X2D 100c for landscapes

[larkis]

Does anyone here see the merit of the new X2D 100c over the Fuji 100s for landscape shooting (with big prints in mind) ? Are the allegedly sharper/better quality controlled lenses visibly better ? I assume the rest of the price difference between this camera and the Fuji is the brand tax similar to what Leica demands. 

The Fuji does seem more like a workhorse (weather sealed to), but it also strikes me as a camera that's basically a slower but higher resolution Sony (which I own a few of including some GM lenses) while the X2D 100c is something more out of left field. Does anyone here have experience shooting landscapes and the occasional portrait with the Hasselblad lenses/cameras ?

I want to get into another medium format system but don't want to second guess the optics like I have on my old but well build 645Z. I have briefly fantasized about a phase one system but the usability margin and affordability is not something I can consider at this time.

Any opinions would be great !

[BernardLanguillier]

Does anyone here see the merit of the new X2D 100c over the Fuji 100s for landscape shooting (with big prints in mind) ? Are the allegedly sharper/better quality controlled lenses visibly better ? I assume the rest of the price difference between this camera and the Fuji is the brand tax similar to what Leica demands. 

The Fuji does seem more like a workhorse (weather sealed to), but it also strikes me as a camera that's basically a slower but higher resolution Sony (which I own a few of including some GM lenses) while the X2D 100c is something more out of left field. Does anyone here have experience shooting landscapes and the occasional portrait with the Hasselblad lenses/cameras ?

I want to get into another medium format system but don't want to second guess the optics like I have on my old but well build 645Z. I have briefly fantasized about a phase one system but the usability margin and affordability is not something I can consider at this time.

Any opinions would be great !

As a current Nikon Z7II/Z9, GFX-100s and P1 IQ4-150 (on XF and Arca) and former H6D-100c owner:

- Some of the Fuji lenses, in particular the 23mm, 120mm and 250mm are absolutely world class. I don't see how the Hassy lenses could be significantly better, especially at landscape typical apertures,
- The Fuji lenses are significantly cheaper, overall the system is cheaper
- As far as I know, the Fuji offers some valuable functions such as focus stacking that the X2D is currently missing,
- There are L backets for the Fuji, none shipping yet for the X2D,
- Capture one currently doesn't support the X2D while it supports the GFX100s - this is an absolute show stopper for me, no way I would want to move back to LR or Phocus
- it took Hassy 3.5 extra years to come up with a 100mp camera vs Fuji, I expect the same to happen in the future with upcoming chips or technologies

Cheers,
Bernard

[Conner999]

We use an H5D, GFX-50S (which we sue primarily with HC glass for the leaf shutters) and are acquiring an X1DII and (likely) eventually an X2D.

Putting aside the questions of Hassy vs. Fuji colour science, haptics, etc., the only two big technical reasons to go with a X vs say the 100S would be a) the leaf shutter for 1/2000 sync and the ability to tether to an ipad. The latter would be the only one of the two handy for landscape work.

[BobShaw]

There is a fairly good review by Karl Taylor here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5GjcpJeKUs

Personally I currently have two X1D originals and would probably look at selling one and getting an X2D once the dust settles. Nothing wrong with the X1D but for say art reproduction 100MP is a step up. For most other things it is just more disk space. The IS is reported to be very good also. Let the early adopters fix it first and pay for the development.

Seriously, it has been out a week. There will be L brackets if that is important.

Colour science, smaller, lighter, better lenses especially the new ones. Flash synch at 1/4000S all look pretty favourable to me.
The downsides are that it does not appear to have a GPS which I love on the X1D and it seems to have a new battery. I have a lot of old batteries and need at least three a day currently. i expect this to use more. (UPDATE - Apparently it uses the same batteries, just faster.)

Hasselblad is a lot more than a "tax". I think it will lead Fuji. The 645Z is not even in the same race.
It probably signals the end of the H6D and Phase One is all but dead. Steam engines in a modern world.

[SrMi]

I do not have my X2D yet, so I am speculating based on my experience with my X1D II and GFX100S.
X2D has much better ergonomics than GFX100S. I could never really bond with the Fuji, though I like my X-T4.
The lenses are great, and there is a large availability of zooms. However, I prefer primes and like the available set of XCD primes.
Note that X2D has not yet implemented focus bracketing or face/eye tracking.
The EVF of X2D should be much better than in GFX100S (I hate the constant flickering).
The long exposure implementation is better in Hasselblad.
I hope GFX100S will not be better in any way so I can sell the Fuji system , though some Fuji lenses are great.

You can find Gordon's first impression and comparison between X2D and GFX100s here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1745984/8

[SrMi]

Two more disadvantages of X2D:
- No live histogram
- No Auto-ISO in M mode

Those features were not available on X1D neither.

[S@W]

I would love to like the Fuji system. It is a lot cheaper than Hassy and offer more lenses (native + adapted) options.
I tried hard to like it with the GFX 50 R then 50 S but really couldn't cope with their color science.
Pictures have a pinkish / magenta / cyan exaggeration, muted browns that I pretty much dislike.

Of course I shoot raws and raws can be tweaked in all possible kinds of ways but I never succeeded getting files that are fully matching my taste, using film repro options or not, using C1 or LR.

Color science isn't easy, thankfully for some digital labs that still can pay their color experts.
Here's a link of a Fuji vs Leica M11 comparison, not agree with all he says but the idea is there:
Fuji vs Leica M11

If anyone does have cooking receipts for C1 or LR that help create more neutral files from Fuji (reducing cyans, etc) please share !

I was immediately sold with the Hasselblad files on the other end, they are rich, natural, tasteful.
I believe Focus is extracting the essence of the files better than LR, being picky, just nuances but still.

I'm no fan boy of any brand, just like beautifully crafted stuff and most of all naturally reproduced colors.
To me checking the files rendering is a must when choosing between any camera, and especially between Fuji vs Hassy.

[chrismuc]

X2D
back screen not tilting when camera in portrait mode
no ultrasonic dust removal on sensor

[BernardLanguillier]

Two examples of the horrible colors delivered by the GFX100s through C1 Pro. Captured this Sunday.




GFX100s + 120mm f4 (first one is a 400mp stitch)

Cheers,
Bernard

[Chris_Brown]

I would love to like the Fuji system. It is a lot cheaper than Hassy and offer more lenses (native + adapted) options.
I tried hard to like it with the GFX 50 R then 50 S but really couldn't cope with their color science.
Pictures have a pinkish / magenta / cyan exaggeration, muted browns that I pretty much dislike.

Of course I shoot raws and raws can be tweaked in all possible kinds of ways but I never succeeded getting files that are fully matching my taste, using film repro options or not, using C1 or LR.

Color science isn't easy, thankfully for some digital labs that still can pay their color experts.
Here's a link of a Fuji vs Leica M11 comparison, not agree with all he says but the idea is there:
Fuji vs Leica M11

If anyone does have cooking receipts for C1 or LR that help create more neutral files from Fuji (reducing cyans, etc) please share !

I was immediately sold with the Hasselblad files on the other end, they are rich, natural, tasteful.
I believe Focus is extracting the essence of the files better than LR, being picky, just nuances but still.

I'm no fan boy of any brand, just like beautifully crafted stuff and most of all naturally reproduced colors.
To me checking the files rendering is a must when choosing between any camera, and especially between Fuji vs Hassy.

I’ve recently begun working with a GFX100s and found the film profiles in ACR to accurately mimic the films (I was a huge Fujifilm fan back in the day). The film profile “Classic Chrome” was designed with the least amount of color saturation. Perhaps you could use that as a starting point and brew your own DNG camera profile. I made custom camera profiles for my Canon gear and they work very well for copying artwork and rendering horticulture subjects accurately.

[S@W]

Thanks for this tip 

[Lust4Life]

I have to toss in a few words.
For color work, I have used all MFDC's and to my eye, Hassie is the best.
BUT considering that only 2% of my work in recent years has been color, 98% only B&W, the color delta with GFX and H means nothing to me.
I shot and convert, that simple.

Thus for color, I'd take Hassie BUT since the GFX 50 came out I dumped the H5D60WiFi and 4 lenses and have transitioned with the Fuji GFX from the 50 to the 100 and now the 100s.

I have a lot more of my IRA still in the bank, far less weight in my pack and my B&W works looks the same.
As to the times I work in color (and I only shoot landscapes/clouds) I'm comfortable with the color I can achieve, and there is a lot more "green" in the bank.

[BAB]

Hasselblad also decided not to include a joy stick to move the focus point, you must move it with you finger on the lcd panel. Shooting landscapes with manual focus will be just fine, however when one wants to use aut and move the point slightly you must use your finger and you can’t seethe focus point in the EVF. They did however assign the reentering of the focus point to the X button…why no joy stick?

My H6D 100 c has the best highlight roll off, when I mentioned this to Jim K and asked about the roll off on the X2D his reply was that the X2D cuts off sharply hum tats a real drawback for me.

Color science unfortunately no camera comes close to Hasselblad.

As far as the X2D stands right now for me it’s not ready for prime time!
Say you want to invest 20 k body and three lenses of which I’m not sure the 90 is yet available and previous X lenses are crippled. If you spent 20K on a used H6D 100c and probably 5-6 HC used lenses speaking about landscapes it slaughters the X2D!

Then there is Phase system also available used!

[hubell]

Say you want to invest 20 k body and three lenses of which I’m not sure the 90 is yet available and previous X lenses are crippled. If you spent 20K on a used H6D 100c and probably 5-6 HC used lenses speaking about landscapes it slaughters the X2D!

I know the internet is rife with unfounded hyperbole, but "slaughtered"? You own both systems with a complement of 5-6 HC and XCD lenses and have compared the output from the two systems over an extended period of time?
And, just how are the legacy XCD lenses "crippled"? I have six that I have been using with an X2D for a couple of months and I am now quite concerned.

[BAB]

No Autofocus because mine are older...they want 2500 per lens to convert the shutter.

So manual all the way

[hubell]

No Autofocus because mine are older...they want 2500 per lens to convert the shutter.

So manual all the way

Oh, you mentioned "previous X lenses." I think you meant previous H lenses. No problem, these kinds of Freudian slips happen all the time.

[nazdravanul]

My 2 cents on the topic, after the first few weeks with the xd2 in parallel to my gfx 100. Long story short: it’s all about the lenses.
At f8 the xcd 38 kills both the GF  30 (no longer have it) and the 35-70. The 65 xcd kills the same 35-70 that killed my 80mm GF that was at f8 close to my ex 63mm GF. The XCD 120mm Macro puts more pixels per target at all focusing distances compared to the GF 110, with equally drop dead gorgeous renedering style (different aestethics, both awesome) and per pixel IQ.
For the 38 and 65 alone the x2d is worth it, for me, for sure. The only thing slightly better than the xcd 65 is is my un-shifted Rodenstock 70 Digaron-W (on the GFX 100).With the shifted Rodenstock, the Hasselblad becomes better.
The differences start to be visible at 100% and at 200% and 400% they become huge. So it mainly matters if you print really big, and I do that. Or if you are really kinky with your pixel peeping (I also do that  )
Note: using C1 for Fuji and Phocus for Hasselblad yields the best results.

[BernardLanguillier]

Well, the 35-70mm is probably the worst GFX lens together with the 100-200mm.

A more reasonable comparison would be with the 32-64mm f4 or the 45mm f2.8. And those are outstandingly sharp.

I just sold my 32-64mm to replace it by the 45-100mm f4 as I intend to do more portraits. Shockingly good as well.

The right lens to compare the Hassy 120mm macro to is the GFX 120mm f4 and it is super upper good as well. Probably the sharpest lens in the G system.

Cheers,
Bernard

[John Hollenberg]

Well, the 35-70mm is probably the worst GFX lens together with the 100-200mm.

Not a lot of difference in testing by Jim Kasson.  My copy of the 35-70 is excellent.

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/gf-35-70-and-32-64-foliage-on-axis/

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/gf-35-70-and-32-64-foliage-corner/

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/mtf50-and-microcontrast-of-fuji-35-70-gf/

Also, Joseph Holmes prefers the 35-70 due to the very significant field curvature of the 32-64:

"The 35-70 is plainly a huge step up from the 32-64 with respect to field curvature. I find the 32-64 great otherwise, but for my kind of work, predictably being able to get everything in focus and in fairly straightforward ways is simply a necessity. All things considered, I prefer the 35-70."

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-50s/field-curvature-35-70-gf/ (see comments)

[nazdravanul]

Well, the 35-70mm is probably the worst GFX lens together with the 100-200mm.

A more reasonable comparison would be with the 32-64mm f4 or the 45mm f2.8. And those are outstandingly sharp.

I just sold my 32-64mm to replace it by the 45-100mm f4 as I intend to do more portraits. Shockingly good as well.

The right lens to compare the Hassy 120mm macro to is the GFX 120mm f4 and it is super upper good as well. Probably the sharpest lens in the G system.

Cheers,
Bernard

The 35-70 is rather crap until f8 where it becomes a really good lens. At f8 it killed my 30mm, 80mm and 63mm. The 2 Hassy lenses - 38mm + 65mm - kiled everything at f8, except my unshifted Rodenstock Digaron-W.  All comparisons with Hassy were done at f8, for “landscape” shooting. I no longer have the 45mm, the FL doesn’t fit me. I still love my GF 110. The 23 may have to go - I suspect the Hassy 21 may be better. The GF 250 stays, I don’t think the 135 + 1.7 TC Hassy can bring anything else to the table in terms of IQ. 
Overall, I feel the per pixel IQ gaps compared to my beloved (and gone) Otuses are slowly filled in with the Hasselblad lenses on the 100 MP sensors. Looking forward to see what the GF TS 30mm brings to the table, as well as the GF 55 1.7 (the 80mm GF was a bit of a headscratcher for me, I hope the 55 goes closer to the 110 IQ).
One thing remaining even when comparing the 120 Hassy vs GF 110: a bit more details in the shadows. Playing with the PP sliders doesn’t make things equal. Not sure where it comes from, but it’s there, and it does matter for my (sometimes heavily post processed) landscape shooting.