I have all four sensor sizes - a GFX 50s ii, Nikon D850, Fuji XT5 and sony RX100 V. I shoot landscapes Andy a few are landscape. Photographer medium format is a game changer because of the size of the sense you get incredible, dynamic range and the image quality cannot be understated. Yes it's better than full frame for landscape photography, but it has some drawbacks and that is depth of field, and also the challenge of that. But where the medium format shines is dynamic range - is just unbelievable you can underexpose an image and still retain detail in the shadows. You can shoot portraits with it, but I wouldn't
Strange, I wonder if you feel you're losing DOF because your 50mm is acting as a 28mm. If you're shooting medium format your best bet is a 150 and or 180 2.8. Those are closer to your typical 85mm and higher. And a 2.8 on a medium format feels more like a .1 / 1.2. The dof in my experience gives you way more bokeh. Most tend to buy the body and go for the cheaper lenses such at kit lens. They assumed 50mm is 50mm. You'd have to get pretty close to your subject to see any real dof vs where you'd stand with a full frame. But typically medium format is bokeh king, google explains why for further information. With that said the opposite is true with apc sensors. Which is why companies are making 1.0, 1.2 and 1.4 lenses for crop. Now you have 75 1.2 lenses (for cheap) (thanks viltrox) which is giving you a longer reach with identical dof as a full frame lens costing 2 to 4x as much. In conclusion, if portraits are your main source of work... medium format would technically and mathematically be your best choice. You just can't be cheap on lenses if you want the best results.
Well I learned something - I thought a medium format was in between a full frame and a crop sensor. Makes sense (not) if a full frame is no crop and a crop sensor is 50-60% crop, then medium must be in between, or a 20-25% crop. Someone out there must have thought the same. Thanks Tony.
Comes from back in the film days, when photography started with plate cameras, which were "large format", 35mm became "standard" because of all the egos that would be bruised by calling it small, and there were a couple of smaller ones again, and medium format was between plate cameras and 35mm. Much of what people talk about as the difference is really only obvious in high quality film medium format. Digital still hasn't caught up to the resolution and dynamic range of medium format on fine grained positive film, but it's slowly getting closer.
3:48 that's not correct. Diffraction is wavelength and pixel size dependent, meaning that you will start to see diffraction at a given wavelength at the same aperture on a 102Mpx Super Full Frame medium format camera as well as a 61Mpx FF sensor and a 26Mpx APS-C sensor. For 3.76μm pixels, which should be the pixel size of this sensor, you hit the diffraction limit at 700nm at f5.5, meanwhile if you consider 550nm you would be experiencing it beyond f7. Depending on the things you're shooting it will be looking more acceptable or worse when into diffraction, your milage may vary
Fuji GFX and Hassy XCD are really not medium format... i like to call them "slightly larger than 35mm" medium format classically is 645, 6x7, 6x8 and 6x9 the GFX sensor is still significantly smaller than 645
Usually I use my 1DX3 as my go to. I've had my eye on the GFX 100s/ii as a landscape and portraiture camera. I have MF films cameras that I adore, my Fuji GX680iii is just glorious in its size and capabilities. A really nice thing about the GFX 100ii is that it's significantly lighter than my 1DX3, that would be nice.
@@SPECTRA890 i think it would be the full frame for multiple reasons a) it has a higher burst. i mostly do sport photography so i really need that burst rate to get all of those amazing shots. b) the af is not that good which for sports or wild life which is another genre i love shooting is just really not that great. c)it weighs alot more then my full frame and is way to big for my camera bag. d) the battery just sucks which leads me to carry more batterys which also weighs a lot. But yea its still an amazing camera to have for landscape and Portrait photography and you could also shoot street photography on it if you really want. So yea i would keep the full frame
I have a variety I shoot with. I shoot both 35mm and medium format (645.) I develop my own film. Digital I have APSC, M4/3, 4/3, Full frame. What I like about medium format is the smooth focal falloff and depth of field. On film the shots definitely have a "look." Good video, but you really lean on your presets to fix the images - I will chalk it up to a system you aren't familiar with.
I'm going there (Iceland) late January 2024. I hope I can shoot photos as good as yours. By the way... you shot this video moths ago... no?? It's weird so little snow/ice in Iceland in December.
I have the GFX 100s which is roughly the same as the 100 ii. Your video, is actually, accurate and adds a little fun. I like more the "depth of fieldy" term... Actually, at the same aperture, the medium format cameras give less depth of field. So, I find that for landscapes I shoot almost everything at f16 on the GFX. On my Canon, I would have shot at f8 or maybe f11.
I have a Canon 450D, and I want to upgrade to an R7, but I don't think buying a camera is worth that money, even if this is maybe my principal "non-existing hobby 'cause of the money" with FPV and MTB.
Few months ago I wanted to buy a medium format camera. I contacted Fujifilm and Hasselblad. one replied to me, but not really helpful reply, Fuji just ignored me. So I decided to buy the Nikon Z8. I know it is not the same, but I prefer the color of the Z8 than the R5
I am currently using the canon sx70hs and its great. But the problem with it is that all the focus when they made the camera was about the insane zoom it has, but it's lacking some resolution. So now I'm buying the Canon 250d for more sharp photos and I'm keeping the sx70hs for really far away photos.
I bought Canon 250d after 8 years of photography with my phone.. so it was a huge change for me.. and i got some budget lenses which are 18-55mm.. 50mm 1.8... and a 55-250mm and it works great for me.
I was a Canon user for 15 years (no complaints! )... and now using the Fuji GFX system and it is a game changer for my line of work. I can produce much higher quality images for a reduced editing time. I take gigapixel images... so that translates to less images per shot, less than half! On my Canon 5dsr, I would average 50 to 100 photos per image... and now it is 20 to 30.
I shoot a Micro Four Thirds camera(Olympus E-M1X) and a full frame camera (Nikon Z5). Eventually I want an APSC, a 1 inch sensor, and a medium format camera.
I shoot both crop and full frame digital, and 35mm and medium format film. My Mamiya RB67 has a 6cm x 7cm negative. I love it. I think what I like most about it is that it doesn’t even take batteries. No electronics. I am the only processor this camera has. I also have a 4”x5” large format, but it needs some TLC before I can put film in it.
How is the shutter lag? I used a Phase One camera with 50mp back in the studio photographing a ballet dancer. Beautiful image quality but the shutter lag for jumping/motion drove me crazy.
Can you recommend what kind of lens I should get, I have a rebel t6. I am only 17 year old and I am on a tight budget but I want to expanded my photography. I have the kit lenses.
The Fujifilm GFX series of cameras are all not Medium Format. It’s a format between Medium Format(eg. 60x70mm) and Full frame (24x36mm). Fujifilm doesn’t even call it Medium format, they call it Large format (43.8x32.9mm)
the greatest sportsphotos were shot with less than 5fps, so 8fps with that imagequality is a gift. as always in sportsphotography: knowing the sport is worth more than spray&pray with 20fps.
9:23 Seriously invest in a light meter (Sekonic L-858D ). Sync the light meter to camera’s sensor physically see camera’s dynamic range in a scene by using use the zone system to get it right in camera perfect every time 👍
I wish camera companies would stop acting like their stuff is cutting edge when in reality it is always about 10 years old. There is no reason that any camera can not be fast at 200mp with 18 bit depth. Some consumer FPGAs these days can play games, run ai loads, machine learning, etc. You can get a surprising amount of logic gates for very little money and have a reasonable clock rate. So why is reading sensor data so resource intensive?
How large do you print? Me too, so we're fine with 20 Mp. Whenever I need extra resolution - I use Topaz upscaling software. I'd never buy Fuji over Canon in their current state. And it's not because I'm not as sophisticated or rich as you are, it's because any masterpiece photo I've ever seen would not profit from becoming 100 Mp if it was already 20.
I’m currently shooting on a Nikon D5600 which is a 23.5mm x 15.6mm cropped sensor (APS-C type). My backup/second camera is a Cannon EOS Rebel which is also a slightly different type of cropped sensor.
people buy a camera for what they want and use...why does nobody actually compare apples to apples? why do they try to fudge numbers to try to make it look like large format? if 2 people are shooting and both use same lens. focal length/ fstop/ iso. then you get into dof/ and fov. that would help more people to decide what they would like to buy. ...i have never gone out with my gfx and went gee what do i need to do to make this look like cropped sensor? then keep the photos at their respective sizes and print or zoom in.
dude, what's the copper tone filter thing on your lens from iceland? I paused to look at & I see stepping marks on it lie, "3-4-5" is it some sort of polarizer or ND?
About the depth of field being different for different sensor sizes, this seems to be a myth originating from people, and commentators, not adjusting the aperture number for the sensor's crop factor (just as they would for a lens' focal length to get approximately the same field of view) You adjust the aperture number because the calculation that defines the aperature number involves the lens focal length (focal length/aperature diameter, aperature diameter is also referred to as the entrance pupil) If one adjusts the f stop by the crop factor, then the depth of fields, does not change for the different sensor sizes.
Hmm, I don't know why, but these pictures from medium format always seems to me naturally sharp and full of details in compare to 35mm, especially in landscape photos.
… I shoot 35 mm film with my Praktica DTL 3 … I like this camera very well, my medium film I shot with my Pentacon Six, great camera … my brother has an Zenza Bronica S2A … very cool camera … go on shooting film 😎📸
Well my favourite camera (and only interchangeable one) it the Lumix g7. I know its old but Im new to this hobby and it was a cheap alternative especially considering i don't have much money to spend on Photography and the lenses are cheaper than on other cameras. And i also really started to love the light and small body of it.
I use a Fujifilm xt-5 and a canon R6. while I was at school I had access to a PhaseOne camera and that thing was amazing! I want to get a medium format camera for portraits
i use both the Fuji GFX 100s and the Nikon Z8. The Fuji is my go to system for landscapes mostly because of the ratio and sensor; it takes me back to by days where I used 4x5. The reason I watched this video is that I'm considering replacing the 100s with the 100 II.
Oh, that's interesting. I have Z8 and consider switching to gfx, but I'm a hobbyist and do not shoot nor sport neither weddings or so. Portraits, landscapes, street, lifestyle. Could you explain for what purposes you choose Z8 and why not gfx?
Not quite, the fullframe cameras like Sony, Nikon and Canon have better auto focus and better focus tracking, but APSC camera is catch up on that aspect. But the cameras size are growing, Fujifilm latest APSC flag ship XH2s is almost the same weight and size as the Sony A7R5/4 or A1, Nikon Z8 is almost as heavy as Fujifilm GFX 100S/100 ii, the largest portrait prime for Fuji system is 110mm F2 ( there is a 250mm F4 but people rarely use this prime for portrait) . and it is about 1kg, the closest in focal length I know is either the 105mm F1.4 Sigma which weighs about 1.6 kg or 135mm F1.8s weighs close to 1kg. Medium format is a slower operating camera compares to any other camera and it is a less well rounded camera than the others.
The worst thing about any better camera system is that the ecosystem surrounding it gets increasingly more expensive. Medium format is the best out of any solution for photography just because of those raw, higher numbers, by far, but no normal folk will ever be able to afford lenses for it even if they get their hands on the camera. The most fun part about photography is gear and being stuck with 1-2 lenses because of how expensive they are isn't fun. To top it all off medium format doesn't have the lens selection a full frame camera system has (you don't even have the option of going vintage, most vintage lenses cover full frame sensor sizes) and there's no way you're finding compact & light lenses to go with your camera. Depth of field, resolution and noise signal all beat the crap out of a full frame though for sure. I have an A7 III, Xperia 5 III and hopefully a Samsung ex2f for fun soon. I really like playing around with light, color and depth of field which all benefit from having a full frame in my case, I do a lot of nature & street photography with low f lenses, in low light. A lot of telephoto stuff too.
I use a Canon EOS 6D Mark II with a Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS II USM lens. I like the extra reach over a 24/70, and given that I don't really do much macro or portrait photography, the f/4 aperture doesn't bother me. I mainly shoot between f/5.6 and f/8 anyway, as according to Google the sharpness starts taking a hit at f numbers higher than f/8. Also, I mainly do landscapes and street photography because of where I live, so higher f numbers are often needed.
I think people underestimate how much more natural the 4:3 aspect ration is for photos. FF is very cinematic with its 3:2 but framing feels way better with 4:3. ESPECIALLY when you shoot in portrait orientation. Turning a FF sideways shows how narrow the ratio is compared to 4:3
Got too many for fun. Use to shoot APS-C and m4/3 but sold them not long ago (miss my Fuji x100f). Shooting Film on 35mm, medium format (6x9) and large format (4in X 5in), and digital (Full frame Panasonic S1 and medium format - GFX 50sII).
A7IV as my main and A7III as my backup. Love the flexibility with glass I have through Sony. I also have the iPhone 15 Pro Max as my carry around but that’s not really all that worth mentioning….especially following my actual cameras and their thousands of dollars worth of glass.
