Clicky

Jump to content


Photo

Medium Format Rumors


  • Please log in to reply
152 replies to this topic

#21 Sator-Photography

Sator-Photography

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 04:52 AM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

 

For me, I'm curious what the main focus of the camera (assuming it materializes) will be. Would it primarily be a studio camera? If so, it is not of much interest to me. But if they make a small and light (relatively) rangefinder that handles well in the field, that really gets my interest. The X-T1 is about 40% lighter than a D7200. A Fuji Medium Format Rangefinder could end up similar to a Nikon 810. 

 

This is the big sticking point. The advantage of the Pentax 645Z is that you can work quite fast with it considering it is a MFD camera. It still forces you to slow down compared to a DSLR though. 

 

The only reason the Pentax 645Z is quite fast for an MFD camera is because it is an SLR design. A mirrorless design is inherently slower than an SLR design, so that if Fuji had made a MFD version of the X-Pro1 with the Sony 50MP cropped MFD sensor, it would have been intolerably slow. 

 

The question for Fuji is whether mirrorless technology has advanced enough that a mirrorless MFD camera can be made to shoot fast enough to keep up with the Pentax 645Z. It's all very well if the GX-Pro1 is more compact and portable in the field than the 645Z, but if it is so slow it might as well be a studio camera for shooting with strobes, its inherent slowness would undermine any size advantage. Keep in mind that the 16MP X-Pro1 already forces you to slow down, so imagine how painfully slow a 50MP GX-Pro1 might have been if released 1-2 years ago.

 

The other thing is that the competitive price of the Pentax 645Z is said to be due to the fact that it shares lots of parts with their DSLR bodies. Fuji too need to have a GX-Pro1 share lots of component parts with the X-Pro2/3 body. So in many ways, the development of their MFD system is dependent on that of their X-system. If the X-system was successful then that would fund the R&D costs of their MFD system, just as the Instax system funds the cost of the X-system. 

 

Is the mirrorless technology in the X-Pro2 mature enough now that it can be upscaled to MFD proportions? Or should they wait to upscale the X-Pro3 to MFD proportions, and deliberately design the X-Pro3 so it can share manufacturing parts in common with the X-Pro1 to reduce costs?



#22 deva

deva

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 06:43 AM

The only reason the Pentax 645Z is quite fast for an MFD camera is because it is an SLR design. A mirrorless design is inherently slower than an SLR design, so that if Fuji had made a MFD version of the X-Pro1 with the Sony 50MP cropped MFD sensor, it would have been intolerably slow. 

 

I don't think I agree with you... or we have different ideas of what slow is.

 

My X-T1 is not slow. There are some low light situations where it does not autofocus as fast as my Nikon, but most of the time there isn't much of a discernible difference (if any).

 

In practice, I'm often overall faster in various situations with the Fuji due to the dedicated knobs which I find intuitive to use. I'm also faster with the Fuji because it is so small and light. I can carry 2 X-T1 bodies and 3 X primes for almost the same space and weight of a single D7x00 plus 3 equivalent primes. 2 X-T1's around the neck feels hardly heavier than the single SLR. In that case the Fuji's are definitely faster cause there is no need to switch lenses as often.

 

The jump to medium format means more processing, bigger lenses means slower auto-focus, but that is the same regardless of SLR or Mirrorless design. However, the Mirrorless MFD camera itself can be smaller. That makes it, like the APS-C Fuji, easier to handle and less weight makes it easier to carry, hold and maneuver. I assume that like the APS-C Fuji X-lenses, that the MF Fuji Lenses would also be smaller on the normal to wide end than the MF SLR equivalent. These things (to me) are also part of whether a camera feels fast or not.

 

I think a Fuji Mirrorless MFD camera would be overall faster than the Pentax (by my way of looking at it). 



#23 danwells

danwells

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 08:28 AM

The new X-Processor Pro offers plenty of speed to more than keep up with any sensor (when I saw the specs of the processor, my reaction was "there are only two reasons for that kind of processor - medium format or 4K video"). Fuji rates it at 480 megapixels per second - that's enough to shoot the big 100 megapixel sensor at 4.8 FPS (not that the sensor can read out that fast, anyway), or the 50 MP sensor at around 10 FPS. It's also a general purpose processor, meaning that, if they wanted to use a SECOND one to handle focus, for example, that's not hard to do - simply divide the code between them.

 

As for size and weight, I'm thinking lighter than a D810 - the Leica S is already only 40 ounces,  6 ounces heavier than a D810 (and close to 10 ounces lighter than a D5), and that is a SLR. An X-Pro 2 is roughly 17 ounces, an A7rII 22, and the lightest  full-frame DSLRs are around 27 ounces. I'd say a 33x44mm mirrorless might wind up in the 27-30 ounce range. Sizewise, it might take up the volume of a small full-frame DSLR, but be a little taller, especially if it had a hybrid viewfinder, and not quite as thick. If it had the big sensor, which is 54x40mm, it would be a little bigger, especially if the sensor were mounted in traditional 645 orientation (all the Texas Leicas were 645 vertical when held horizontally). If the sensor were mounted in a horizontal orientation, as small-format sensors always are, the body wouldn't necessarily be especially tall, but it might be quite wide. I'd also be surprised if that big sensor would end up in a body lighter than a D810. Certainly lighter than a D5 or a Phase - maybe lighter than a Leica S?

 

Lens sizes and weights for 33x44 mm would probably not be far off full-frame equivalents, especially given that MF lenses are traditionally a stop or more slower than 35mm lenses. If the sensor were 54x40 mm, the lenses would be a little bigger, but they might not be huge. Midrange lenses for medium format can be quite reasonably sized, although wideangles get big rather quickly, and telephotos, while reasonably sized for their focal length, get very big for their angle of view, because the big sensor needs longer lenses to get the same angle of view. Telephotos have plenty of coverage, so format size doesn't matter for lens size - Mamiya's 645 300mm f2.8 is actually smaller and lighter than Olympus's 300mm 2.8 for the old 4/3 system (the new Micro 4/3 lens is much lighter, but it's f4, and it's actually almost twice as heavy as the new full-frame 300mm f4 Nikkor). Canon's and Nikon's full-frame 300mm f2.8 lenses are substantially lighter than either Olympus's or Mamiya's. The problem comes in when you realize that the Olympus lens has a 2x crop factor (and it does manage to be lighter than any fast 600mm lens), and the Mamiya lens needs to be 50% LONGER for the same angle of view (it's about equivalent to a 200mm on 35mm). If Mamiya had even MADE a 500mm f2.8, it would have been a monster, while Olympus's 150mm f2.8 is quite reasonably sized.

 

Lens pricing is rather variable - many of the midrange focal lengths can be quite reasonable - at least a couple of the Pentax lenses are actually cheaper than comparable (but faster) APS-C Fujinons. Anything out of the ordinary gets expensive FAST. The Fujinons for Hassselblad are more expensive, although some of that is the fact that they say Hasselblad on them.  Hasselblad had the gall to charge thousands of dollars for cheap Sony E-mount lenses (to go with their dressed up NEX-7) until they realized they weren't selling any when Sony sold the same lens for $249. Leica and Phase One lenses are ALL hellishly expensive, although that's true of Leica lenses for any of their lines, and Phase One stuff is never cheap.

 

Hopefully, Fuji will adopt some version of the Pentax pricing model - you know you're in a crazy market when Leica is the mid-priced option!



#24 Thekrees

Thekrees

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 09:33 AM

If I was Fuji and I looked at this poll I would put the Medium Format project back up on the shelf.
I guess for a lot of people medium format is like the holy grail - it's a fantasy.
When hardly anyone will pay $5k plus, then they are gonna totally balk at adding lenses to their purchase on top of that.
I use Fuji X because it is small and the lenses are great. It is also cheap.
If I wanted to get back into medium format I would buy the Canon or Pentax. But I'm not interested.

#25 mactheweb

mactheweb

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 02:59 AM

Nearly twice as many people voted on a price as said they were interested. That means a lot of people who aren't interested in the first place likely just voted $3000 cause it was the lowest #.

 

1,000 people have so far said they would pay at least $5000 and just under 1900 said they were interested. 

 

From a marketing perspective, I have little idea how Fuji might read those numbers, but that seems like fairly sizable % to my layman's eye. 

3% said they would be willing to pay $10,000 or more. That's a more probable price for a new medium format Fuji. 5K, now way.



#26 danwells

danwells

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 05:28 AM

$5000 is actually probably the "lower bound of reason". I'm not sure Fuji could get it that low, but, unlike calls for $3000 and the like, I'm also not sure they COULDN'T. Yes, it's lower than the Pentax, by a substantial margin, but the mirror, all the motors (Pentax has screw-drive lenses to deal with, and those are BIG screw-drive lenses, requiring a substantial focusing motor), the AF module, and most importantly, that huge prism, all have costs. At $5000, there's no chance of the big sensor - it's GOING to be 33x44mm, if it comes in that low, and, in just the same style as the X-system is optimized for, but locked to APS-C, it will be optimized for and locked to 33x44mm.

 

Of course, a 33x44mm mirrorless has a ton of appeal. It will give medium format mobility it hasn't have since the days of Texas Leicas. The lenses will be a lot smaller than 645 lenses could be. Zooms, at least in modest focal length ranges, may even be a reasonable size. . The image quality would be a significant step above any 35mm full frame camera of the same generation (with 1.7x the sensor area, assuming similar pixel pitch and technology, the jump should be similar to going from an X-Pro 2 to an A7rII). The current Sony 50 MP sensor isn't the latest generation, and, by giving up a generation, is not all that much higher quality than the A7rII (it usually wins side-by-side comparisons, but it's pretty close). Hopefully, the sensor would be a new development of the X-Pro 2/A7rII generation, but another big jump in pixel count - at 70-75 MP, it would be close to the same pixel pitch as the current APS-C and FF image quality champs. A camera with 1.7x the image quality of an A7rII, paired with well thought out Fujinon lenses, is nothing to sneeze at. Sure, it gives up some image quality at the extremes to the high end of the Phase One line, and some flexibility in the studio as well - but it's half the weight and little more than 10% of the cost.


  • deva likes this

#27 Sator-Photography

Sator-Photography

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 97 posts

Posted 30 January 2016 - 09:33 AM

I don't think I agree with you... or we have different ideas of what slow is.

 

My X-T1 is not slow. 

 

But how would the X-T1 perform with a 50+ MP sensor?

 

With each release, Fuji's mirrorless models get faster. The X-T1 is faster than the X-Pro1, and the X-Pro2 faster than either. 

 

The reality is that my X-Pro1 is a lovely camera, but it does slow you down. If it had a 50MP cropped MFD sensor it would be intolerably slow, and I doubt that the X-T1 would have coped that well with a 50MP sensor either. But mirrorless is improving. The problem is that there may be little point in bringing out a MFD mirrorless model with the Sony 50MP cropped sensor, since Sony already offer the a7RII with a FF 42MP sensor and Canon offer the 5Ds with a 50MP FF sensor model. If you scale the Sony 42MP FF sensor up to cropped MFD size, it would make it a 72MP model. How would a mirrorless model cope with that? Or else with the Sony 100MP full frame MFD sensor?

 

There is no doubt that mirrorless is currently significantly slower than SLR designs. Even the Sony a7RII is slow when reviewing shots. The Pentax 645Z may be fast enough for many, especially compared to how slow Hasselblad and Phase One MFD models handle, but the Pentax is an SLR model. If it were a mirrorless, it is simply a fact that it would be much slower to work with. 

 

It is just currently impossible to expect that a mirrorless be as fast as a SLR design. However, mirrorless is catching up, and it is only a matter of time before a mirrorless design can handle a 100MP sensor and still perform reasonably well. The question is not if, but when that becomes both practical and cost effective from a sales-marketing point of view. 



#28 deva

deva

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts

Posted 30 January 2016 - 10:47 AM

 

Of course, a 33x44mm mirrorless has a ton of appeal. It will give medium format mobility it hasn't have since the days of Texas Leicas. The lenses will be a lot smaller than 645 lenses could be. Zooms, at least in modest focal length ranges, may even be a reasonable size. . The image quality would be a significant step above any 35mm full frame camera of the same generation (with 1.7x the sensor area, assuming similar pixel pitch and technology, the jump should be similar to going from an X-Pro 2 to an A7rII). 

 

Yeah, this is the possibility that interests me... I would prefer that sensor size (33 x 44) to the bigger one. Both for cost, and size/mobility... especially mobility. 



#29 deva

deva

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts

Posted 30 January 2016 - 11:11 AM

But how would the X-T1 perform with a 50+ MP sensor?

 

With each release, Fuji's mirrorless models get faster. The X-T1 is faster than the X-Pro1, and the X-Pro2 faster than either. 

 

The reality is that my X-Pro1 is a lovely camera, but it does slow you down. If it had a 50MP cropped MFD sensor it would be intolerably slow, and I doubt that the X-T1 would have coped that well with a 50MP sensor either. But mirrorless is improving. The problem is that there may be little point in bringing out a MFD mirrorless model with the Sony 50MP cropped sensor, since Sony already offer the a7RII with a FF 42MP sensor and Canon offer the 5Ds with a 50MP FF sensor model. If you scale the Sony 42MP FF sensor up to cropped MFD size, it would make it a 72MP model. How would a mirrorless model cope with that? Or else with the Sony 100MP full frame MFD sensor?

 

There is no doubt that mirrorless is currently significantly slower than SLR designs. Even the Sony a7RII is slow when reviewing shots. The Pentax 645Z may be fast enough for many, especially compared to how slow Hasselblad and Phase One MFD models handle, but the Pentax is an SLR model. If it were a mirrorless, it is simply a fact that it would be much slower to work with. 

 

It is just currently impossible to expect that a mirrorless be as fast as a SLR design. However, mirrorless is catching up, and it is only a matter of time before a mirrorless design can handle a 100MP sensor and still perform reasonably well. The question is not if, but when that becomes both practical and cost effective from a sales-marketing point of view. 

 

What you are saying makes no sense.

 

Nobody is talking about putting a high MP sensor in an X-T1 or X-Pro1. A medium format Fuji would of course need a processor capable of dealing with the extra data. That might already be there with the X-Pro2 processor.

 

Also, Mirrorless is not slower than an SLR. It is slower in some ways and faster in others. Mirrorless does not need to move the mirror so it can easily have faster frame rates for example. 

 

The speed of reviewing shots has nothing to do with whether the camera is Mirrorless or SLR... 

 

Autofocus is faster with the SLR's but for many people, the difference is already insignificant and the X-Pro2 is looking like it's a solid step faster than the X-T1. 



#30 danwells

danwells

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 146 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 04:47 AM

They ARE already there with the X-Pro 2 processor (assuming their claim of 480 megapixels/second bears any relationship to reality, and there's no shooting mode on the X-Pro 2 that needs that much, so no way to tell even if you had an X-Pro 2 in hand). That's 9 FPS on the 50 MP sensor, and about 6on the hypothesized 72 MP sensor. Of course, that's without AF or the viewfinder, BUT medium format frame rates are MUCH slower than smaller formats (the Pentax 645Z and current Leica S are considered EXTREMELY fast at 3-4 FPS - Hasselblad and Phase One are mostly hovering at less than 2). At 3 FPS, the processor has 2 X-T1s worth of speed left over, just to handle AF and viewfinder duties. If, for some reason, the processor isn't fast enough, Fuji could simply use TWO of them - some Nikon and especially Canon pro bodies use dual processors...



#31 flysurfer

flysurfer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 694 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 03:25 PM

IIRC, Fuji has been using 2 processors (CPUs) since the beginning of the X series.


Fuji X SecretsX-Pert Corner – Flickr SetsRico's Fujifilm X camera books (use code XPERT40 for a 40% discount)


#32 umad?

umad?

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts

Posted 31 January 2016 - 05:47 PM

I think you are talking about two different things. Canons ISPs have had ARM based CPUs for decades now. (afaik they were based on TI OMAPs)

And since they weren't really made for their highest end cameras, they literally put two chips on the PCB.

 

To be honest, I haven't really done a Fuji tear down (why would I ^^), but I think they have put two cores in their processors (so one chip, not two) for quite some time now.

 

 

The big thing is, that EXR III moved to Cortex A7 (dual!) cores and also increased the clock. 

 

 

And looking at the pure specs of the EXR III I would say it is a bit over designed for the X-Pro2. The processor most certainly is no bottleneck when talking about a bigger camera. 

 

So one could say, that Canon is building their processors for the entry/mid level and if need be, they put it into the pro bodies. Twice.

 

Fuji on the other hand has a really modern, very powerful high end processor, which it puts into their cameras (I think it will stay high end exclusive for some time and we will also see EXR II and X-Trans II not go away for months/years) 



#33 gdanmitchell

gdanmitchell

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Posted 02 February 2016 - 04:53 PM

"Autofocus is faster with the SLR's but for many people, the difference is already insignificant and the X-Pro2 is looking like it's a solid step faster than the X-T1."

 

I combine Fujifilm mirrorless with non-Fujifilm DSLR, using the system that is best for the particular kind of photography I'm doing. Mirrorless is getting better all the time, but there isn't any solid evidence yet that AF is as fast on mirrorless as it is on DSLRs. That's fine for the work I do with my Fujifilm systems, but when I want faster AF and a few other features where DSLRs are still ahead, I use the DSLR system.

 

Those working with a single system have a tougher choice, since there are pluses and minuses to both types of system — you have to choose what is most important to you.

 

Dan



#34 mpw1950

mpw1950

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 03 February 2016 - 10:16 PM

There is absolutely no reason for an SLR Medium Format camera, anyway.

 

The sole reason DSLRs still sell (apart from market inertia and brand value, of course), is because of the relative advantages in AF performance with the mirror design.

 

A MF will never be used in sports/wildlife/action or, even, extremely low light environments. If it's one camera format where mirrorless makes absolute sense, it's digital MF.

 

After all most digital MF cameras are used tethered with a huge EVF (a laptop)! Why do you need a mirror, or really even a built-in viewfinder most of the time?

 



#35 EyesUnclouded

EyesUnclouded

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts

Posted 03 February 2016 - 11:43 PM

After all most digital MF cameras are used tethered with a huge EVF (a laptop)! Why do you need a mirror, or really even a built-in viewfinder most of the time?

 

 

It's a fact that most of us are used in composing using a viewfinder of sorts. A mirrorless option could do even more to get MF out of the studio and, even, detach it from the tripod, where off-studio MF cameras spend most of their lives.



#36 frod

frod

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 309 posts

Posted 05 February 2016 - 08:39 AM

Maybe it will be a medium format x-pro with ovf ;-)

The aperture ring is for composing in the third dimension, not removing it!


#37 Patrick FR

Patrick FR

    Advanced Member

  • Administrators
  • 848 posts
  • LocationTOP SECRET

Posted 02 March 2016 - 01:17 PM

Medium Format Fuji :: “50MP Sensor & Available 2017!” – New Source

 

More here: http://www.fujirumor...017-new-source/



#38 milandro

milandro

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,646 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 04:30 PM

We shall see how wise this thing is.

 

It will certainly absorb a lot of money because they need to develop not only a technology that they don’t yet have but also all the lenses to go with it.

 

Not for me anyway.

 

Since I’ve abandoned the active profession, I am no longer interested in a MF digital camera ( I did use a Contax with a phase one back ages ago) and I wonder how big is this market and more importantly what the purpose of this market actually is.

 

Short of wanting to produce incredibly large gallery images ( there is certainly a demand for this but how big is it?) there is not much that one can do with 24 or 36Mp and I am already way happier than I really need to, with my poor 16Mp.


the popular expression wishful thinking is an oxymoron!

 

To all TAPATALK users

 
As a form of courtesy towards your fellow users of this forum, PLEASE remove the obnoxious tapatalk signature, it adds nothing to anyone’s contribution and it is only a sneaky way used by tapatalk to push their product by polluting each forum participant with promoting their products with unpaid advertising for their software and the brand of your phone. Removing it is easy and it is an act of courtesy that shows respect for all those whom are annoyed by this pointless feature. This is not a personal attack to you, the annoyance is caused by tapatalk and the phone or tablet brands, they are getting all the exposure and you gain nothing by this.

#39 Tikcus

Tikcus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 317 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 08:28 PM

Sure certain professions will appreciate it, but bigger bodies, bigger lenses, more money, not for me

 

16MP in my APS-C Fujis produce A1 Prints that are good enough


Edited by Tikcus, 02 March 2016 - 08:28 PM.

"Share what you have learnt"

 

My Flickr


#40 deva

deva

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 277 posts

Posted 02 March 2016 - 08:42 PM

I used to enjoy the more deliberate pace of shooting MF on film for landscapes but do not actually need the MF camera  for work anymore.

 

Still, I may buy a Fuji MFD depending on performance and available lenses. It would be a personal indulgence with the only partially valid excuse that I do make bigger prints from time to time.  ;)




 
x

Registration is free

Not registered? Really?

Discover the full potential of the Fuji X Forum... register now!
Registration is free and done in a few minutes!

As registered member you can discuss, post your questions and present your images.
And get in contact with Fuji X photographers worldwide!

We are looking forward to you!

The Fuji X Forum Team

Register Close