I recently commented to a friend that this is an extraordinary time to be a photographer and/or hybrid/video shooter. Gear does not make the artist, but good gear certainly can facilitate artistic expression. I want to give a nod to still photographers of yore who became notable in the field because they had to work with older gear and understand photographic fundamentals. I would not have known this as I am a fledgling hobbyist were it not for a recent video posted here on your foray into large format film photography.
I've always said to myself: I'll get a leica when I retire but just for the fact that fujigfx50sii can do 24x65mm format... I might change the idea crazy~
The GFX50S II is at the same point that a Tesla is for me, still probably too expensive to justify, but not the ludicrous option they once were. The 50S II is the first time I can look at all my camera gear and go, "you know what? I can sell all of this and jump on the medium format train." Definitely won't, but feels good to know I could :)
It's priced lower than a Nikon D6 or Canon Flagship DSLR, its lower or almost the same price as some High end Mirrorless too!!, so I dont think its too expensive, if anything its a bargain compared to other Digital Medium Format offerings!!. :)
@@maxwellwellmax878 It's a bargain compared to many full frame digital cameras. If state of the art auto focus is not a requirement, then there is no reason to not buy this instead of anything offered by the competition.
@@briangc1972 I agree!!. I still have my Tripod and a Mamiya 7 medium format camera, so its possible that fuji can sell this camera to those of us who can live without fast Autofocus.
I've just had an epiphany of why you're so easy to listen to, Hugh. Not only are not monotone, you're not monospeed. I never realized that varied speech rate could be so effective...until I had this epiphany. Maybe this concept has been around forever, but I've never heard of it before and it awakened me to a more effective communication style. I've learned something new today, Hugh. And I didn't have to subscribe to Squarespace to do it!
I give presentations in front of small audiences regularly. While I have a long way to go to be better, I do vary my tone, inflection, rate of delivery, and cadence. Much of that is made easier by having a versatile voice/larynx. Still, underdeveloped raw talent (and it does take real work, practice, and repetition in a live setting) is often observable for what could be with a modicum of effort. I don't think I would describe myself as "easy to listen to" the way I would Hugh. Hugh has a very velvety vocal quality and something to say.
You summarized my thoughts exactly... Fuji could just coast and focus on their other businesses, but they keep doubling down on X and GFX, which should keep instilling confidence in them staying in the game for the long-term. Seeing sample images from the new 23 and 33 1.4 zoomed in, you can see the improvement in resolution, I can only imagine what it will be on the rumored 43mp stacked bsi X-H2. Meanwhile, they're making the medium format space within reach of hobbyists and fleshing out the lens ecosystem. I may make the leap soon...
Thank you for another smart and enthusiastic video. It is bewildering how much Fujifilm is investing into their pipeline. Got to keep that Gas under control though.
Fuji reminds me of the Avis Car Rental commercials in the 80's. Avis used to say, "We are number 2, so we try harder...." Fuji is also like the red headed step child in the camera industry; they don't get the love and respect they deserve. This new aggressiveness is going to be great for consumers. Everyone, including Leica, will take notice and have to adjust pricing and market placement according to the new standards set by Fuji. If the IQ of the GFX system does rival the SL2, then Fuji is going to grab a big chunk of market share with this move. It is good that Fuji listened to the consumers and decided to drop video and give us a high pixel, high IQ camera at a better, lower price.
It seems that most of the disadvantages of GFX line are only disadvantages when it is compared to smaller format cameras. For me, who has been shooting large format film for a while and fancying a digital alternative, just about any camera from the GFX line will do! Of course, it's just me and my shooting style. I do mostly landscape and even with a 35mm camera, I still use a tripod and cable release whenever possible because I am so used to them (and prefer my image sharp). So yeah, a cheaper digital medium format is most welcome! I can't help but thinking of attaching a GFX body to a view camera with maybe a Schneider Super-Angulon or Rodenstock APO Sironar!
I think Fuji needs to do 2 things to increase their market share: Continue to make cameras like the X-S10 that are more conventional (and yes, continue to make traditional cameras that they make now),and take that next step in autofocus so that it's on par with Canon and Sony. Combine those the features that they already have (color science and film simulation come to mind), and they can do some industry damage. They have a great product, it just needs to take that next step.
@@de-graftasafo-adjei4646 Well, I think to increase market share, they're going to have to have some cameras like the x-s10 that are more conventional. Some people just don't like the classic dials. So, I think both if they want to grow. They offer a lot inside of the camera, but the outside turns some people off.
Not so much for the specs, but I bought the 50S II (with 35-70) for the way it handles and feels out in the field. It reminds me a lot of the Pentax 67 II, and one nice thing abut the GFX cameras is the ability to shoot in 6x7 format. The GFX isn't a sports or wildlife camera, it's something you take your time using. Video? There are better, smaller and cheaper cameras for that. But nothing available today feels quite like shooting with a GFX, and when the stars align, the images are a cut above those from most other cameras.
Great summary Hugh. The Mk II really is in a sweet spot. On the downside, it will trash the secondhand prices of the previous generation, so you had better really feel you need the IBIS. Personally, I like the ergonomics of the existing 50S and really didn't like the ergonomics of the 100 when I (briefly) owned it. I would also miss the tilting viewfinder option. But for anyone contemplating getting into the system, it's a very compelling offering. And true, they are not do everything cameras. But a 50 paired with any of the APS-C Fujifilm camera's makes a killer combined system.
I think 2022 will be a great time for many who are on the fence about trying a fuji camera to finally try one out. Used prices are reasonable for the build quality, third party autofocus lenses coming, I'm just hoping the new generation of primes mixed with their next gen sensor will fix their achilles heel which has always been autofocus and (to some people) sensor resolution.
the GFX 50S II is a mixed release. 1. from a GFR and Medium format standpoint it's great. It essentially makes the 50R obsolete unless you want Rangefinder; otherwise, it's useless. It also make the GFX 50S useless also; the only thing that camera had extra was that tilting viewfinder. It also continue to make the X1D II even more useless; that camera is essentially the same price as the 100S, despite no 4K or even 1080P, 100 mp vs 50, IBIS vs none, hydrid autofocus vs just contrast, better battery and more. 2. However, as other reviewers have pointed out, $4000 price for an 8 year old sensor is pretty uncalled for; not when it's still limited by certain things like terrible video, still with rolling shutter, 3 frames per second, and so forth. But back to the price.. the biggest issue is would you pick this up... or a Canon R5 that is $200 cheaper? That canon will give you excellent video, excellent autofocus, excellent stills, best in class image stabilization, probably best in class autofocus (them or sony)..same thing with sony A7R4 or Nikon Z7 and other cameras that are cheaper, sometimes by over $1000, but will have far more versatile use and with pictures that are fairly comparable to what you can get with the GFR's 8 year old sensor. That's not even counting the fact that you will get a lot more lenses with some of these other companies, especially SONY, they will be cheaper and lighter. Professional cameras are expensive, especially with phones taking the cheaper point and shoot camera market. Even more expnesive is the lens; which essentially make you stuck with 1 ecosystem. So while with Sony for example, you can have one system for sports/widelife, general purpose, video; with the Fuji, you essentially have to go with GFR for one type of picture you want, and then use their APSC for lightweight street photography or if you want anything quick forcing you to adopt two VERY different system. essentially the same thing will apply to canon/nikon (ability to stay with just 1 system) once their lens catch up making again the incentive to go with one of these other system over fuji. Really the only thing that would make you go with fuji is "medium formart bragging", which in practice, at least at the 50- MP level, is just not there.
I'm updating My Nikon F-system with a used D850. Got Zeiss and nikon PC lenses for landscape and a D700. I'm using Nikon for my portfolio work. Then I'm thinking that I will get a GFX 50Sii so I can use my old HB 503CW and Mamiya 7ii lenses They are good in the center but not so good at the edges compared to Fujis GFX lenses. The TS lens will be nice. The problem is the contrast AF. Not earning money on my photography so I cannot spend money on new gear that I seldom use. I also got Fuji x-T1 and X-Pro 1 with budget Zooms that I use instead of compact cameras.
It's interesting to see Fuji doubling down so hard, especially with lenses like the 150-600. I think one area where they'll continue to struggle is conquest of Sony full frame shooters. From my observations out walking and on the forums, there is a not insignificant number of people who buy into Sony for the massive third party line-up. The Tamron zooms combined with the Sigma primes gives you a lot of lens for a reasonable amount of money if you don't need G-Master/Nikon Z S-line level optics.
There was no mention of the XT3ww and XT30II during this summit today... they cared that little about the second version of the XT30 not even to mention it in passing? I don't know how you develop a product line and do that.
Excuse me, but I have a technical question. Would you be able to use an XF lens (looking at you, excellent 50-140mm) on a GFX system? Asking for a friend...
God I hope the X-T2 has a normal sensor! I yearn for a Fujifilm camera with a good normal sensor. (Their low end cameras don’t count because I need two memory card slots)
you could argue that Canon, with the M6 mark 2, is offreing the biggest resolution in the APS-C space, at a significant smaller size too compared to an X-T3/4. What really drags them down is their lens lineup that have been abandonned it seems. I would not be surprised if Canon announces a RF mount APSC camera with RF-S lenses alongside the rumored 800$ Full frame body I'm really hoping Fuji is preparing some big stuff for the X-T5. A new sensor with about 30Mp would be a compelling offer, especially if the rumors about the A7 IV being 33Mp are true I don't know if they will put a new sensor in the X-H2, but it would make sense to release a new one with your flagship camera. That was the mistake they made with the X-H1 having the X-T2 sensor, with the X-T3 already announced)
I'm not counting on it having better autofocus. Based on Fuji's firmware update history, if they develop better autofocus for it, then they'll probably update the X-T4 autofocus too.
@@TheSshadow7 But it sounds like the X-H2 will debut their new processor, which means the T4 might be too old to handle the new AF. Fuji learned a valuable lesson from making the H1 (I have two of them) then just a few months later debuting a newer, cheaper camera with faster AF and newer imaging engine.
Fuji should have made the 33mm a F1.2. Many people would want that extra bit of light and closer to F1.8 of full frame aperture equivalent. I don't see many wanting 33mm F1.0. Still if I want a 50mm equivalent then I could just buy a canon RP and 50mm f1.8 RF on the used market for retail of the 33mm. Just the build and feel wouldn't be a good as fuji 33mm. Fuji X cameras only short comings for me has been AF performance and the lack of an F2 zoom like sigma 18-35mm f1.8. I feel if they could make that F2.0 zoom a number of people would think of switching systems and to show how serious fuji is about APS-C.
Hmmmm....approximate 40mp bsi stacked aps-c X trans sensor arriving soon perhaps? One would think so given they specifically point out three lenses resolve to that type of sensor.
Thanks Hugh. Very Thorough and well though out. I find the 50S II very intriguing. I am actually thinking of swapping my 50R with it. Mind you I also have the 100 ( which I am debating whether to keep or not) and the 100s. I do like the 50 sensor as it is better suited for adaptive lenses ( as most of them straggle with the 100 sensor). In addition I think that sensor is better suited for astrophotography. IBIS is a must as Getty older does not make may hands steadier. I am on the fence with the new zoom, but I would buy the wide angle zoom tomorrow and the TS lenses the day after. Totally agree that autofocus improvement is a must for Fuji( in spite of me shooting landscape) as it would remove the big negative that all reviewers talk about. Lastly where is my monochromatic X series camera??
In response to your query about "Lastly where is my monochromatic X series camera??", I think you can select monochrome in-body and/or address that in post-production. My mentor tells me he does so. I haven't tried that yet, so I am speaking with a large degree of ignorance and inexperience.
@@uvp5000 hi thanks for the reply. True that you can choose an in camera monochrome simulation or apply it in postproduction. But what I am referring to is a monochromatic sensor ( Leica for instance has at least one such camera) that is dedicated and can only capture monochromatic images with results that are far superior to anything you can achieve by software manipulation.
@@icogicog8287 Thank you for your response. I was thinking of the Leica as compared to the FujiFilm. I was not aware that an intentionally designed monochromatic sensor would yield different results than a change to software settings as I have not shot with a Leica or, specifically, the M.
GFX50s II for 30% less than the GFX100s... but 14bits instead of 16bits... no phase detection... 50% less pixel... not what i call a bargain at the end !
Fuji has lost their raison d'etre with the new xf lenses. They are double the weight of the old lenses and even heavier or equivalent of the full frame alternatives.
I personally almost bought the 100s, luckily I rented it for a test week before buying, and unfortunately, the problems far outweighed the gains. In fact, only the photo resolution was sensational, but af, dynamic range or ergonomics turned out to be overhyped, and in the end, the camera was not for me. The gains from buying the 50sII are even more limited. I believe it is an excellent camera but suitable for a tiny niche of applications.
Medium format, by it's own definition, is already a niche market. None of the GFX line up are designed for mainstream consumers. This is good. Instead of us being forced to the same camera with 20 features I don't want, I can pick the one that best suits me and you can pick the one that best suits you.
@@3BMEP Landscape and outdoor portraiture. I literally just bought the Hasselblad X1D mark II. I received the 135mm lens and TC, waiting for the big brown truck to get here with the body and 45mm ..... The Phocus software and Hasselblad's color management lured me away from Leica. Almost bought the S type007, Leica has NEW demo units for $5999, it was a very hard decision.
@@3BMEP I don't have a clear genre of photography. I work on movies/animations, so photography gear is a secondary tool. I use it primarily for documentary, photo geometry, scouting, etc. Currently, I use A7R4 and A9 with GM primes- 14, 24, and 50 (this works great), and I'm constantly testing every zoom option available, but I'm not a big fan of any of them, or.. maybe Sigma 28-70 is surprisingly nice glass. Not perfect IQ, but interesting look and great design. For pure fun on the streets, I use TL2 and M2 with Voightlander glass.
Hugh, you mentioned the 18mm and a list of improved features. Are these improvements over the 16mm? I don't understand why they made the 18mm when the 16mm is such an amazing lens and so close in focal length...unless these are improvements over the 16mm and they didn't want to make a 16mm II. Hence, the different, yet so close, focal length.
@@kubowich Well, I'm familiar with the differences. I actually own the 16mm (24mm equivalent) and I know there's not that much difference between a 24mm and 27mm equivalent. Now, I wasn't insulting Fuji for making the 18mm. Just curious as to the reason. If I needed a wide angle lens and the choices were 18mm and 16mm, I'd choose 16mm because it gives just a little more flexibility regarding width, which is the main reason people buy wide angle lenses. And for vlogging, the extra width is even more valuable. Now, if they already had an 18mm and were making a 16mm, I'd understand that more, given the reasons I just stated.
@@Herr.Mitternacht he just argued with “for vlogging, extra width is even more valuable”… this guy does not understand photography. He really needs a book or two. Sorry not sorry.
The 16/1.4 is one of my favorites, and I prefer it over 18. But it is so good optically, I think, that FujiFilm concluded they could update other lenses that were less competitive in today’s market - like the previous 18, 23 and 35 and more of immediate need for attention. However - the 16/1.4 is due, too, for AF improvements.
Hmm... To me this and everything that happened for the last two years looks like a beginning of a slow death, serious is the last word I would think of.
