Fuji Guys GFX unboxing at Fuji Guys youtube
Do Not Buy the Fujifilm GFX…
DPReview published a controversial article about the GFX, where they basically end up saying that the GFX is not worth the money extra compared to FF cameras. In short:
- Low Light noise performance: Current Full Frame systems offer faster lenses than the GFX, so you’ll get less low light noise with FF. Moreover the FF sensor technology like Sony’s back-illumited sensor allows to catch up with MF since “sensor is better able to use the light projected onto it“
- Base ISO Dynamic Range: The Nikon has the ISO 64 mode. “Each pixel can hold more total charge before clipping, relative to equally-sized pixels on any other sensor in a consumer camera. That means it can tolerate a longer exposure at ISO 64, longer enough (at least 2/3 EV, or 60% more light) to capture as much total light as the 68% larger sensor in the GFX 50S exposed at its base ISO (100). […] noise performance at ISO 64 rivals many current medium format cameras their base ISOs“
- Shallow Depth-of-Field: The GFX lenses are not as fast as the fastest FF lenses, so they have less shallow DOF
- Resolution: Resolution-wise, they simply can’t imagine anything better than the Canon 5DS R paired with truly stellar lenses. However, they also add that “larger sensors will always tend to out-resolve smaller sensors with equivalent glass. And so this is the area where we most expect to see an advantage to the Fujifilm system, especially over time as we approach 100MP, and beyond. It’s probably easier for a F1.8 prime paired with the GFX 50S to out-resolve a F1.4 prime on a 5DS R when both systems are shot wide open, but whether that will be the case (or if Fujifilm will even make a F1.8 or brighter prime for the system) remains to be seen. I certainly don’t think it would be a cheap combination.”
… You Just Need 3 Top Full Frame Cameras to Perform like 1 Fujifilm GFX :-)
Ok, this paragraph has quite a provocative title, but it’s actually inspired by the words of DPReview itself (more below)
I’ve seen many comparisons called “unfair” (and I like unfair comparisons). But I’ve never seen this: put together the strengths of 3 different high-end Full Frame cameras (Sony A7rII, Canon 5DSr, Nikon D810) and then compare it all with one single camera, the Fujifilm GFX.
- The GFX has a terrific resolution? Don’t worry, the Canon 5DSr comes close to it (really?).
- The GFX has a terrific base ISO dynamic range? Don’t worry, the Nikon D810 comes close to it (got to check this out soon).
- The GFX has a terrific noise performance? Don’t worry, the Sony A7rII comes close to it (hm, my ISO invariance pixel peeping says differently).
The problem is… what if you want it all in one? I’ll quote DRPreview: “if you want both the base ISO dynamic range of the D810, and the low light noise performance of an A7R II, then the GFX might be your ticket.”
And I allow myself to add, that if you want the high-resolution of the GFX, then neither the D810 nor the A7rII are for you. You have to take the Canon 5DSr… but then you lose the dynamic range and noise performance.
So, seen from another perspective, we could say you need all these 3 Full Frame cameras to perform almost like 1 Fujifilm GFX (but I doubt that, since the pixel peeping I did, shows that with a 6 stop push, the GFX spanks them all).
There would be so much more to discuss (and in part debunk) on that article, such as the lack of fast lenses. As our GFX group demonstrates day by day, you can adapt ultra fast lenses on the GFX. And Fujifilm has the 110/2 in the pipeline for this spring. But I have to make a break now after a long day… my guitar is waiting :)
Anyway, I think you guys can make up your own mind on this and read the article “Thinking about buying a Fujifilm GFX 50S? Read this first” here at dpreview.
GFX has Huge Cons and DPReview is Right!
Don’t get me wrong, the GFX has it Cons, just like any other camera. The AF-speed is not really snappy, it has no 4K, it does not have the super fast EVF refresh rate of the latest X-series cameras, it’s expensive and more.
It will shine in some areas, but create frustrations in others (good luck shooting some serious sports photography with it).
But if there is one thing you do not have to worry about the GFX, then it’s its image quality. As proven by DPReview today, it delivers an IQ, that you need 3 different Full Frame cameras with different strenghts to almost match it :).
And yet, DPReview is right. 95% of us don’t need the GFX. We can be more than happy with any modern APS-C or FF camera. But the GFX was made for the niche, for the 5%, for the people, who need (or want) the ultimate image quality and don’t want to spend a fortune for a Phase One.
Well, for those people the waiting is over. The Fujifilm GFX will give you the extra boost in your images you were looking for :)
- Join our super-active and super-helpful Fujifilm GFX community
- Don’t miss a single GFX tidbit and follow our public GFX Facebook page
Fujifilm GFX Vs. Hasselblad X1D Vs. Fujifilm X-T2
- Round 1: GFX Vs. X-T2 at billfortney: “The GFX has a ton of resolution and can be blown up to outer space and still have enormous detail, and the X-T2 holds it’s own until we start cropping or making very, very large prints on the order of feet by feet. Can you see the difference with your nose against the print, yes you can, but standing back at a reasonable distance I suspect it would be harder, though the GFX would still have the edge!”
- GFx Vs X1D / 3 people used both cameras in German at fineartprinter (translation)
- Thoughts after using the Fujifilm GFX at the Spanish site dslrmagazine (tranlsation)