advertisement


Medium Format from Fuji?

Lefty said:
There's a 1.7x magnification factor, so that translates to the following FF equivalent apertures:

f2.8 becomes f1.65
f4 becomes f2.35
Click to expand...

That's not the case. The F stop is simply the ratio of the lens focal length and the diameter of the aperture.

If a meter indicates that an exposure is 1/250th at f4 that will be the exposure regardless of the size of the camera's sensor.

Cinema lenses use 'T' stops, that's slightly different as it takes into consideration the amount of light absorbed by the glass in the lens.
 
Lefty said:
There's a 1.7x magnification factor, so that translates to the following FF equivalent apertures:

f2.8 becomes f1.65
f4 becomes f2.35

It will be interesting to see what the UK pricing is. (Although I would never be in the market for something like this)

Lefty
Click to expand...

No, what it means is that the relative DOF is as follows:

DOF @ f2.8 @ 63mm lens (Med. format) = DOF @ F1.65 @ 50mm lens (FF), etc.

But the 2.8 aperture is the same amount of light transmission as would be on any lens @ F2.8 (presuming the light transmission is fairly normal).

That being said the reason the lenses are slower is because on larger formats, faster lenses means really, really heavy pieces of glass.
 
Stunsworth said:
That's not the case. The F stop is simply the ratio of the lens focal length and the diameter of the aperture.

If a meter indicates that an exposure is 1/250th at f4 that will be the exposure regardless of the size of the camera's sensor.

Cinema lenses use 'T' stops, that's slightly different as it takes into consideration the amount of light absorbed by the glass in the lens.
Click to expand...

Apologies - should have clarified that I was talking about the equivalent FF aperture in terms of depth of field. (i.e. f2.8 on the Fuji medium format camera gives you the same depth of field as f1.65 on FF). As you say, the actual light gathering capability is an absolute and is not affected by the sensor size.

Lefty
 
It's funny how fashions in photography change - we all love shallow depth of field images, but it's not that long ago that you'd be craving more and more light in the studio so you could get your Bassleblad/Bronica to the magical f8 to get a decent depth of field. Of course with a 6x6 neg, DOF at f4 was quite shallow! I think Fuji are quite "safe" with f2.8 as the widest aperture on that size of sensor.
 
My question about that is less about the DOF and more about sheer light gathering, I like to shoot @ F1.4-F2.0 often because I'm shooting in the Duh-Hark. And I like that. 2.8 would be a bit slow for me, and on THAT note----

The way around this would be cleaner/clearer/less noise @ higher ISO's. So given that the pixles on this thing are--excuse my math if I'm wrong, but I believe--double the size of their standard X-trans (24mp @ APSC vs. 50mp @ MF, four times the size, only double the pixels, ergo double the size per pixel) would it be safe to say that the high-iso here would start to challenge A7S type shit?

Please answer, mind-hive.

love,

Me
 
yuckyamson said:
My question about that is less about the DOF and more about sheer light gathering, I like to shoot @ F1.4-F2.0 often because I'm shooting in the Duh-Hark. And I like that. 2.8 would be a bit slow for me, and on THAT note----

The way around this would be cleaner/clearer/less noise @ higher ISO's. So given that the pixles on this thing are--excuse my math if I'm wrong, but I believe--double the size of their standard X-trans (24mp @ APSC vs. 50mp @ MF, four times the size, only double the pixels, ergo double the size per pixel) would it be safe to say that the high-iso here would start to challenge A7S type shit?

Please answer, mind-hive.

love,

Me
Click to expand...

I just don't think this MF Fuji is the sort of camera that most people will be using for available light photography. This is clearly designed as a tethered studio tool, or, with the viewfinder, maybe a high end wedding photography appliance. If you are hanging about in nightclubs, this isn't what you need :D
 
Jeff,

I would be surprised if the MF Fuji's sensor were noiser than the 24 MP one in the recent X-series cameras. If so, shooting at ISO 3200 should be a snap. Is that not sensitive enough?

Joe
 
The GFX next to a Nikon D810, to give you some idea of size.

DSC09651_fujifilmhandson2.jpeg


Joe
 
Another fun bit about medium format mirrorless cameras is that in theory you can provide an adapter, and shove on lenses from SLRs. Given they produce the Hasselblad H series lenses, i'm wondering what their agreement is with Hasselblad, and whether they can support the protocol? That would be a smart move in the sense of opening up a light weight portable camera system for pros with Hasselblad gear, but i'm sure it would be fraught in terms of licensing.

Another option would be the Mamiya/Phase one compatibility, again, giving access to 20 years of medium format lenses designed for 645.
 
Joe P said:
A bit more on the GFX --

http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/9/21/12971628/fujifilm-gfx-50s-medium-format-hands-on

Joe
Click to expand...

And the funniest thing about the whole 'aimed at the pro market' is that 90% of your work is aimed straight at web use and in particular 'social media' where small file size images and speed to post rule.

If i had money to burn on a camera for the hell of it, i'd quite fancy the Pentax 645Z but i've yet to have a client come back to me & ask for more resolution/bigger file sizes than they're getting from any DSLR i was using at the time (currents cameras are the Canon 1Dx - 18mp).

The game's changed for good now that great image quality is available from virtually all the cameras out there.
 
Joe P said:
Jeff,

I would be surprised if the MF Fuji's sensor were noiser than the 24 MP one in the recent X-series cameras. If so, shooting at ISO 3200 should be a snap. Is that not sensitive enough?

Joe
Click to expand...

Hey Joe,

Given the tool isn't designed for available-light, low-light, type situations, fully understood, but also rules are meant to be broken (otherwise why would we be building a very compact, mirrorless MF camera?).

When I first saw the ISO 6400 files out of an X-Pro1, it was like a revelation (for me and many others) because this was the first time that high ISO didn't reak of digital junk-nasty-pants.

Having owned the XE-1 and now the XT-1, I can rightly say that the high ISO stuff is amazing, and when you know it really well, you do start to see some smushiness and garbage on anything north of ISO 1000. Not complaining just worth noting. I really try to shoot 800 or below, but will gladly shoot 1600, or 3200, or if needed, 5000.

My point is that there is something I very much enjoy about shooting wide open in very dim situations--it's not about whether or not this is a "correct" shooting mode for portraiture, street, or anything else (read: kids while they sleep) but rather it's a freedom that I haven't had before that I really enjoy exploring. IN most of these situations I'm between ISO 1600-3200 and typically between 1.4-1.8 or 2.

The other companies' high ISO has now caught up, and surely bested FUJI's performance in this regard (Sony, as much as I don't like the feel of their cameras, has high ISO qualities that are amazing to behold) and although the XT-2 is a step-up in this regard, it doesn't reach that much beyond where they were 4-5 years ago. (significant, I'll grant you).

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bitch and moan at all. I'm just purely curious about whether or not the high-iso benchmark of this new MF camera will be a significant leap forward, and while shooting at F2.8, allow a guy like me to use it (again, in the way it's not meant to be used, but why not) at, say, an ISO10,000 and look really wow or not.

I'm asking because obviously one of Fuji's strengths was to reinvent high-ISO and I'm wondering if it will happen again. that's all.
 
Jeff,

I'm sure all sorts of sample pix from the GFX will be available soon, but the twirly thing on the left suggests that decent quality high ISO pix are a possibility.

fuji-gfx-s50-10.jpg


Fast lenses for medium format cameras are not technically impossible, but it's rare to see anything faster than f/2.8. Scroll through the list of MF lenses and you'll see that most around around f2.8 to f/4 -- for lenses that often cost multiples of thousands of clams.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Medium-Format-Lenses/ci/467/N/4288584244

I think in practice this new Fuji MF camera will be better than anything we currently have in our camera bags.

Joe
 
Joe,

Sorry maybe we are miscommunicating--I'm aware of the technical restraints on making fast MF glass--I commented about that up earlier in the thread. I expect most of the glass to be 2.8 for the primes, or slower.

That being said you can see something interesting in the design of the six already--the 63mm 2.8 has the "Stepping down" design (what I'm calling it, where the lens is fairly compact and gets smaller from front to back) ala the X-series 35mm F2, and the 23mm F2, wheras the 110mm F2 has the "Bubbling out" design approach ala the 23mm F1.4, 16mm F1.4, or 56mm F1.2.

Ergo, my presumption is that, as the line fills out, they will likely have slightly less expensive primes consistently at F2.8 (the 45mm, the 63mm, and others) and then a "faster" series consistently at or around F2.0--which, as you said, is quite fast for MF.

As for the performance of the High ISO, I know the camera WILL shoot to ISO 25,600 or hell, 51,000 my question is to what quality. Which brings me back to the original question--given the pixel density of half the size, presumably, is it going to be a jump forward for their quality in this regard.
 
Jeff,

I'm admittedly debating in a vacuum because I haven't seen any high-ISO sample pix, but an expensive camera, even if cheaper than the other MF competition, that takes shitty high ISO pictures in 2016 would be an engineering and marketing blunder.

Nothing Fuji has done in recent years makes me think this would be likely. I have an X100 and am still amazed by the quality of pix straight out of the camera.

FWIW, this video suggests that the GFX's image quality will be excellent.

[YOUTUBE]MHhAkirFH-Q[/YOUTUBE]

For those watching the video at work be warned there's some brief nudal fronity of the boobular region.

Joe
 
Joe,

The reason for maxing out at f/2.8 is due to the available leaf shutters for leaf shutter medium format lenses. Copal shutters come in three sizes, with iris diameters of 24, 30 or 45mm. The 45mm shutter tops out at 1/125th, whilst the 24 and 30mm ones go up to 1/500th, so basically you need to restrict the iris to 30mm in the lens design to be able to fit a fast shutter for general purpose use.

If you work out the iris diameter for an 80mm at f/2.8 you need 28.5mm (so possible), and the hasselblad 100mm uses f/3.5 (again 28.5mm). This is the reason for the f/2.8 limit.

Hasselblad F lenses (which use a focal plane shutter, not a leaf shutter) don't have this problem, so they made the 110/2 and 150/2.8 lenses for these cameras. Mamiya also used a focal plane shutter in their 645 cameras, and so their lenses can go faster without being limited to the size of available leaf shutters. They made an 80/1.9 lens for their 645 system.

I've got a mamiya 80/1.9, and fast hasselblad F series lenses (50/2.8 and 150/2.8) which work nicely. The hasselblad 50/2.8 is a monster, taking 86mm filters.

But I take your point, faster than f/2.8 is rare, but this is more to do with the constraints from the leaf shutters than anything making such lenses impossible to make.

As I mentioned, i've a feeling that higher ISO availability makes the need for faster lenses less of an issue, and the minimal depth of field you get from such designs possibly makes them less useful than you'd imagine if you are used to 35mm shooting.
 
Cesare,

The reason for maxing out at f/2.8 is due to the available leaf shutters for leaf shutter medium format lenses. Copal shutters come in three sizes, with iris diameters of 24, 30 or 45mm. The 45mm shutter tops out at 1/125th, whilst the 24 and 30mm ones go up to 1/500th, so basically you need to restrict the iris to 30mm in the lens design to be able to fit a fast shutter for general purpose use.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I didn't know that. But isn't Fuji GFX's shutter in the camera?

Joe
 
Apropos of nothing, I miss my Mamiya 7, and often wondered if a digital version could be created. The lenses were compact and amongst the sharpest going, it had a 6x7 negative and was pretty light. Mind you, a 6x7 sensor would be HUGELY expensive I reckon...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top