The camera you want to hate! Fujifilm GFX50 MKII 

This is the comment I was looking for. Someone who purchased recently and has similar use cases to me. I don’t shoot landscape, but I do shoot product and fashion, mostly in studio. I needed a photography workhorse. I went with the GFX50s ii over the Sony A7r V. The sensor size and film simulations were compelling. Another consideration is the release of the GF tilt shift lenses. Especially the 110mm t/s for product/macro. I’ll only have the kit lens to start, but I want to be ready to make the lens purchase without needing to make the body purchase at the same time. If the GFX 50s ii didn’t have the kit lens, I would have purchased the GFX 100s with the 55mm based on price considerations. I got the GFXs ii on Black Friday sale too. It just made sense lol. Mine arrives tomorrow so I am looking forward to getting hands on!

Thanks Steve.

Glad you enjoyed it and it was helpful. The GFX is an amazing system. No doubt!

Thanks!

Glad it helped.

So you were on the old TPN?

Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks

Thanks. Without the shutter speed dial, I use one of the control dials. I set it to control Shutter speed. The aperture is still on the lens, so that hasn't changed.

Paul, I appreciate the thought thorough response. Soo many people rush out to get the latest gear, even if it doesn't fit their budget or workflow.

Glad you enjoyed it and for the encouragement.

Enjoy!

Thanks for the comment.

Thank for the very down to earth and complete review and thank SG Roadie for his comment. Interestingly in the various reviews I don’t think this is stressed enough. Although I don’t know it for sure, my understanding is that there is not a newer sensor that could be used in this camera. Which I agree is a shame as I think there are advantages in a 50 versus an 100MP sensor in this format, including astrophotography, low light performance and the ability to be able to use vintage lenses that often do not have the optical performance to match the 100MP sense.

@@icogicog8287 thanks. Agree there seem to be no option for a 44x33 50mp sensor. Leica’s S3 offers a 61mp sensor at 45x30 aspect, and I don’t know which sensor they use…not Sony. I opted for the 50s II, because the 100s is overkill. And file handling the large files are a bother. Even with fairly large computers. With this sensor, I am not sure if the 50’s Low light performance is better than the 100’s BSI sensor. I have tried both, and feel perhaps the 100 is a bit cleaner, even though the photo sites are smaller.

They aren't removing it, just taking it off of the specialist bodies. The X-T series will continue to keep the design

That top screen is made with something similar to E-Ink tech. Functionally it’s always on. It doesn’t really draw power. It’s a bit like a kindle if you’ve ever owned one of those.

I have the 100s and I can tell you it doesn’t.

Thanks for watching.

I felt the same when I first started using it. But the reality was I had a lot of issues with my tilt adapter shorting out at the worst times. So now I used the flip screen. With this new screen it pulls straight out vertically. I can see the whole frame. I don’t miss the massive grip. This one works well for me.

Thank you for that correction.

Can’t say as I don’t shoot weddings.

Too low burst rate

@@Vinterloft yes that is an issue. But, remember medium format cameras are not designed to shoot action. But yes, this is an advantage of the 100s. But even that camera is slow compared to any APSC or full frame. This might be tackled with the upcoming XH1 stacked sensor.

Well, since the 50sII doesn’t have phase detection, I’d say the 100s.

@@MattBrandon Hi Matt - How did it fair out with the speed in normal use ? Nice Lemtosh in green by the way

@@powderedtoastman3093 I am impressed that you can tell the model of my glasses. lol As for the Af. I was not disappointed. It wasn't anything close to the 100s. But it did seem to be more responsive than the original 50s. My only beef is the same beef everyone has, the sensor. Yes, it's good, great even. But it is still old. But as I said, it is still a great upgrade.

@@MattBrandon Haha, I wear Moscot myself. Can’t go wrong. I was looking at the original 50s and it was quite slow for focusing when tested in store. Haven’t had a chance to test the 100s yet. Do you feel the lens motors are limiting the AF speed

@@powderedtoastman3093 Moscot you mean? I am sure the lens has to do with it. But the lenses are the same on the 100s and it is much faster. I am sure it has mostly to do with the phase detection vs contrast detection. But the 50sII is faster the 50s due to the newer processor. It’s much better than the one in the original.

What would you like to see? Give me your thoughts.

@@MattBrandon do vido bout new xf lensas

Not happening. Sensors are expensive to make. They have to wait for Sony t to o make It. Lots of sensors are thrown away from not being perfect. It’s called farming. Get rid of bad sensors keep hood ones. Failure rate higher the bigger the sensors hence more costly. Plus it’s illogical for it to be 6x9. You see how big the Fuji lenses are now. You see how expensive they are? Where is the market for lenses even bigger? You say all these things but you’ll always find a reason not to buy one. Critics like you don’t make sense but talk about some crazy film equivalent like somehow this is relevant in digital era. Digital has already surpassed film even smaller sensors. Look at how clean low light photos Is with super high isos.

@@Chris-ey7zy There always was and still is a market for high resolution photography. 35mm or full frame, was a miniature format, and the Fuji isn't that much bigger. Not only is true digital medium format achievable, I guarantee it will be made in the coming years. Lenses to cover the format are only big if they contain AF and image stabilisation, neither of which would be necessary in a studio-landscape camera.

@@borderlands6606 most people either shoot for Instagram or big posters. And the equipment that We have between Fuji and hasselblads are more than adequate. It won’t be long before Sony makes a 150mb. Why would they honestly need A bigger sensor? How big is the biggest printer able to print without it becoming a multiple paper for one image and how far back or close are people going to look at an image. With pixel shift on still objects , how much more details are honestly needed. Past a certain point these products will just be rendered anyways like ikea catalogs. Having bigger sensors creates such shallow depth of field who would want one. I mean commercially.

@@Chris-ey7zy The market is driven by novelty, not need. When costs come down people will see the benefit of large, high res sensors. I remember when 6mp was said to be all the resolution a photographer could reasonably need, and pixel count has been going up ever since. Photographers who shoot large format film cameras don't always print big, some of them even contact print. Especially with colour photography a 36" print on digital 6 x 9 would have a completely different appearance to one shot on full frame. Look at wartime 5x4 Kodachrome and compare to the 35mm version. No one outside a lab has seen such definition, so they don't yet know they want it.

@@borderlands6606 no one cares. I’ve shot 4x5. Mamiya 7 ii no one cares if it’s that different. You have lenses made with .95 full frame 50 mm to give you that shallow depth of field look. Tilt shift lenses. Etc. it’s not economically viable and no one wants to carry or use something that big. What’s the most popular camera today. The iPhone. Something you carry around. Maybe back in the day you got bragging rights by using big cameras but not anymore. The only people using these big 8x10 type of cameras today make tintypes or some ancient type of process. People want fast availability and easy. Photography is about sending messages. Creating a brand statement. Besides what computer do you need and who will develop a sensors that big. It’s definitely only something a government can afford. There are software today that stitches other peoples photos of same scene and gets a larger picture. We are not going bigger sensor. If anything multi sensor makes more sense.

..and those are all the reasons I liked it. The point was, I didn’t want to like the new form factor. If you watch the video you will see I really didn’t complain about anything significant.

I used MKII at the time as that was what everyone was calling it. That is what communicated. Technically isn't the GFX50 S2 either. It is the GFX50S II. It's really a matter of what communicates.

Your choice.

@@MattBrandon Of course it is duh 🙄