf shutter lenses, and others say it does support them.
The only competitor right now is the X1D. The big advantage of the Fuji is the replaceable viewfinder. Should a better, faster viewfinder appear in the future, you can upgrade. Hasselblad seems to have gone the way of a lesser system that, so several reviewers, is no match with what Leica puts into its full frame camera. I cannot imagine why they did that. Without having seen the camera, it could be the Achilles heel of the X1D.
After all, the viewfinder is the key composing tool.
Also, the X1D is very expensive. You get a used H5D for that which has a great viewfinder. If I have a bad shooting experience with an EV I don't care how small the camera is. I won't use it.
-
1. As we haven't seen anything of the Fuji yet it is hard to tell. There are even reports it does not support leaf shutter lenses, and others say it does support them.
Where did you see a "report" that it doesn't? So far the only (credible) report is this https://fuji-x-secrets.net/2016/09/21/inside-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/c and it says that it does...
The only competitor right now is the X1D. The big advantage of the Fuji is the replaceable viewfinder. Should a better, faster viewfinder appear in the future, you can upgrade. Hasselblad seems to have gone the way of a lesser system that, so several reviewers, is no match with what Leica puts into its full frame camera. I cannot imagine why they did that. Without having seen the camera, it could be the Achilles heel of the X1D.
After all, the viewfinder is the key composing tool.
Also, the X1D is very expensive. You get a used H5D for that which has a great viewfinder. If I have a bad shooting experience with an EV I don't care how small the camera is. I won't use it.
The X1D may be a "competitor" (but clearly handicapped) to the 50s... the discussion however is for the GFX camera system which Fuji claims for in their own page... Hasselblad X1D can't have a FF 54x40mm sensor, nor it provides a focal plane shutter as to be "open" to view cameras or non leaf shutter lenses... does it?
-
And how sure are we of all those "givens"?
-
And how sure are we of all those "givens"?
2-6 have been reported in the various links that have been provided, additionally for "6" Fuji claims that the lenses will out resolve sensors with resolution well beyond 100mp sensor...
"1" hasn't been in reports, but it is a result of careful calculations that does stand true... The GFX system mount can house a FF 54X40mm sensor... Other than that, Kevin already reported that the 50s is only the first out of a series of cameras coming in the GFX system.
-
On point (1), can the Hasselblad G1X mount likewise accomodate a 54x40mm sensor? From the
photos I have seen, both are of similar diameter (just a bit more than the sensor's 55mm diameter) but I do not know how the mount depths compare.
On point (6), surely Hasselblad's lenses are as prestigious as Fujifilm's — given that many or all of its AF lenses are produced in collaboration with Fujifilm.
The big difference I see is the potentially greater flexibility of the GFX from its having a focal plane shutter, and the hypothetical possibility of there also being leaf-shutter lenses for the GFX.
-
On point (1), can the Hasselblad G1X mount likewise accomodate a 54x40mm sensor? From the
photos I have seen, both are of similar diameter (just a bit more than the sensor's 55mm diameter) but I do not know how the mount depths compare.
On point (6), surely Hasselblad's lenses are as prestigious as Fujifilm's — given that many or all of its AF lenses are produced in collaboration with Fujifilm.
The big difference I see is the potentially greater flexibility of the GFX from its having a focal plane shutter, and the hypothetical possibility of there also being leaf-shutter lenses for the GFX.
The diameter of the mount, seems to be a few mm wider with the GFX, flange distance is about 20% larger with the Fuji (2.64mm), but this doesn't mean the X1D can't house a 54x40mm sensor on its mount, the maker can always increase the distance of the rear element in the lens own barrel...
With the Fuji, the 54x40mm sensor's diagonal will be 2-3 mm larger than the mount's diameter, but this can't cause any issue as to shade in anyway the corners of the sensor as the lens will "see" the sensor totally unobstructed and even allow for a considerable amount of shifts before there can be vignetting due to the mount. Clearly none will ever complain if he uses the Fuji on a bellows camera.
Hasselblad lenses aren't the only example of Fujinons (that's what they truly are) being superb lenses, Fuji makes some superb glass that is highly praised in Hollywood but they are also famous for their lenses on any of the (lots of) MF projects they've put into the market up to now, as well as the line of lenses they made for bellows cameras.
Focal plane shutter along with leaf shutter compatibility, is indeed a major advantage with Fuji, but there is also interchangeable swinging finders with higher resolution, specially designed microlenses on the sensor that are promising to improve the performance of the sensor on bellows cameras and a huge variety of older lenses one can use with the camera on a bellows camera or on the body itself, that the costs of building a complete system up, will be a fraction of what it will be with other systems... Add to this the reduced bulk and it makes it (IMO) very hard for any of the other makers to compete....
It even competes directly for costs (I mean total costs of building a system up) with the upper level DLRs from Canon and Nikon, of which the body may be cheaper, but one needs dedicated only glass on it, which can be very costly other than being "only FF".... Therefore the MF market should be expected to grow in size considerably due to this camera.
-
I think some people have tried reading between the lines of the Fuji announcement and other reports to inflate this camera's capabilities. Nowhere in the Fuji announcement do I read that it is the entry-level camera and nowhere do I read of it's compatibility with leaf-shutter lenses. The other so-called report reflects less of reality and more of the writer's wants. If Fuji doesn't make adapters, others, like Metabones, will. No, they will make adapters if there is money in it. If any adapters are going to be made, it will be down the road a year or two and they will be made if the sales numbers for the Fuji camera and demand for adapters warrant their construction. If any adapters are to be made, they will be the simple dumb ones first as electronic ones would require some backwards engineering and sometimes that doesn't work so well. It is not really in the best interests of either Fuji or Hasselblad to make adapters for the other guys lenses.
-
Another fundamental question is what changed in the economics of MF.
We have been told by existing MF vendors that the only viable business model was very high prices/low volumes.
Was it real or did they completely misread the market. Were the low volumes the cause of their business models or its consequence?
In 5 years we went from a P1/Hassy duopoly at 40,000 US$ a camera to having Pentax, Leica, Fuji and now Hassy offering "MF" systems at 1/3 the price.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
I guess that the Sony CMOS sensor probably played a role, probably quiet affordable and easy to integrate as it delivers a digital output.
Also, the lower price point expands the market. In the recent years my feeling was that Phase was going into the direction of boutique system, although well made. Hasselblad always semt to have an eye for a wider market. Selling more systems mean that development costs can be shared over a larger volume.
Obviously, the smaller format makes some sense it is large enough to have some advantage over 24x36, especially when both formats share the same technology.
I also think that we will se a 24x36 like performance development, so that CMOS based MF will always br ahead the smaller formats.
A final observation is that MF prices may be low enough to really expand the market.
An interesting question is what happens to full frame MF.
Best regards
Erik
Another fundamental question is what changed in the economics of MF.
We have been told by existing MF vendors that the only viable business model was very high prices/low volumes.
Was it real or did they completely misread the market. Were the low volumes the cause of their business models or its consequence?
In 5 years we went from a P1/Hassy duopoly at 40,000 US$ a camera to having Pentax, Leica, Fuji and now Hassy offering "MF" systems at 1/3 the price.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Another fundamental question is what changed in the economics of MF.
We have been told by existing MF vendors that the only viable business model was very high prices/low volumes.
Was it real or did they completely misread the market. Were the low volumes the cause of their business models or its consequence?
In 5 years we went from a P1/Hassy duopoly at 40,000 US$ a camera to having Pentax, Leica, Fuji and now Hassy offering "MF" systems at 1/3 the price.
Cheers,
Bernard
My opinion is that they completely misread the market... MF cameras where selling hundreds of thousands each year during the film days. The existing base was huge for MFDB makers to take advantage of it during the "golden days" some 12 years ago... Instead, they decided on a high price/ low volume policy of some ....8K backs annually altogether which was only a fraction of the existing base.
Additionally, they decided not to support many out of the existing base of cameras and then, they continued to do so by shrinking the demand further to their own platforms. Another major mistake though was the "trade in" offerings... They kept replacing the older backs with new ones that never made it back to the market again... This meant that the new backs had the "trade in" build into the price and that the consumers of new backs that had no trade, they where paying a premium profit on top of the backs price! Further more though, by trading the older backs and never return them to the market, they where restring their own (already small) "market base" further!
And then... the fatal mistake was restring compatibility in their own systems where one couldn't upgrade the back only and keep his platform, or keep the back and change the platform.
Then, LV came with the Cmos sensors and changed it all... Then, Sony came and offered a 24x36mm "digital back" by only adding a shutter and a mount to what a digital back is.... And now Fuji comes to do the same on larger sensors...
How much a "premium" back should sell for? ...well, look at the CFV price and there you are. Now add a mount to it, how much that should cost? I guess the X1D price is the answer for a premium maker.
And now Fuji comes and only adds a focal plane shutter on top of the X1D (and 12 CPU contacts on the mount so that there won't be an existing lens in the S/H market that won't function all it can with it)... I won't be surprised at all if the MF market will triple within the first year of the Fuji production! it not only is priced "right", but it provides a platform for one to use his Contax 645, Bronica ETRS and SQA, Mamiya 645, AFD, RB,RZ, 6,7, Rollei 6xxx, HY-6 and any other "dead" platform, but Nikon & Canon too line of lenses of lenses on it...
What the Fuji does (other than being priced right) is taking advantage of the huge existing base of customers... all the opposite of what the MF makers where doing up until recently.
-
One has to add that the Fuji GFX can work with Canon & Nikon lenses on the Cambo Actus mini & Cambo Actus XL cameras... On other "DSLR" versions of bellows cameras that take "square" lens frames, the grip may interfere with the lens frame when DSLR lenses are used on them, so perhaps it would be a good idea if the makers of bellows cameras that use square frames on the front standard, start redesigning the lens boards of the FF DSLRs as to make the lens mount a bit recessed when it is fitted on the front frame.
-
Will the lenses for the GFX be 'fly by wire' like all current offerings by Fuji?
These lenses have been getting better but still not quite there yet if you compare them with the mechanical ones.
"Rico Pfirstinger geantwortet: 22. September 2016 um 00:48
Focus by wire, as usual."
From this blog:
https://fuji-x-secrets.net/2016/09/21/inside-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/
-
One has to add that the Fuji GFX can work with Canon & Nikon lenses on the Cambo Actus mini & Cambo Actus XL cameras... On other "DSLR" versions of bellows cameras that take "square" lens frames, the grip may interfere with the lens frame when DSLR lenses are used on them, so perhaps it would be a good idea if the makers of bellows cameras that use square frames on the front standard, start redesigning the lens boards of the FF DSLRs as to make the lens mount a bit recessed when it is fitted on the front frame.
Unfortunately not even the Cambo borad will work for all situations. In landscape orientation: yes. In portrait orientation: no.
I did some further research and posted this over at getdpi. Here's a copy of the posting:
Cambo and Arca have Canon lens boards with electronic aperture control for their bellow cameras. They don't require the collaboration with Fuji. The main problem for those devices is the small difference between the flange distance of Canon EF (44mm) and Fuji GFX (26,7mm). It results in only 17.3mm space. That brings the lens panels quite close to the camera and its grip. I am very interested in such a solution. So to check out if it would work I took product photos and scaled them to the same size in photoshop, using sensor size, mount diameters and mm-scales on the images as references. I think it is quite exact. My results:
a) the Arca F-Universalis lens board with aperture control will fit with the camera in landscape orientation. But the grip will limit the horizontal shift to one side to next to nothing (remember there is also the bellows between lens board and the grip which I didn’t draw). You could compensate that with the shift on the lens, but it’s a bit strange to do that on a view camera. Arca would probably have to make a dedicated bellow with a wider opening for the larger sensor, and a new mounting ring for the Fuji. Portrait orientation won’t work at all, because the lens board is about 12mm higher than wide, it collides with the grip.
b) the Cambo Actus lens board for Canon with aperture control is much narrower. It will fit in landscape orientation with enough space for shift in all directions. Cambo would probably have to make a new bellow with a wider opening. Their rotating mount for the camera side would have to be replaced by a thinner on without rotation - it is too thick to fit in the 17.3mm together with the lens board. In portrait orientation it won’t fit at all, much too high.
c) Cambo has a Canon lens board without aperture control for the Actus. This is much smaller and will work in both camera orientations with enough space for shifting in all directions. But no aperture control (set aperture on a Canon camera, detach, mount on the Actus, no easy switching between working aperture and full open).
So it looks like there will be no easy solution. Someone will have to develop a product further or from the ground on. I very much hope that someone would chime in and do that. A fixed adapter with aperture control by metabones would be a great thing. Or a shift adapter like a mini-pancake-camera with interchangeable panels for different MF-lenses.
Regards -
Marc
-
My $0.02 on competition. The GFX looks like a really cool system, and I am very eager to evaluate it.
I won't be ditching my 100mp back and investment in Schneider & Rodenstock glass for the GFX. I also have a hard time imagining folks ditching recent investments that they might have made in other 50mp or 60mp backs/bodies/glass for the GFX.
I can easily imagine cancelling my X1D preorder and waiting for a GFX instead. I was going to evaluate the X1D as a MF alternative to the cameras I currently use outside of the studio. (The P1 XF, back, and lenses work great for me in the studio, but are just a bit too much for me to carry around.) IMO the GFX might thwart whatever ambitions that Hasselblad had for selling into a much broader market. If they do find themselves competing with Fujifilm--which is nimble, transparent, and super responsive to customers--Hasselblad--which seems to have issues with announcing things before they're ready to go to market, missing dates, under-communicating with customers, and selling at a higher price point--is going to be in for an interesting ride. But it could be that they end up selling to two different types of photographers, and all will be good.
Putting myself into the shoes of someone brand new to MF, or someone upgrading from an older MF system, the GFX looks amazingly well-positioned, even more so if folks build adapters that allow you to bring your glass from another system over with you to the GFX. I'd very strongly consider the GFX unless I had a need for higher resolution, brand affinity, too significant an investment in incompatible glass to ditch, or need for some feature that the GFX doesn't have (like tethering into my workflow.)
And all of those considerations go out of the window if it turns out the GFX can't make great images or is unreliable. I do mostly portrait and candid photography, and I have *loved* every Phase One back that I've ever used, and am addicted to the look that I get with my favorite S-K lenses and what I can pull out of those files. I know other folks who love the A7Rii and make beautiful images with it, but I love my Canon 5DSR and Canon glass. I own both, but when I'm reaching for a camera and lenses to shoot candids, my hand more often than not goes to the Canon. I have also loved every Fujifilm camera that I've ever owned, so, my hopes are high for the GFX. Whether or not I fall in love with the GFX will be all about the images that *I* can get out it.
-
Unfortunately not even the Cambo borad will work for all situations. In landscape orientation: yes. In portrait orientation: no.
A modified Cambo board would work with the controls moved to the side. Maybe Cambo should have done it this way in the first place?
-
Unfortunately not even the Cambo borad will work for all situations. In landscape orientation: yes. In portrait orientation: no.
I did some further research and posted this over at getdpi. Here's a copy of the posting:
Cambo and Arca have Canon lens boards with electronic aperture control for their bellow cameras. They don't require the collaboration with Fuji. The main problem for those devices is the small difference between the flange distance of Canon EF (44mm) and Fuji GFX (26,7mm). It results in only 17.3mm space. That brings the lens panels quite close to the camera and its grip. I am very interested in such a solution. So to check out if it would work I took product photos and scaled them to the same size in photoshop, using sensor size, mount diameters and mm-scales on the images as references. I think it is quite exact. My results:
a) the Arca F-Universalis lens board with aperture control will fit with the camera in landscape orientation. But the grip will limit the horizontal shift to one side to next to nothing (remember there is also the bellows between lens board and the grip which I didn’t draw). You could compensate that with the shift on the lens, but it’s a bit strange to do that on a view camera. Arca would probably have to make a dedicated bellow with a wider opening for the larger sensor, and a new mounting ring for the Fuji. Portrait orientation won’t work at all, because the lens board is about 12mm higher than wide, it collides with the grip.
Yes, I fully agree... The best thing would be if Arca redesigns the EOS lens board and makes the mount (only) recessed into it in a "tube" that will "just" surround the lens barrel... Recessing the lens, will additionally be beneficial as to bring the entrance pupil of the EOS lenses nearer to the board's plane, on which Arca tilting operates.
b) the Cambo Actus lens board for Canon with aperture control is much narrower. It will fit in landscape orientation with enough space for shift in all directions. Cambo would probably have to make a new bellow with a wider opening. Their rotating mount for the camera side would have to be replaced by a thinner on without rotation - it is too thick to fit in the 17.3mm together with the lens board. In portrait orientation it won’t fit at all, much too high.
c) Cambo has a Canon lens board without aperture control for the Actus. This is much smaller and will work in both camera orientations with enough space for shifting in all directions. But no aperture control (set aperture on a Canon camera, detach, mount on the Actus, no easy switching between working aperture and full open).
So it looks like there will be no easy solution. Someone will have to develop a product further or from the ground on. I very much hope that someone would chime in and do that. A fixed adapter with aperture control by metabones would be a great thing. Or a shift adapter like a mini-pancake-camera with interchangeable panels for different MF-lenses.
Yes, I agree that the Cambo mount for EOS won't work in portrait orientation, but perhaps it will be easier for Cambo to retain the current design and only make an add-on "leg" that will allow the existing mount to be mounted horizontally.... ;) No big deal
-
A modified Cambo board would work with the controls moved to the side. Maybe Cambo should have done it this way in the first place?
Good idea! Maybe Cambo should start making it like that immediately... It will be beneficial for Sony users too as it will add working space when in "portrait" orientation...
-
Good idea! Maybe Cambo should start making it like that immediately... It will be beneficial for Sony users too as it will add working space when in "portrait" orientation...
+1
-
I've been wondering if Phase One will develop their own Mirrorless as well. I had the impression that the product cycle of Hasselblad and Phase One were always pretty aligned. Has anybody heard chatter about a XF-Mirrorless? ;D
-
Hi,
Neither the D1X or the GFX are just a camera, they are both new camera systems that need new lenses.
I don't know if Phase One is interested in building a 44x33 mm MF system. For Fuji and Hasselblad it obviously makes sense to build a "small sensor" mirrorless MFD system. But I think Phase One is more focused on high end full frame 645 MFD.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
Neither the D1X or the GFX are just a camera, they are both new camera systems that need new lenses.
I don't know if Phase One is interested in building a 44x33 mm MF system. For Fuji and Hasselblad it obviously makes sense to build a "small sensor" mirrorless MFD system. But I think Phase One is more focused on high end full frame 645 MFD.
Best regards
Erik
...."need" new lenses? ....Many will be happy with their existing line of lenses for MF and use them on the FGX too... Fuji people where clear in photokina that they look for a wider compatibility with other platform lenses...
Among the strongest advantages of the GFX is that it can provide (mechanically) a platform compatible with almost all previously existing lines of lenses.... Add to this the 12 CPU contacts and the size and one can end up using a platform for all his photography and even replace his FF platform and then one line of lenses to even share the same with his technical or view camera...
IMO, for phase to come up with a mirrorless offering, they have to change their business policies altogether... and this isn't only related with pricing, it (mainly) has to do with compatibility and support of the existing base of MF gear from third party makers...
EDIT: ...and in addition, P1 has to support the (inevitable) convergence of technologies... IMO, there is no future for Hi end makers that ignore motion picture in their offerings...
-
IMO, for phase to come up with a mirrorless offering, they have to change their business policies altogether... and this isn't only related with pricing, it (mainly) has to do with compatibility and support of the existing base of MF gear from third party makers...
Not really. They just need to come up with a mirrorless MF system that that is a technological tour de force that allows them to sell the Phase One mirrorless system at a Phase One-type price point. The question is whether they can do that and still keep it light and portable. (They already have heavy and unwieldy well covered with the XF and the Blue Ring lenses.)
-
IMO, it's not a matter at all of what price point one may think a maker can sell at... It is rather that Sony is not making sensors to sell a few hundreds of them annually... They make sensors to make profit out of them and this means high volumes.... That's why I'm sure that the GFX 50s will soon be followed by a GFX 100s....
As for "technological tour de force"... I'm sure that Fuji's choice of the simplest possible ergonomics, aperture ring and even remove the exposure compensation dial from the GFX are as "technological tour de force" as any (real) photographer will ever need... Don't you find ALPA "technological tour de force" enough?
-
Theodoros,
You state in your original post that the Fuji GFX system "is compatible with leaf shutter lenses".
Just wondering where you got this information from? I haven't been able to find anything like this at all
If the Fuji GFX was indeed somehow compatible with leaf shutter lenses, then it would truly be an awesome all round camera!
Cheers.
-
During the rollout in one of the videos and a few of the conversations with Fuji Executives, they commented on adapters for 3rd party lenses. The use of leaf shutter lenses was mentioned as something that was being considered. Fuji-Rumors picked that up in one of their reports. They are more like a early news source for Fuji, as their info is around 90% correct.
http://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-gfx-50s-the-facts-the-future-and-about-leaf-shutter-lenses-electronic-shutter-fuji-designed-sensor-more/
Paul C
-
This is the most detail report on the GFX yet... It is result out of interviews with Fuji executives and examines the capabilities of the system for the future in depth: https://fuji-x-secrets.net/2016/09/21/inside-the-fujifilm-gfx-50s/ The compatibility with Hasselblad HC/HCD lenses, the will of Fuji to allow third party lenses as to be compatible with the platform and the inclusion of 12 (!!!) CPU lens contacts as to make (dedicated) compatibility with third party lenses as easy as possible are clearly mentioned.
-
Very interesting times indeed!
I cannot imagine how Hasselblad would allow the use of HC/HCD leaf shutter lenses for flash/studio work, as this seems to be one of the main advantages that the Hasselblad X1D has over the Fuji offering....
Still, I would love to see it happen as this would truly make the Fuji a great all round camera..
One other question, when they state in the article that "Fujifilm will support resolutions as high as 100 MP, which is a pretty clear hint at future GFX models with even higher sensor resolutions" are they referring to the camera having the current larger Sony sensor as found in the Phase One IQ3 back? Or are they referring to keeping the same physical sensor size (44mm x 33mm) but having a newly designed sensor that is 100mp?
If the former was true, these new lenses would have to have been designed with this in mind right? Can the mount/body even accommodate such a large sensor in its current state?
Thanks in advance!
-
Hi,
I would be pretty sure Fuji means future sensors when they talk about 100 MP. It is very probable that we will see higher MP sensors from Sony. Upscaling the present A7rII sensor to 44x33 would yield 70 MP, but there used to be a lot of talk about a 70-75 MP 24x36 sensor. Scaling up that would yield around 100 MP.
Sony probably has a roadmap for 44x33 mm sensors and it probably has 100 MP on it, hopefully combined with phase detecting AF on sensor and electronic firs shutter curtain.
For me, the great attraction is that these cameras are designs for the future and not for the past.
Best regards
Erik
Very interesting times indeed!
I cannot imagine how Hasselblad would allow the use of HC/HCD leaf shutter lenses for flash/studio work, as this seems to be one of the main advantages that the Hasselblad X1D has over the Fuji offering....
Still, I would love to see it happen as this would truly make the Fuji a great all round camera..
One other question, when they state in the article that "Fujifilm will support resolutions as high as 100 MP, which is a pretty clear hint at future GFX models with even higher sensor resolutions" are they referring to the camera having the current larger Sony sensor as found in the Phase One IQ3 back? Or are they referring to keeping the same physical sensor size (44mm x 33mm) but having a newly designed sensor that is 100mp?
If the former was true, these new lenses would have to have been designed with this in mind right? Can the mount/body even accommodate such a large sensor in its current state?
Thanks in advance!
-
How could Hasselblad stop the use of the leaf shutter lenses? I am sure the necessary adapter will be made by a third party as most in the industry are.
Paul C
-
This is an interesting time. I currently shoot H5X and Credo, and I have 4 lenses and no interest in investing in an entirely new lens system. However, both of these cameras are extremely interesting to me. Both get me higher ISO in a smaller form factor, and in theory, both may be able to take my lenses. The X1D having a Nikon hot shoe is very appealing, however, not being able to process those photos in C1 alongside my Credo and Nikon files is a dealbreaker for me. If I can process the Fuji files in C1 and use my HC lenses, and the price is as advertised, I'll probably pick one of those up and sell my D810 which I currently only have so that on commercial work I don't drop from 40 to 20 mp if I need to use my backups.
-Doug
-
Hi Paul,
There may be patent or intellectual property issues. But normally it seems that those issues can be handled.
Great pity that Hassy and Fuji did not share bayonet, like 4/3 systems do.
Best regards
Erik
How could Hasselblad stop the use of the leaf shutter lenses? I am sure the necessary adapter will be made by a third party as most in the industry are.
Paul C
-
Best quote of the week.
For me, the great attraction is that these cameras are designs for the future and not for the past.
Best regards
Erik
-
How could Hasselblad stop the use of the leaf shutter lenses? I am sure the necessary adapter will be made by a third party as most in the industry are.
Paul C
Well, they can update their firmware, which seems to negatively impact the use of Hasselblad H lenses on the Leica S...:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265050-new-hasselblad-lenses-on-s/
-
In thinking about this camera as a potential purchase next year (if the rumored H lens adapter is out), I'm wondering as someone who lights almost all his work, how does an EVF camera work with flash. I.e, am I going to be looking at a silhouette/dark frame through the evf before the flash goes off? Or is it TTL? Thanks!
-Doug
-
Hi,
I don't know. On Sony you have a choice to show "picture effect" or not, or something like that. With the function set off you just see a viewfinder image.
Pretty sure the X1D has a similar functionality, but I don't actually know.
Best regards
Erik
In thinking about this camera as a potential purchase next year (if the rumored H lens adapter is out), I'm wondering as someone who lights almost all his work, how does an EVF camera work with flash. I.e, am I going to be looking at a silhouette/dark frame through the evf before the flash goes off? Or is it TTL? Thanks!
-Doug
-
In thinking about this camera as a potential purchase next year (if the rumored H lens adapter is out), I'm wondering as someone who lights almost all his work, how does an EVF camera work with flash. I.e, am I going to be looking at a silhouette/dark frame through the evf before the flash goes off? Or is it TTL? Thanks!
-Doug
With exposure preview turned off, the lcd will show you properly exposed screen based on the existing ambient light.
Which turned out to be an advantage for low light photography, since it serves like some kind of night vision, because it shows brighter picture than you could see through a regular OVF in a very low light.
If you've never used a camera with EVF before, and you are thinking about purchasing an expensive mirrorless MF, I suggest you try some cheap micro43 or something first, to get used to a EVF. Some people like it, some don't.
-
With exposure preview turned off, the lcd will show you properly exposed screen based on the existing ambient light.
Which turned out to be an advantage for low light photography, since it serves like some kind of night vision, because it shows brighter picture than you could see through a regular OVF in a very low light.
If you've never used a camera with EVF before, and you are thinking about purchasing an expensive mirrorless MF, I suggest you try some cheap micro43 or something first, to get used to a EVF. Some people like it, some don't.
One thing the Fuji won't get you is the huge OVF image of the medium format SLRS.
Edmund
-
One thing the Fuji won't get you is the huge OVF image of the medium format SLRS.
Edmund
Which is sad. It is obvious that OVF is dying.
-
Which is sad. It is obvious that OVF is dying.
I will hold on to my Leica S007 as long as possible, love the OVF.
-
One thing the Fuji won't get you is the huge OVF image of the medium format SLRS.
Edmund
I would think that EVF images could be made in any size, with a suitable combination of panel size, panel brightness, and magnification of the little "telescope" between the panel and the eye. With EVFs, there is no particular connection between format size and VF image size, other than how big the users want the camera to be. Maybe there is not currently enough demand for larger/brighter panels, but maybe there will be some day, once there are more high-end EVF cameras in formats 36x24mm and larger.
How big are the EVF images in the big digital cine-cameras?
-
Hi,
They are often used with a small monitor attached to the camera.
I would suggest that power consumption may limit the brightness of EVF, as long as it is operated on battery power.
But, I am pretty sure that the future of EVFs is bright. Let's not forget that SLRs have been with us for more than 80 or even 120 years. The concept was invented 1861.
Best regards
Erik
How big are the EVF images in the big digital cine-cameras?
-
Hi,
They are often used with a small monitor attached to the camera.
I would suggest that power consumption may limit the brightness of EVF, as long as it is operated on battery power.
I was thinking specifically of "one-eyed" EVF's like the Red Bomb http://www.red.com/store/products/red-pro-evf as opposed to "two-eyed" screens. Agreed that power consumption is likely a constraint: that Red EVF is rated at 6-12W (and weighs 600g). But with formats like 44x33mm and larger, and considering the bulk of many lenses for such formats, there could be room for the batteries needed to support a big, bright EVF.
-
I've been wondering if Phase One will develop their own Mirrorless as well. I had the impression that the product cycle of Hasselblad and Phase One were always pretty aligned. Has anybody heard chatter about a XF-Mirrorless? ;D
I believe they will bring one out, but are waiting for the true next generation of sensor, that will have a better EVF potential ('refresh rate') and may even have a fast Electronic Shutter up to 1/1000s (much harder to achieve in larger sensors). From what I hear the next generation of MF sensors is coming sooner than we expect, with many of the improvements we hope for. This 'cropped 645' size will jump to 80mp or more, and might allow Phase to come straight in at the high end. Though of course Fuji can upgrade easily with a camera system ready and lenses in production, too.
I'm not really prepared to step down from my IQ3100 to 50mp, but if Phase or Fuji can get an 80+mp mirrorless in 2017, I'll certainly get one.
-
Hi,
My impression may be that Phase One is quite happy staying at the high end. I would also think that Sony will deliver say 140 and 200 MP sensors in full frame 645 if there is a market for them and at a profitable price point.
Best regards
Erik
I believe they will bring one out, but are waiting for the true next generation of sensor, that will have a better EVF potential ('refresh rate') and may even have a fast Electronic Shutter up to 1/1000s (much harder to achieve in larger sensors). From what I hear the next generation of MF sensors is coming sooner than we expect, with many of the improvements we hope for. This 'cropped 645' size will jump to 80mp or more, and might allow Phase to come straight in at the high end. Though of course Fuji can upgrade easily with a camera system ready and lenses in production, too.
I'm not really prepared to step down from my IQ3100 to 50mp, but if Phase or Fuji can get an 80+mp mirrorless in 2017, I'll certainly get one.
-
All I know is that if it is anywhere close to what it looks like to be by the specs, and the body cheaper that the Hastle-blad, and it's expensive lenses ... I'm buying.
-
I handled one the other day. A pre production prototype obviously.
Lighter than you think, but not as light as Hassy offering. If you're used to an X1Pro you'll get this.
Was impressed by the selectable full sensor AF points, a first for MF. And the EVFs movable tilt/rotate option seems excellent. The standard lens is a bit longer than ideal -would have preferred a 50/55 on crop sensor. Battery was huge and unique to this camera. That's good (life) and bad - no alternatives, takes up a lot of space. I really think a Canon or Phase One style battery would have been fine.
Couldn't test the image quality/files obviously. No convertor even if they'd let me put an SD card in. Was reasonably quiet, but not much as new Hassy, though a 'quiet mode' might yet be in the final firmware.
It's very promising all in all. I pray for Capture One support, and for a quick upgrade of that sensor to next gen 75/80 mp soon. Late 2017 in my dreams. I've got so used to 100mp, that it's really tough to step down so much.
-
I handled one the other day. A pre production prototype obviously.
Lighter than you think, but not as light as Hassy offering. If you're used to an X1Pro you'll get this.
Was impressed by the selectable full sensor AF points, a first for MF. And the EVFs movable tilt/rotate option seems excellent. The standard lens is a bit longer than ideal -would have preferred a 50/55 on crop sensor. Battery was huge and unique to this camera. That's good (life) and bad - no alternatives, takes up a lot of space. I really think a Canon or Phase One style battery would have been fine.
Couldn't test the image quality/files obviously. No convertor even if they'd let me put an SD card in. Was reasonably quiet, but not much as new Hassy, though a 'quiet mode' might yet be in the final firmware.
It's very promising all in all. I pray for Capture One support, and for a quick upgrade of that sensor to next gen 75/80 mp soon. Late 2017 in my dreams. I've got so used to 100mp, that it's really tough to step down so much.
The X1D is supposed to have selectable focus points as well in the finalized product.
The X1D shutter sound in the recent 'Hands-on Tour' video with Kevin is an obnoxiously loud clank clank (at about the 17 minute mark).....not remotely quiet if the in-person production model is anything close. I can't imagine the GFX is even louder....at least I hope not.
Jeff
-
Unfortunately not even the Cambo borad will work for all situations. In landscape orientation: yes. In portrait orientation: no.
I did some further research and posted this over at getdpi. Here's a copy of the posting:
Cambo and Arca have Canon lens boards with electronic aperture control for their bellow cameras. They don't require the collaboration with Fuji. The main problem for those devices is the small difference between the flange distance of Canon EF (44mm) and Fuji GFX (26,7mm). It results in only 17.3mm space. That brings the lens panels quite close to the camera and its grip. I am very interested in such a solution. So to check out if it would work I took product photos and scaled them to the same size in photoshop, using sensor size, mount diameters and mm-scales on the images as references. I think it is quite exact. My results:
a) the Arca F-Universalis lens board with aperture control will fit with the camera in landscape orientation. But the grip will limit the horizontal shift to one side to next to nothing (remember there is also the bellows between lens board and the grip which I didn’t draw). You could compensate that with the shift on the lens, but it’s a bit strange to do that on a view camera. Arca would probably have to make a dedicated bellow with a wider opening for the larger sensor, and a new mounting ring for the Fuji. Portrait orientation won’t work at all, because the lens board is about 12mm higher than wide, it collides with the grip.
b) the Cambo Actus lens board for Canon with aperture control is much narrower. It will fit in landscape orientation with enough space for shift in all directions. Cambo would probably have to make a new bellow with a wider opening. Their rotating mount for the camera side would have to be replaced by a thinner on without rotation - it is too thick to fit in the 17.3mm together with the lens board. In portrait orientation it won’t fit at all, much too high.
c) Cambo has a Canon lens board without aperture control for the Actus. This is much smaller and will work in both camera orientations with enough space for shifting in all directions. But no aperture control (set aperture on a Canon camera, detach, mount on the Actus, no easy switching between working aperture and full open).
So it looks like there will be no easy solution. Someone will have to develop a product further or from the ground on. I very much hope that someone would chime in and do that. A fixed adapter with aperture control by metabones would be a great thing. Or a shift adapter like a mini-pancake-camera with interchangeable panels for different MF-lenses.
Regards -
Marc
Bit of an old post I know but just had a thought concerning this...
Have just seen that Kipon have released a couple of adapters for the Fuji GFX..
One is a straight electronic adapter for Canon Eos lenses. This is done via a separate battery and does not communicate with the GFX body. Couple this with a Kipon Contax 645 - Eos adapter and apparently you get independent control of C645 lenses....
Very Cool.... :)
I was thinking that this might work very well on a "viewcamera" type setup but know I see that the new issue is probably "flange distance" related, as the current setup is optimised to be flush with a GFX body...
Anybody able to see a solution to this via a bit of DIY lensboard "hacking" with a camera like the Cambo Actus? Or is it a matter of waiting till a more useable solution comes out?
Cool, look forward to hearing your thoughts... :)
-
Have just seen that Kipon have released a couple of adapters for the Fuji GFX..
One is a straight electronic adapter for Canon Eos lenses. This is done via a separate battery and does not communicate with the GFX body. Couple this with a Kipon Contax 645 - Eos adapter and apparently you get independent control of C645 lenses....
Very Cool.... :)
I was thinking that this might work very well on a "viewcamera" type setup but know I see that the new issue is probably "flange distance" related, as the current setup is optimised to be flush with a GFX body...
Anybody able to see a solution to this via a bit of DIY lensboard "hacking" with a camera like the Cambo Actus? Or is it a matter of waiting till a more useable solution comes out?
Cool, look forward to hearing your thoughts... :)
If someone would offer a shift adapter Canon EF - Fuji GFX than you would have kind of a view camera setup. Mirex, HCam, Novoflex come to mind. Would be cool to be able to use Contax 645 lenses as shift lenses on the GFX. Although I am not sure if the relatively small inner diameter of the Canon mount could cut of some of the image circle.
Even better would be if fringer would cooperate with someone to offer a shift version of his Contax 645 - Fuji GFX adapter. Imagine you could use that with full aperture control and exif data in the files.
-
To the best of my knowledge, there is a Eos - GFX shift adapter coming in the next couple of months from Stefan Steib.... From there you could simply mount a "dumb" C645 - Eos adapter to it, for movements with the C645 lenses..
This will be a dumb adapter only though, so no electronic control of the C645 aperture.. :(
The best would be a Kipon style adapter that controls aperture though an external battery. This could come in a variety of forms, one that is solely suited to sit on a Cambo Actus lensboard (just like their current Eos electronic lensboard) and one that comes in a Eos mount, that could be mounted to Stefan Steib's upcoming "shift" adapter...
The design might have to be changed a little to enable use on the Cambo Actus, as I believe the current design does not enable use with the Fuji GFX...
Which kinda is a bit shit :(