Canon shooter here and just picked up a Fujifilm X-T4 for street photography. Fell in love with it and found out about the Fuji Medium formats. Currently have a guitar listed for sale to fund the new to me Fuji GFX 50s.
For anything that isn't fast paced, the larger the format, usually equals better image files, plus add some great color science. Not a necessity for making beautiful photos but a joy to work with. Have fun with your new gear.
Hey Thomas, I definitely agree! Some things like AF are noticeably slower, but most of what I do is slow and deliberate anyway 👍. I’m looking forward to using it for many years!
I stumbled across this video and thank you for your information. I also sent you a message on Instagram and followed you on Instagram with a more specific question. That was a bit long for here but yeah if you could answer that question that would be great and I've subscribed to your channel. I'm currently using a Fujifilm XT5 which I absolutely love ...
I've been contemplating upgrading to mirrorless from my current 5DSR. However, as I enjoy photographing landscapes as well as wildlife, I'm currently leaning towards keeping the 5DSR and adding Canon's APS-C sensor R7 for wildlife subjects - its AF looks amazing. It's great to hear that the venerable 5DSR can hold its own with the Fuji and the R5! Thanks for taking the trouble to record and share your findings.
Hey Pete! The 5dsr is still a powerhouse and absolutely worth keeping as a primary landscape camera. The other two have better aspects in some ways (image quality with the Fuji, AF with the R5), but not worth upgrading if the 5dsr still works for your needs. That said the R7 would be a massive upgrade for wildlife I can imagine! I don’t ever photograph wildlife so I plan to keep the 5dsr for the rest of its life 👍
Thank you! And I still love my 5dsr just as much as the first day I got it. It’s unlike any other digital camera I’ve used prior to the 50s II, and I won’t ever part with it 👍
The Fuji GFX is a PHENOMENAL camera system! Love seeing such a great detailed comparison of this camera and a couple others of similar caliber. Having your real world use as an example also really helps give the viewer confidence. I think you're going to love the Fuji the more you get to know it! Thanks for sharing, my friend!
Thanks, and glad to hear! After watching your videos and hearing firsthand accounts from some other photo friends who moved from the 5DSR to the 50s, I was thinking that yeah it'll probably be an improvement. But... I was blown away at how big of an improvement it really is! If Fuji had a longer telephoto zoom comparable to the 100-400, I'd probably move over entirely.
@@JudeStreicherPhoto my thoughts exactly. Introducing the 20-35 was a huge step though! Just going to wait for some price rebates though because that one is $$$
Very interesting to see the yellow shift on the R5, which I also own. In some way that would explain why I have sometimes adjusted the hue of the yellows/oranges towards a deeper orange as I felt it was just a little to yellow in some of my photos.
Hey Russ! Yeah I thought it was a strange result the first time I took them out to compare (no video the first 2 tries), but after that I realized it was a trend and I wanted to share. The R5 is still awesome but I have found myself having to edit the images much more than either of the other two. I wonder if the change in color profile was in response to earlier online complaints that Canons leaned too “red.” 🤷♂️
At f/10 on a FF format you are already see softness from diffraction, so a MF sensor at f/11 will have a clear benefit from that aspect, not neccessarily from the resolution itself.
Hey Marek! Great point and there is some truth to that. The 5DSR diffraction limited aperture is f/8 (where diffraction just barely starts), and the R5 is f/9, so I don't think that shooting at f/10 has as big of an impact as say f/16 or f/22. The GFX has a DLA of f/11 and I actually shot at f/13, so it should still be comparable between the three. I wasn't setting out to be super scientific but rather see how each compares when using as I would normally, and f/8 - f/10 is what I have been using on the 5DSR to get sufficient depth of field. Hope this helps! I think the bigger surprise for me wasn't necessarily the sharpness but more the color accuracy.
Thank you for all the work you've put into this - well done. Canon 5DSr is unbeatable price to performance ratio wise, both other options are just way too expensive IMHO. Have a good day. Also, if I may ask, how large do you usually print? Greetings from Czech Republic.
Thanks! I definitely agree that the 5DSR is definitely the best value for money landscape photography camera. It has it's own limitations and quirks that need managing, but the results can truly be incredible. My typical print sizes are 8x10 inch (A4) and 30x40 inch (A0), strangely enough. Some 11x14 (A3) and 16x20 (A2), but those are less common. Hope you're doing well in CR!
Quite an interesting comparison. Cameras have come a long way in the past decade, especially in focusing and video capabilities, thanks to mirrorless and image processing tech. But when it comes to resolution and color science, the progress hasn't been as noticeable. Fuji's got some charm, but it's not a huge leap ahead, in my book. I still think it falls short of the incredible detail and color you get with 6x9 film. Seriously, give medium format Ektar or Portra a try, and you'll see what I mean. And don't get me started on wide to ultra-wide lenses on full-frame digital cameras. They just don't do it for me, no matter how good the gear is. Stitching images helps, but it's not always practical. Meanwhile, wide angles on medium format cameras? Now, that's a different story - miles better! Would I go for the Fuji? Nah, not my cup of tea. I'll stick with my trusty 5DS R and R6 for digital stuff and keep medium format photography to film. Digital medium format still has a ways to go, in my opinion.
All valid points. I haven't given MF film a try yet, but maybe someday. The high cost of film and processing has been a hangup of mine. I slightly disagree with you on the improvement of digital MF. I can definitely see a pretty substantial improvement over even the superb 5DSR images. Whether that's enough of a reason to have another body and set of lenses, well that's something I'm still wrestling with :)
Great video. I also recently picked up a great deal on a used GFX50S II w/35-70mm lens and absolutely love it. I also picked up a used GF 23mm for the wide end. This 50S II has quickly become my favorite camera to shoot with, especially for nature and landscape pics. I'm using an old Pentax 150mm 645 lens for the long end which is working quite well but often just use my XT5 with the 70-300mm when I need the reach. (I may end up getting the GF 100-200mm). The GFX system is amazing!
Thanks Jim! I’ve seen some truly remarkable deals on that kit recently. Glad you grabbed one and it’s become your favorite as well! I’m going to adapt my 100-400 for longer focal lengths and should be all set. Enjoy!
Great spot for some photography. Thanks for demostrating each camera differences. Always enjoy your photography and travels. Can't wait for the next one. 19:13 is my favorite.
Hi Brian, I really like the tempo of your videos. I'm predominately a Wildlife Photographer but I'd like to try my hand at some Landscape photography when I move from the UK to Canada this summer. I've a 5DSR which doesn't get used much for the main part of my work as I shoot with the R3, 1DX Mk III and R7 but the 5DSR will get used for more of my landscape work. Looking forward to seeing more from you. All the best Rich - Love the Viz, I have two of them and they are just the best dogs. 👌
Hey Richard, thanks for the comment and glad you like the videos! You've got some great wildlife cameras there for sure, though they're definitely ones that have never crossed my mind from a landscape photo perspective! I'm glad you have a 5DSR that you can dust off when heading out. It's probably the best value for money landscape camera despite it's quirks and limitations. Those make it more fun though (I think at least). I'll pass your comment on to River to let her know she has another fan. She's such a sweet girl, and definitely loves the attention! I'm planning to get out with her more this summer.
@@brianbeattyphotography Lol, yep not yet best choice…. I did use it for some wildlife, in the right conditions the detail is phenomenal! But, speed, low light, high ISO, FPS.. the list goes in but for macro and landscape I’m glad I’ve got one. Yep, mine are fans for sure. Looking forward to seeing her staring role, mine have been in a couple, but far too noisy😂All the best & keep up the good work 👍
Next time I'm in CO I want to let you borrow my 5ds so you can compare them. I wonder if the anti-anti-aliasing filter is what is killing the comparison. Also, the OG GFX 50s would have been a more fair comparison since it came out closer to the 5ds/5dsr.
I can definitely add the 5Ds to the mix! Would be cool to have another data point. I disagree with you on the OG 50s point though. Yes it came out at the same time but the 50s ii has the same sensor 👍
Oh there’s definitely an impact in terms of burst, processing time, probably the film sims, EVF, IBIS, all of which the processor supports that makes it a huge improvement with a better user experience. I was looking just at the color/image though which should be the same since it’s just a RAW read of the sensor. You’ve got me curious now though about the 5Ds!
When comparing fuji to 5DSR, did you account for diffraction? I mostly use my lenses for shots of this type at around f5, since after that I see loss of sharpness on 5DSr due to diffraction, which is confirmed by DXOmark data. The key is to have good lenses of course, the ones that don't drag their corners up untif F8 or so. Since Fujis pixels and sensor are bigger, the Fuji suffers from diffraction much less. I believe that 5DSr could have held its own better if the lens was a bit more open in your test.
Great point! And I did... somewhat haha. When I shoot with either Canon body, I tend to stick around f/8 to f/10 depending on the type of DOF needed. While I could shoot below the 5DSR's diffraction limited aperture of ~f/7.1, but then I could potentially need to focus stack to get more pieces of the scene in focus, which adds a lot to the workflow vs. just stopping down to f/9. At that point, any diffraction is barely noticeable, at least in my experience. I have noticed it once stopping down beyond f/11, so I use that as my smallest aperture. If anything, stopping down should've benefitted the R5, which shouldn't be diffraction limited until f/9 or later. Based only on the diffraction and pixel size, the R5 should be sharper, but it isn't (excluding lens impact). I'd say this has more to do with the AA filter than anything. Yes, you are correct that the GFX and it's bigger pixels allow stopping down further. I could do a follow up with wider apertures at some point that could address your points.
@@brianbeattyphotography thanks! it would be interesting to watch, I am sure of that. also, I sincerely believe you could have gotten away with f5.6 on the 5DSr in your first faraway-snowy-mountain shot, if you had placed the center of DOF on the closest trees of that forest. I, as a user of 5DSr, also find that demosaicing with DXO Pureraw 3 gives me better detail than in Lightroom, for some reason. I also denoise the files with their deep prime xd algorithm, which doesn't kill detail at all and lets me raise the shadows without noise showing up. I dunno how they did that, but the detail is neither sharpened nor lost when denoising.
@@sunlbx wow that sounds awesome. I'll have to check those programs out. The DR is one of the only downsides to the 5DSR in my opinion. It's still an excellent camera even by 2024 standards! I definitely never plan to part with mine :)
@@brianbeattyphotography it's one program, dxo pureraw, the current version is 4. i find that the sharpening in the program is over the top. it is advised to only use it to turn your .cr2 files into denoised .dng files (still raw) for further editing
thank you for doing this comparison. I wish people would do more videos like this: same images side by side zoomed at 100%. I wish there was something like "sony a7r iv vs fugi gfx 50s vs canon 5dsr". cheers
Nice comparison. I shoot with two R6's but I'm on the edge of buying 50R or 5DSR as my personal high megapixel camera and that's how I came across your video 🙂
Awesome! The R6 I’ve heard is a great camera, but the 50mp options definitely are a huge bump in resolution. The good thing with the 5dsr is if you have EF lenses you can use them on both bodies. The 50R though has the same sensor as the 50s ii and the images were unreal. Hope you found the comparison helpful!
Okay, Awesome video. Thanks for making it! Now, I'm not trying to be a party killer and yeah, I totally get that RU-vid can have some horrible video compression so what do I know, I mean, I didnt see the live comparison on your monitor. But the R5 looks like a sloppy mess in some of the fine details compared to the 5DS R. Even after you pulled the shadows. And no, I don't own a 5DS R Lol... so I have no foot in the race. Just sayin. Fuji.. definitely in a different league. Maybe some day. :)
Hey Jeffrey, thanks for the comment and glad you enjoyed the video! There’s definitely some YT compression going on, but the 5dsr is better than the R5 for fine detail (even though almost every time I say that I can hear people screaming at me through their monitors!). I also like the colors of the 5dsr compared to the R5 more too. If it wasn’t for the awesome video specs, eye AF for portraits, and IBIS, I’d probably sell it. And yes, the 50s is stunning!
In RAW, I dont get the colour story. The colours you see has to do with the sensor, but also with the profile you apply to the raw data. So if you create the correct profile, the colour can be whatever you want it to be. You can fix it by editing, but it should actually be a raw thing. But the image resolving is real and DR obviously also. It is a pity that one cannot really see what you describe, I imagine because of compression on youtube. But when you zoom in, yeah I see what you are on about. Good to know. Thank you, this is valuable.
that’s a fair point about colors, but I’ve found that the closer a camera is to what I really see at the time, then I end up liking the image more with minimal editing. It’s possible I could get similar colors with the R5 by adjusting the hues of each channel individually, but that’s a ton more work as I end up needing to mask many different areas too to isolate where the colors need changed.
Thanks for the great comparison video! I am still shooting with my 5DsR and waiting for the R5 mark 2 release to see how it turns out. Looking at your results, I'm not really expecting a lot when it comes to pure resolution, but the color depth and DR should definitely be a major upgrade there. Furthermore, reflecting on your way of capturing the images for resolution comparison... much of it must come down to the lenses you shoot with, and at f/10 you are definitely in the land of diffraction. It starts to kick in at f/8 already. Myself I shoot mostly with Zeiss Milvus lenses, and they tend to be very sharp. That could perhaps really get it close to what the GFX provides (resolution-wise, of course there is no match in terms of signal-to-noise...).
Thank you! Yes I considered the diffraction impact a while after completing this one. I’ll probably do another one at f/6-f/7 for all of them to see if there’s a difference. Sharpness and detail aside, there’s no comparison when it comes to the colors, so I doubt that’ll change. Keep using that 5dsr! One of the best cameras still IMO
Then also comparing an exclusive prime like say the Milvus 2/135 or the 1.4/85 to a zoom lens might not be exactly fair either, although I heard that the GFX lenses have very good optical quality - and your results show that quite clearly. The 5DsR does not have much color depth compared to the GFX, but the rumors say that the R5 mark 2 should have 16 stops of DR, which to me implies using 16-bit colors... which could help things a bit, although the rules of physics still apply... a smaller sensor is still a smaller sensor, and its prerequisites will probably still be inferior to that crop MF sensor of the GFX. :)
@@mk0x55 Good points. I've considered putting my 35mm 1.4L II on all three cameras (I have the adapter for GFX) just to purely compare sensor performance, but that feels a bit pedantic and I'd never actually use that particular lens when shooting a scene. So, I have decided to stick with the remarkable GF zooms compared to the best EF zoom I have (24-70 ii). Interesting thought about the R5-2, will be curious to see what they end up doing.
@@brianbeattyphotography Very true, and I also think there is the issue of lens-sensor-match. A lens fitting perfectly an older Canon body (the EF mount ones) might not fit the GFX very well with regards to what angle the light hits the sensor at its different positions... all that potentially affecting the signal-to-noise ratio... Not to mention the vignetting of a full-frame lens on a medium format sensor - having a choice, nobody sensible would probably pick that match for anything beyond pure experimentation. That all makes it essentially impossible to make a completely fair comparison, and that fairness in itself probably has no value anyway, considering the camera systems are just tools to help us realize our photographic visions and bring forth some aesthetic value. Your test put the best comparable lenses fitting each system (perhaps except the RF-version), and the results speak for themselves. Then of course if someone wants to max the resolution potential of say the 5DsR system at the price of sacrificing some portability, versatility and other aspects, one might get a bit closer to the resolution coming from the GFX, but it will cost in different terms (like needing to haul 4-5 different lenses instead of 2 on a trip, do all the shifting in the field, etc.) - most photographers would probably not want to go that route. Another funny aspect to mention is that at best, I view my pictures at 4K, so all that micro-resolution really only helps me if I need to crop something hard enough to come close to 100% zoom on the actual image pixels.
Thanks Doug! Agree 100%. All are excellent, with MF for when quality is everything. I do find the colors slightly better too, but there’s not a bad choice!
I know it's a fair few months old now, but thanks for doing this video. Very useful. I watched a video recently where a photographer compared an APS-C, Full Frame, and Medium Format and concluded there wasn't much difference between the three, but their "test" was rather biased toward making the FF and MF similar. They even used some AI software on the FF image to make it 'comparable'. Thanks for doing a real-world test and not trying to goose it one way or another.
Hey Peter, thanks for the comment! I'm glad you found it useful. And I think it'll be a relevant topic for a while now, at least until a whole new crop of 50-ish MP cameras come out. I watched a few comparisons and didn't really find any that were particularly helpful (or straightforward, as you said), so I felt compelled to do my own unbiased comparison. I didn't really have a vested interest in any of them doing better or worse. If the R5 was easily the best, then I would've gladly sold both the 5DSR and GFX - really just wanted to find the best option with no editing done to obscure the results. Maybe next time I'll add a print comparison into the video to really make things interesting...
Thank you Brian for sharing your very good comparison of these 3 models. I was pleased to see that the 5DSR held up well against the R5. I think out of this that I will be bracketing more or taking an extra image for the shadows though. So no plans on upgrading to the R5 but the GFX 50s II is a different story. I ddin't expect to see that much difference in image quality and color rendering. Looking forward to more content on the 5DSR & GFX 50s II.
Thanks for the thoughts John! If I didn’t do video work or portraits, I would probably sell the R5. It’s an amazing camera and the perfect hybrid option, but when I have the time to slow down for landscape photography I almost always go for the 5dsr unless it’s a crazy dynamic range scene, then I’ll use the R5. Bracketing does usually solve this though and is a smart move. And if I were starting from scratch, the 50s II would be at the top of my list. The images are simply stunning! Even compared to the already excellent R5 and 5dsr.
@@brianbeattyphotography Thank you Brian for all that (excellent) work, very helpful. You mention that you will keep (using) the 5DSR and I wonder why? In which situations would you use it and for what reason? (Given that you have the 50s II.) Please let me add further questions: You mention above that you prefer the R5 for portrait work. Would you not recommend the 50s II for portraits? How is the difference to the R5 (IQ, handling, etc)?
@@zvitkovits hey Chris, great questions. For the 5DSR, it feels like the sturdiest, most indestructible camera of the three. Anytime weather is really bad, I trust it's weather sealing the most. I also have the most "complete" lens lineup with my EF lenses, ranging from the 11-24, 24-70, 70-200, and 100-400, so any focal length I want to use is covered. The 50s is great, but I do still have to adapt the 100-400, which is my favorite lens and comes with limitations in doing so. For the R5, the autofocus, tracking, face/eye detection is unbelievably good. It's great for portraits with moving subjects, and I have f/1.4 primes (35 & 85) that really shine on it for both portraits and my video work. Then there's the video side, which is by far the best of the three. I do think the 50s would be great for portrait work, especially if able to slow down. But the dedicated GFX lenses like the 80mm & 110mm are extremely expensive and I'm very happy with my 1.4 primes already. Hope this helps!
@@brianbeattyphotography Thank you for your immediate reply, Brian! Totally makes sense. Background for my questions ... I also have excellent EF glass and using the 5D4. I mostly do portraits and documentary and (financially) couldn't justify an R5 upgrade. (Besides the fact that i prefer the OVF.) The 5D4 does what I need good enough. For my private enjoyment I might do landscape / nature and thought of adding a 5DSR since they are fairly affordably on the used marked. But watching you video in comparison to the 50s II I am not sure anymore if I want to spend the money for the 5DSR. I guess the difference is also visible on large prints, not only on your excellent screen?
@@zvitkovits the 5DSR is so good, I'd probably recommend it over the 50S in your case. Yeah the 50s is better and I'd get it if I started over, but with EF lenses it's worth the step up in quality for the current price in my opinion. I got my 5DSR for about 1/3 of the price of the 50s II, which is crazy value. I also won't sell it because I don't think I'd get enough back to justify parting with it
Just bought a almost new 5DS with 600 shutter hits for about $750 USD & im more then satisfied & that Fuji price tag is still out of my reach right now
Man, now that’s a steal! I got my 5dsr for $950 and thought that was awesome. You’re going to love it! From what I’ve heard, the difference between the 5Ds and 5dsr is pretty minimal. And both are close in performance to medium format. Save the Fuji for a goal someday but don’t feel like you’re missing out with that great camera in your bag 👍
Brother/Friend, Instead of telling to "take a look" , if possible, please write the name of the camera and image in the clicked photo. I thing if the name of the camera body is written in the clicked photo we will be happy to see the image and the shadows and the colours. Hope you will do that, because for us ( we are very new to camera) we can observe from our eyes also. Waiting for your reply.
Thanks for the comparison. These types of comparison are always difficult. The fuji was better sharpness, next 5dsr, and lastly r5 - not surprising with aa on r5 and bigger lens on fuji.Regarding colours, I normally would shoot AEB and blend HDR with single to solve the colour/details in shadow making the 5dsr equal to fuji for colours and dynamic range. But for me (having transitioned from 5dsr to r5), I am unlikely to go to fuji because r5 is a better general camera and it works with my 600f4 and ts17/ts24 [with shift being more important than body iq]. And the weight and cost of fuji make it only suitable for near car shooting and I like backpacking shooting. So fuji wins but I am not inclined. In fact I have ordered the r8 (24mpx) so I can hike further. As Ansel said - f8 and be there. And Kelby added 'with a tripod".
I agree that the R5 is probably the best “all rounder” of the three. And, I also use the same technique as you with the 5dsr for larger range when needed, but I’ve run into trouble with dynamic scenes like coastal images. Wave movements make blending very difficult with the 5dsr, where the huge range of the GFX will be much better. I’ll also challenge you on the weight side as well… the 35-70 and GFX is much lighter than both my 5dsr or R5 with the 24-70 2.8ii that I typically use. The wide angle option is the same weight, as is the 100-200. There’s definitely sacrifices, like focal range and aperture, but weight isn’t one of them (surprisingly!)
Nicely done. What film profile on the Fuji were you using in your comparisons (that is, did you compare the out of camera JPGs) ? Or, did you process all RAW files for your comparisons, and if so, was the processing influenced by any profiles?
Thanks! No film simulation on the Fuji image. All of these are as close to the raw image as I could leave them, with just some very minor contrast applied to make them look less flat. No color corrections, sharpening, or other processing done.
Great comparison, haven't seen anything with this much detailed explanation! I have a D750 and have been thinking of switching to either Z7ii or GFX 50s II mainly for weekend hiking trip landscape, having a hard time deciding lol
Thank you! I had a similar though process when considering adding the R5 to my 5dsr. New tech certainly is appealing! Even after that though I couldn’t resist medium format 😎
Thanks Bryan! Could not agree more. I thought long and hard about parting with the 5dsr, but I can’t bring myself to do it. Probably because I have my ideal canon lens lineup and am dealing with limitations on the GFX side a bit. But I can definitely see why you’d jump on a 50r deal. It’s such a great camera with unreal images! I can’t wait to get out more with the 50s.
I’ve noticed that color shift even with my Eos R. My 5dsr always seems to have better color. When held next to each other, the R always feels a little “anemic” or sickly for lack of a better term. Seems the R5 suffers the same fate.
Ah man, I used to shoot on the R for a while, and I didn’t even notice that when I first compared it to the 5dsr. I’ll have to go back and take a closer look. Wonder why the colors seem a bit unusual on the mirrorless bodies? I’d be curious to see if anyone has looked at the R6
Great job dude. As expected. I shoot the 5DSR and am heading to the 50sii as well. Wife will keep the 5DSr in her bag. Fuji is the way for accurate and flat film like renditions. Really great stuff man. Keep it up. We are relocating to Reno so maybe we will see ya out on the mountain man.
Thanks James! I'm glad to hear the 5DSR is still staying in the family! Despite it's limitations I still absolutely love it. I have a hunch too that it's more weather-resistant (even though I have no way to prove that) since it's such a sturdy brick. I'm sure I'll ping-pong back and forth between which of the two I want to use on any given day. That said, the colors and detail in the 50s II are simply unreal! You're going to love it. While I think that I could still edit the 5DSR image with a little more sharpening and color adjustments, it's nice to have a much closer starting point with the GFX images. The raw files are also way more flexible too, so the ability to shoot in tough light with just one image is nice too. The 5DSR was a challenge when shooting at the beach for example, when the waves would change between exposures, etc. Ugh. Enjoy the mountains, and definitely send me a message if you ever end up in CO!
Excellent comparison. I've always been intrigued by medium format. Actually, I've considered buying a medium format film camera. However, I am currently very satisfied with my trusty Nikon D850. Thanks for sharing, Brian!
Thanks Michael! It's always been so tempting but financially way too out of my price range. When the 50s II started popping up with a kit lens on the used market for less than what the R5 was when I bought it, I knew the time had come! I'd considered medium and larger format film as well, but given the unpredictability in the costs of film and development, I've decided to stick with the digital options. The D850 is a superb camera, and if I'd started out with Nikon that's the one I would have and would probably have even less interest in medium format. Really, the draw was better color and DR than the 5DSR, which when I put in tough situations can struggle. I know the D850 kills it in those scenarios though, so I'd be very happy with it!
Great video man! Congrats on the new system, looks like you'll be able to make some great photos with it! Great in-depth review of all of the systems. I am still on the R5 but interested to see what the R5 MK II has up its sleeve. Hits all the marks for me at the moment and I just moved to a second R5 body for my vlogs (I was using an R6) but man the image quality looks so good on the Fuji! Excellent work as always!
Thanks as always Jared! It’ll definitely have a good purpose for sure, but I doubt I’ll end up using it exclusively. The R5 is still a killer camera. I’m glad you grabbed one for video work! The video abilities are unreal. It’s the perfect hybrid in my opinion. If the R5 II improves in any way it’ll be hard to believe because the R5 is so good.
Really interesting Brian and thanks for taking the trouble to make these comparisons 😀 . I’m an R5 user and very happy with it being a hybrid shooter, retired and feeling better with its light weight compared to my D series set up 😀.
Thanks Chris - I’m glad you liked it! And yes the R5 is the perfect hybrid camera and the light weight is awesome compared to the chunky D bodies. The R5 is also probably the most technically advanced camera I’ve used, and the functionality (EVF, AF, weight, IBIS) is easily the best of the 3!
Just an observation .. Why did you not have the fuji on a tripod as well and have both cameras with remote shutters so images can be taken at thee exact same time . Changing camera does not offer an honest comparison ...
I thought about that, but only have 2 tripods. So I wouldn't have been able to compare all 3 at the exact same moment. I gave the change in time slight consideration when comparing, but each image was within ~5 seconds of each other (I actually took all 3 prior to filming so they would be as close as possible). When swapping them out I didn't move the main tripod at all, so the composition is identical. And - I always use remote shutter :)
Exactly! They’re all amazing tools for sure, and each has its own set of strengths. Not one of them is a bad choice for landscape photography. Might not recommend the GFX for sports though!
smart move. Especially with the wealth of lens options available for full frame cameras, it's definitely the better choice for wildlife, let alone the better AF. I'd really only use the GFX for slow, deliberate landscape photography or for still portraits
Somewhat true. Images at the same ISO and aperture will be better on the GFX, yes. But that said, the f/1.2 and 1.4 lenses available for the R5/5dsr, as well as the f/2 and f/2.8 zooms will definitely be better low light performers than the options for the GFX (especially compared to the f/4 zoom options). There are the f/1.7 and f/2 primes for the GFX, but we have to look at the whole system when saying one is a better performer in low light than the other, which in my experience would be the R5 over the GFX
@@brianbeattyphotography of course if we're talking about the lense aperture. But I'm talking about physics of the sensor itself. Nevertheless, I'm still quite surprise how much detail and color are retained on gfx handling low light situation
Canon's 100-400 IS II covers the entire GFX sensor with only slight vignetting in corners, users report in forums, when the rear baffle is pulled out with just two fingers. The 11-24mm is hamstrung because of its built-in petal shaped hood though, sadly.
Yep great points. The 100-400 is my favorite lens, and thankfully covers well enough for my needs. I picked up the adapter and can confirm it does very well. Only the 4:3 view has harder vignetting, while the other aspect ratios work perfect. Even in 4:3, cropping 3-4% of a smaller 4:3 is a small price to pay to keep using this one with the great reach. I was initially excited to use the 11-24 too, but it does have that odd vignetting pattern once zoomed out past 13mm. But the bigger problem I had with it was even though it covers the sensor for a lot of the very wide focal lengths, the edges and corners were more smeary than I was ok with. So, I ended up getting the 20-35mm. I guess I could always take the 11-24 along and use 35mm mode if needing that ultra wide view, but I’d rather just take the 5dsr in that case.
@@brianbeattyphotography Wow, I just found your channel last night, and track with your ideas! I didn't realize you owned the GFX, and are using some Canon lenses on it. I shot a 5DsR for years, but gave up landscape photography until just now, since discovering the GFX 100S. I was so disappointed that no one, including Panasonic came out with an oversized sensor for 35mm, so we could shoot in different aspect ratios other than 3:2 natively. Now we have our oversized sensor with the GFX 100S, and all of the Canon EF lenses work on it; though, composition may be clumsy when the image circles don't cover GFX's entire MF sensor. I haven't bought the GFX 100S yet, but will soon. I've been reading and watching everything I can about the camera, and what can be used on it. I plan on using my Canon 100-400 II, the Fuji kit lens, 35-70mm, and the Canon 16-35mm f/4. Your Fuji 20-35mm is probably sharper, and looks sweet, but I'm hoping the 16-35mm f/4 is sharp enough, and covers enough of the sensor. I'm okay with having to crop a bit for vignetting. I've compared both of the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 lenses, and they don't seem to do any better, including with vignetting, according to lens reviews (The Digital Picture and OpticalLimits). I read in a forum that the rear baffle can be pulled out of the 16-35mm f/4 also, which is supposed to at least help with the long end. The 16-35mm will give the wider field of view, and can use filters. If we need to go wider, the Laowa 15mm shift lens looks like a winner, and covers the entire image circle of the GFX. We can shoot with it from anywhere from 11.5mm and longer (through cropping). It has the bulbous front lens, so no filters. Did you remove the baffle from the rear of the 100-400 II? I've read in forums that vignetting is only slight then at 4:3. DPReview's forum (soon to be gone, apparently) shows how easy it is to pull it out. I've also found out how ugly the shadow detail is with the 5DsR. The GFX 100S' dynamic range should be a dream! I'm also interested in shooting in the 65:24 ratio, and have longed to compose it in camera, which the 100S does with their size options. For astro, shooting the night sky, it's disappointing that all of the best astro 14mm and wider, fixed length lenses for 35mm have the built-in, undetachable petal shaped lens hood, which will only allow them to be shot in 3:2 and probably no wider than 35mm. I hadn't thought that your 11-24mm would be useable on the GFX at all, but since it's a zoom, the lens hood is probably designed to only work best at 11mm, so above 13mm it's useable. Sad to hear the edges aren't sharp. I'm wondering if the Laowa 15mm can be used for night sky photography wide open. From everything I've read, it seems possible, but isn't tack sharp. Keith Cooper has shown in some of his RU-vid videos in which he's reviewed some shift lenses on the GFX that Sharpen AI can be used to clean up edges in extreme wide angle lenses. He says the edge blur acts like motion blur. You could maybe try that with your 11-24mm. It's probably in his Canon TS-E 17mm and/or this Laowa 15mm shift lens reviews on RU-vid. I'm hoping that Fuji will offer more Image Sizes for the different aspect ratios on their lcd besides Large, Medium and Small, especially between L and M, so if we're using lenses that vignette, it will be easier to compose. But I'm willing to use lenses that vignette regardless - being so excited to no longer be stuck in 35mm 3:2. Since photography is supposed to be artistic, I don't know why it's been okay to only capture the 3:2 portion of our lenses. Now we have artistic FREEDOM with the GFX 100S! God bless!
I haven’t modified any of my lenses. Doesn’t feel right to take part of it out. I’d rather just deal with a little vignetting! And unfortunately the 16-35 vignettes a fair bit. But, throw the 100s into 35mm mode and you’ll still get a 61mp image! More than the 5dsr has already.
@@brianbeattyphotography It does seem pretty drastic to pull out the rear baffle, but I don't see anyone regretting having removed it. It could affect resale value, but I see it all as win win. Being able to compose in the entire lcd would be a huge benefit; though, I'm willing to use lenses that don't cover the entire sensor if need be too. I'm going to talk to our local camera repairman and get his advice. Someone said some shiny parts maybe covered by baffle, so I'm wondering if a felt tip marker is okay to darken them, if it is necessary to do so. I want to be able to shoot in any aspect ratio, so I'm not very interested in shooting in 35mm mode, 3:2, unless 400mm isn't enough of a reach, and it has to be cropped anyway. The Medium size settings can also be used, which look a little bit tighter than 35mm mode. If the 16-35mm f/4 covers the sensor enough so 65:24 doesn't vignette, with the baffle removed, I'd be a happy camper, since it's a difficult format to shoot in for me, since I've never had a camera that I could compose images in it. The only subject I would use the 5DsR for would probably be birds, which I don't shoot often, but have found 5 fps fast enough for what I do. Do you mind telling me what Canon EF to Fuji GF adapter you're using, and if you recommend that one? I'm leaning towards getting the Fotodiox, but haven't heard enough about it or the other adapters to know for sure. The main thing is probably that they focus well enough. I imagine the weakness of using adapted lenses for landscape, instead of only Fuji lenses will probably be the lack of weatherproofing at the adapter, so shooting in the rain or snow would require covering the lens and camera. I like shooting macro flowers too, which is sometimes in light rain. The Canon 100 f/2.8 IS macro is supposed to cover the GFX's entire sensor. I hope things are working out with your dog as your shooting buddy!
The same one. But outdated according to who? It’s still top of the line across almost any metric. Just because of the age doesn’t mean it’s not a great performer.
