Medium Format Fuji: Tell me the First Question FujiRumors should be able to answer for you!

[milandro]

I have read it and contributed to the question with my answer to the poll.

 

How much?

 

Yet, immediately, this thread degenerated in one of the so many fantasy league threads. Fuji should do this that or, and why not?... Especially the other!

 

Maybe you haven’t seen those posts?

 

To answer your obvious question with an obvious answer.,.. When will we get the results to the most popular question? You know, as in ...ask an ” obvious” question get an “obvious” answer.

 

When the camera will hit the market.

 

I never thought of myself as silly though, so, because I suppose you don’t do that too I won’t treat you as one ( I wrote “ obvious" whereas it could have been writing “ silly") ... I would much prefer if in future you won’t call me that.

[kkonkkrete]

Fair enough!  Speculation threads are all equally pointless.  As is going for a walk on a nice day.  Or, frankly, taking a photograph most of the time.  I'll just stop doing things that are pointless fun, and concentrate on proper serious purposeful things instead.

 

BTW, while I gladly respect your stated preference for me not to call you silly in the future, please feel free to call me silly any time you want ... it's just light hearted banter on my part, no harm intended.  I mean it, and I'm sorry if I offended you.

 

Anyway: any new information?

[milandro]

No offense taken, just clearing where I stand on the way I wish to communicate with people here and henceforth.

 

I don’t think we need to be formal, but I wouldn’t think to call people here, pal, dude, mate or, indeed silly.

 

We are all members of the same forum but we are not otherwise acquainted after all.

 

[napkindoodle]

Yes, I'm seeing a lot of fashion photographers take advantage of the leaf shutter on the GA645 with great results. Makes for a perfect alternative to a bulky PhaseOne / Hasselblad setup. If Sigma can make their DP Quattro series work, then there's no reason Fuji can't outdo them and Pentax in this space.

 

The (film) body GA645 format is superb, easily a better option for travel and documentary photography than any high end FF ILC or DSLR. But also having a leaf shutter, makes genres such as fashion and portraiture (using high sync speed flash), still life, etc, highly applicable.

[jlmphotos]

They also had their own medium format camera in a rangefinder style.

 

I'd love for them to make a digital version of this....

 

0043 Fuji GW690III 90mm Professional 6x9 by Zebrio, on Flickr

YYYYEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSS!

[danwells]

I really hope it's not a fixed lens! The reason they could get away with it in film is that most of the cost of the "Texas Leicas" was the lens - film transport and basic metering was relatively cheap (and not terribly heavy) - owning more than one was a reasonable way to get multiple focal lengths, and you could even carry a couple of them for the weight of a medium format SLR and 2-3 lenses.

 

The sensor cost alone for a digital medium format camera is WELL into the thousands of dollars. The only digital MF body we've ever seen under $5000 is the outdated Pentax 645D after the 645Z came out, and that's a relatively low performance 40 MP CCD - many full-frame cameras outperform it (it's questionable even against a 4 year old D800). Assuming the Fuji will use the Sony 50 MP CMOS or a newer version of it (scaling up the A7rII sensor gives 72 MP), we're probably looking at closer to $10,000 than $5000. How many of us want to own more than one $8000 camera to get several focal lengths?

 

The good news is that the Sony sensor is not THAT big - a camera not a lot bigger than an X-Pro 1 could contain a minimum-size mount to handle it. The lenses may be the size and weight problem... Most of Sony's lenses for the A7 system are huge compared to the bodies (they tend to be fast primes and fixed-aperture zooms, or else basically SLR lenses with built-in mount adapters). I wouldn't mind seeing Fuji do some slow primes and variable-aperture zooms to keep it portable - as far as I know, the only reasonably sized medium format zoom ever made was a Fuji - one of the Texas Leicas had a zoom (actually, an almost-zoom which had discrete steps)!

 

One reason I'd be especially disappointed with a fixed lens is that I find the two most likely primes (~35mm and ~50mm equivalent) boring, and they're only about my fifth or sixth mosr used focal lengths. My most used length is a modest telephoto (~70mm equivalent), then a wider lens (~28), something longer (~105), then a tie between quite wide (15-24) and longer still (150+), all before you get me into the "normal" range. I realize that the edges of this range won't happen in medium format without considerable cost and weight, but much of it should be accessible, and my favorites won't be likely fixed primes (on a 33x44 sensor, the first lenses I'd want are a 90 or so (70mm equivalent), then a 30 or 35 (24-28mm equivalent)), or better yet a relatively compact 30-90 or 35-105 zoom (f4-5.6 is fine to keep it small).

[keylight]

^ The first two 35mm equivalent lenses I would buy would be 35 and 50, maybe 85 too. 

 

seriously though is fuji doing this? this has got to happen soon.

[Sator-Photography]

I know this thread is a bit old, but I have been thinking about medium format more lately. 

 

I do think that there could be a place in Fuji's lineup for a medium format version of the X-Pro. That is, it would be a rangefinder styled modern "mirrorless" type of camera (although confusingly rangefinders don't have mirrors either), with interchangeable lenses, and X-trans sensor.

 

As for sensor size, it should be mentioned that the 53.7 x 40.4mm MFD sensor is closely equivalent to a 6 x 4.5 once you take into account the actual area occupied by the image in the film frame. That's why this is often referred to as "full frame" medium format sensor, whereas the 44 x 33mm size is often called a "cropped sensor". It is true that no medium format image ever occupied so small an area of a film frame. The more practical choice of sensor would nonetheless be the same cropped sensor size as that of the Pentax 645Z, with which the Fuji would go up against as its major competitor. I have heard that the Pentax 645Z has been a success for them, as it is a bargain compared with all of the alternatives, which cost more like $30-40000. Given the fact that Fuji has longstanding experience with medium format it makes sense for them to produce a rival to the Pentax 645 series.

 

As for the idea that Fuji would produce a medium format equivalent of an X100 with a fixed lens for consumers who might travel with it, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It would be like making an Instax camera the size and weight of a Fuji GX680. The only reasonable target audience for MFD would be professional photographers, who would need a choice of focal lengths—preferably with central shutters—depending on what their requirements are. Consumers (and even pros) wanting to travel with their cameras are already well served with the lighter and more compact APS-C X series.

 

It would be perfectly reasonable for Fuji to skip full frame and go straight to medium format. The reason is that if you want a balance between compactness and image quality, APS-C is arguably the far preferable option. A Sony full frame mirrorless is virtually the same size and weight as a full frame DSLR, especially once you put something like a fixed aperture zoom lens on it. The Leica SL full frame mirrorless is even bigger, and the zoom lens they released with it, elephantine. So if you are going to have a larger, professional, high resolution camera, it might as well be a mirrorless medium format camera. At least a MFD version of the X-Pro would be dramatically smaller than their brick-sized MFD rivals with a mirror.

 

The major problem with a mirrorless MFD series is that Fuji would need to develop a whole new line of lenses to go with it. Cost would also be an issue, which must be kept down if it is to compete with the Pentax 645Z. You can automatically assume Fuji's rival MFD body would cost at a minimum around $10000 USD. Given the choice between a Pentax 645 series camera and a medium format version of the X-Pro, I would probably choose the Fuji, assuming the price is competitive with the Pentax rather than with the MFD offerings from Phase One, Hasselblad or Leica. 

[keylight]

^ This is an excellent post, and is what would make the most sense for fuji

 

Although

 

The major problem with a mirrorless MFD series is that Fuji would need to develop a whole new line of lenses to go with it. Cost would also be an issue, which must be kept down if it is to compete with the Pentax 645Z. You can automatically assume Fuji's rival MFD body would cost at a minimum around $10000 USD. Given the choice between a Pentax 645 series camera and a medium format version of the X-Pro, I would probably choose the Fuji, assuming the price is competitive with the Pentax rather than with the MFD offerings from Phase One, Hasselblad or Leica. 

From what I've read, Fuji is already heavily involved in designing or manufacturing hasselblad lenses. And could easily use an existing lens mount, or create adapters (would have to support auto focus etc).

 

I know a lot of people who say there isn't the market for medium format- like sure, not when it costs 50grand to get a kit.

Sell a body & sensor for like 8grand, make sure it can tether to capture one. or at least provide lightweight reliable tether software that capture one can then import images from. And you'll have the biggest share of the MF market.

I'd say lightroom tethering would be a bonus but you'll never see a commercial photographer using it. especially not to tether ugh.

[Dis]

The major problem with a mirrorless MFD series is that Fuji would need to develop a whole new line of lenses to go with it.

I expect the problem of getting medium format useful live view comparable with current X-series one could happen to be more challenging. I doubt rangefinder MF camera could compete with DSLR. Thus working mirrorless model is necessary. 

[Sator-Photography]

 

I know a lot of people who say there isn't the market for medium format- like sure, not when it costs 50grand to get a kit.

Sell a body & sensor for like 8grand, make sure it can tether to capture one. or at least provide lightweight reliable tether software that capture one can then import images from. And you'll have the biggest share of the MF market.

 

 

Fuji have vast experience in the professional medium format film market. I think the time might be ripe for them to start to digitise this expertise. Fuji are better off trying to compete against FF rivals from Sony, Canon and Nikon by digitising their medium format expertise rather than introducing yet another FF camera onto an increasingly crowded market.

 

If you brought a full frame Canon EOS camera about 10-12 years ago it would have cost you as much as a Pentax 645Z does today. It's only a matter of time before MFD sensors come down in price while going up in quality. Pentax has lead the way in making MFD more of a mainstream professional product again, just as in the film era. Their success with the 645Z shows that the market is showing polarisation: either you shoot with a phone camera or a high-end professional beast. And the more MFD sensor units the Sony sensor division sells, the more the price will come down, producing a snowball effect.

 

People say that the digital camera technology of today is mature, but I think that if we looked back in 15 years we'll all be laughing at that view. The digital revolution has reached a provisional maturity for small formats only (35mm and less). It has only begun in the medium format sector and it hasn't even touched large format. 

 

If Fuji hit the market with a mirrorless MFD X trans version of the X-Pro at a price competitive with the Pentax 645Z, a lot of professional photographers who have drooled over the $30-40K MFD offerings from Phase One etc but couldn't justify the cost will eagerly buy into this system. Pentax has shown that the market is there. A revolutionary mirrorless MFD X-Pro would add immense prestige to the entire Fuji camera range right across the board. It would also nicely complement the APS-C X series. One would offer professional grade images in a compact body perfect for pros who travel with lots of heavy equipment, while the MFD cameras would offer uncompromised IQ for studio usage while still being small enough to carry outside the studio in place of a FF DSLR. Many pros who shoot FF will seriously be tempted to dump full frame systems to buy into such a high end system. I know I would.

 

As to lenses, I should add that, in addition to having a central shutter, they should be made compatible with "full frame" MFD sensors as well as cropped 44x33 MFD sensors, even if Fuji only release a cropped sensor body to test the market to start with.

[Sator-Photography]

I expect the problem of getting medium format useful live view comparable with current X-series one could happen to be more challenging. I doubt rangefinder MF camera could compete with DSLR. Thus working mirrorless model is necessary. 

 

Agreed, it would have to be mirrorless (not a rangefinder design) to future proof it. Yes, getting a workable live view remains a challenge, but this is one area of mirrorless technology that is rapidly maturing, and it is only a matter of time before it is ripe to be upscaled into MFD proportions. If there is one company that could do this and do it well it would be Fuji.

[Larry Bolch]

Lenses would be the least of the problems. During film days, Fujifilm produced industry-leading large format lenses, medium-format cameras, both with fixed primes and interchangeable lenses. The relationship with Hasselblad is somewhat hush-hush, but word on the street is that both the lenses and bodies are being contracted to Fuji for manufacture. What is sure is that Fuji and Hasselflex have long had a relationship. Fujifilm points out on their site that the GX645AF was developed in collaboration with Hasselblad and looks just like cameras that are branded as Hasselblad. (Bottom of the page.)

 

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/fujinon/quality/

 

Furthermore, they are a major supplier of lenses for movie and TV production. At the moment, B&H lists 24 ciné lenses starting at $22,815.95US and ranging upward to $99,800.00. On the video side, they list 158 lenses from $2,999.95 to $233,490.00. B&H also shows an additional 47 lenses for industrial applications. X camera lenses may be new to the consumer market, but Fujifilm has long been a major player on the industrial level. 

 

Clearly Fujifilm has the capability of building a medium-format camera. However, capability and will may be entirely different. Once again, Hasselblad is in trouble, so they might be more willing to work with Fuji if there is a non-compete clause in their agreement. However, if Fuji has committed to NOT building a medium-format camera and Hasselblad digs in their heels, we will not see a Fuji Texas Leica. Secondly, they may see the medium-format market as saturated, small as it is. While a major network may not flinch at buying a bunch of $233,490.00 lenses to cover the Olympics, not that many working shooters are willing or able to spring for a $5,000 normal lens.

[Sator-Photography]

Of course Fuji do already have medium format lenses from the film era, however a mirrorless MFD camera would have a different flange distance, and quite possibly differing requirements with respect to autofocus. I also don't know exactly how old some of those film era medium format lenses are, but I suspect that a lot of them could do with an update, in addition to having a new mount. In any case, even if they don't exactly have to start completely from scratch, it is not going to be as simple as just reissuing the same old medium format lenses from the film days.

[danwells]

For compactness' sake, I hope the lenses are specifically designed for 33x44.That is one of the secrets of the present X-system - really high quality APS-C lenses, instead of full-frame lenses that are too big (mostly at the wide to normal end). Fuji will never get ahold of a sensor larger than 33x44 at a reasonable price unless Sony plays around with CMOS sensor sizes. The bigger Kodak (now Truesense) and Dalsa sensors are incredibly overpriced CCD dinosaur derivatives of military or industrial sensors (market leader Dalsa is a division of spy satellite parts (among many other things) maker Teledyne)- the camera market (as we'd define "camera") is meaningless to those companies/divisions. Sony is the only supplier of camera-specific medium format sensors, and the market is probably too small to attract a competitor. Given this, a 33x44 system with specialized 33x44 lenses will be much more attractive (primarily in size and weight, but also possibly in image quality - area coverage is one of many competing goals in lens design) than a 33x44 system with oversized lenses.

 

There are at least four separate markets for this system,  and the lenses need to satisfy all as best they can.

 

1.) Studio. Lenses as fast as possible for depth of field/bokeh, and with leaf (AKA central) shutter for flash sync.

2.) Wedding/fashion/location portraiture. Lenses a good balance of speed and compactness, with at least some leaf shutter options

3.) Landscape. No need for fast lenses - make them compact, weather resistant and sharp (really sharp zooms mean fewer lens changes in the field). PLEASE no leaf shutters - they add weight and have slow maximum shutter speeds, which is sometimes important for light control.

4.) Architecture. If this system gets a tilt/shift lens or two, the architectural photographers will flock to it (not that landscape photographers would mind T/S lenses, either). Again, no need or desire for fast apertures or leaf shutters.

Street and travel photographers will probably share lens tastes with landscape and/or wedding photographers.

 

If I were Fuji's lens designers, I'd release the system with four initial lenses (plus leaf shutter versions of a couple of them). Every lens (with the possible exception of leaf shutter lenses) should be weather sealed. The diagonal of 33x44 is 55 mm, so a normal lens is actually 55mm (this sounds very close to full-frame, BUT the 50mm normal on full-frame is actually a bit long - it should really be 42mm).

 

30mm f2.8 (f4?). This is a significant wide-angle, equivalent to about 25mm on full-frame, about 16-18mm on APS-C. f2.8 would be ideal, but it might be huge. 30mm and under lenses exist for medium format, but they're big, heavy lenses with a lot of distortion correction in software. If a 30mm f4 is much smaller, lighter and less distorting than a 2.8, it's worth it. 

 

60mm f2 (f2.8?) Most medium format normal lenses are f2.8 - the smaller format may permit a reasonably sized and priced f2 normal lens. Important to have a leaf shutter version. Not sure if leaf shutter and f2 are compatible (if they are, a 60 f2 LS and a 60 f2.8 with no leaf shutter (but excellent weather sealing) might be an interesting set of options.

 

100 mm f2.8 (plus leaf shutter version). A fast portrait lens (by MF standards)

 

35-105 mm f4-5.6. The modest maximum aperture is to keep the zoom compact. If the 20-40 (or 20-45) is feasible, this lens might start at 40. If it's not, there's an argument for starting it as wide as 30.

 

Additional lenses (not necessarily available at launch).

 

90mm f1.6 (leaf shutter if possible, maybe APD). Not light or cheap, but the fastest portrait lens ever built for medium format (there is no medium format lens faster than f2 right now). This should be a leaf shutter lens, but I'm not sure about very fast LS lenses - Hasselblad Zeiss lenses for their focal plane cameras tended to be a stop faster than their leaf shutter versions.

 

Either a 20mm f4 or (ideally) a 20-40 mm f4 (or f4-f5.6). The widest lens ever for medium format - ideally, it's a zoom.

 

135mm f2.8 or f4. A long portrait lens or short telephoto (possibly macro, especially if f4). Eventually, the studio crowd would kill for an f2 leaf shutter version, but that is a very large, heavy, expensive lens.

 

250mm f5. Nobody's going to shoot sports or wildlife on medium format, and the f5 keeps it a reasonable size for people who would use it for landscape or travel.

 

105-240mm f4-f5.6. A long zoom. If this would be similar in size and quality to the 250, no need to make the long prime.

 

No need for anything longer - any photographer who owns a medium format X system will have at least one other system (probably an APS-C X system, likely a DSLR as well), with longer lenses if they care.

 

Exotica might include a 10 or 12mm fisheye , a 35mm (or so) faster than f2, a 60mm f1.4 (I'd actually release the really fast portrait lens before superfast wide or normal lenses - bokeh is MOST important in a portrait lens), and a couple of tilt/shift lenses for the architectural folks.

 

I'd hope for the normal lens to be under $1500, maybe closer to $1000, with several lenses under $2000. The zooms might be around $2000, with the fast leaf shutter lenses ranging up to $3000 or more. Tilt/shift lenses and other exotica would probably be even more when released, both because of complexity and low production. This is similar to Pentax pricing (except that there are a couple of very expensive newer Pentax lenses that don't seem especially exotic).

 

In terms of the body, I'd hope for:

 

~$5000 (at least cheaper than the $7000 Pentax)

Focal plane shutter (with the ability to disable it to use leaf shutter lenses) - speed range of at least 60 seconds to 1/2000

Around 2 lbs or less (the huge advantage of being both mirrorless and 33x44 - it shouldn't be too hard to get the body lighter than a D810 or a 5Ds)

Weather sealed

"Texas Leica" shape

Either a really good EVF (what Leica just used in the SL?) or a hybrid finder

4"+ LCD - crib it from the cell phone market - plenty of room.

Oddly, I'd expect it to use two standard Fuji W126 batteries - Fuji might not want to do a big battery for one camera - Pentax didn't (theirs actually uses their APS-C DSLR battery). It would have a very short battery life if it used a single W126, but two would work.

Dual card slots (probably dual SD - why would Fuji put in a CF slot, when they've not used one in years?). No real need for XQD - this isn't a super-fast camera.

Controls similar to X-Pro1 (perhaps with some X-T1-style additions)

 

Sensor:

Possibly the Sony 50 MP (as per the Pentax 645z), or possibly a 72 MP BSI variant (which would have the pixel pitch and technology of the A7rII, and should be easy for Sony to build - it's just a big A7rII sensor).

[withfilm]

How far off do we think this might be assuming it's actually being developed by Fuji right now? 2017? 

[withfilm]

 

 

 

If I were Fuji's lens designers, I'd release the system with four initial lenses (plus leaf shutter versions of a couple of them). Every lens (with the possible exception of leaf shutter lenses) should be weather sealed. The diagonal of 33x44 is 55 mm, so a normal lens is actually 55mm (this sounds very close to full-frame, BUT the 50mm normal on full-frame is actually a bit long - it should really be 42mm).

 

 

 

 

Dan, not necessarily disagreeing with you here... but, how realistic would it be for Fuji to produce leaf shutter lenses for a new system? Are leaf shutter lenses being produced now for other medium format systems? 

 

I feel like as much as I would love to see the leaf lenses it would be a harder sell for them.  

[Larry Bolch]

Dan, not necessarily disagreeing with you here... but, how realistic would it be for Fuji to produce leaf shutter lenses for a new system? Are leaf shutter lenses being produced now for other medium format systems? 

 

I feel like as much as I would love to see the leaf lenses it would be a harder sell for them.  

 

Very much so. Hasselblad will sync up to 1/800th of a second. Mamiya offers a mix of leaf and focal plane lenses. Schneider Kreuznach provides lenses for Phase One and Leaf (if they are still around) with leaf shutters. Pentax went with focal plane and I don't believe have any leaf shutter lenses, however, they did have at least one leaf shutter lens for the film 6×7. Leica has a mix. Leaf shutters historically have been primarily for medium and large format cameras.

[withfilm]

Very much so. Hasselblad will sync up to 1/800th of a second. Mamiya offers a mix of leaf and focal plane lenses. Schneider Kreuznach provides lenses for Phase One and Leaf (if they are still around) with leaf shutters. Pentax went with focal plane and I don't believe have any leaf shutter lenses, however, they did have at least one leaf shutter lens for the film 6×7. Leica has a mix. Leaf shutters historically have been primarily for medium and large format cameras.

 

Larry, thanks for the insight. My worry was that Fuji would not want to invest lens technology that isn't being used currently. But of course as you've said, that isn't true. 

[Sator-Photography]

90mm f1.6 (leaf shutter if possible, maybe APD). Not light or cheap, but the fastest portrait lens ever built for medium format (there is no medium format lens faster than f2 right now). This should be a leaf shutter lens, but I'm not sure about very fast LS lenses - Hasselblad Zeiss lenses for their focal plane cameras tended to be a stop faster than their leaf shutter versions.

 

My understanding is that there are difficulties in putting central shutters into fast lenses. For this reason, the Leica S 100mm Summicron f/2.0 has no central shutter.

 

http://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-S/Leica-S-Lenses/Summicron-S-100-mm-f-2-ASPH

 

Also I don't think anyone has ever offered a f/1.6 medium format lens, and if Fuji did make one, it would be the fastest commercial MF lens ever made, and akin to them offering an X series f/0.7 lens. As for a f/1.6 MF lens with central shutter, that is rather improbable, and if they ever succeeded in making one, it would cost a truly astronomical sum of money, one that it would make the Leica Noctilux seem priced like a nifty fifty. It would also be huge and weigh about 4 kg, or possibly more if it is a solid metal construction.

 

Fuji will never get ahold of a sensor larger than 33x44 at a reasonable price unless Sony plays around with CMOS sensor sizes. 

 

Fuji rangefinders can accept different film formats, so hopefully they will future proof their system so that their lenses can one day also be used on a full frame MFD system as well as with a cropped MFD sensor. Even if full frame MFD sensors may be out of the question for the moment, eventually Fuji may end up in a position where they could manufacture them themselves in house to minimise costs, once they have their organic sensor fabrication in full operation, and the cost of larger format sensor manufacture comes down. Eventually, Sony may well also start to offer full frame MFD sensors themselves. That will not happen for many years, of course, but the importance is to be prepared for such a future. It was not too long ago that even a full frame sensor camera would set you back $20K, which gradually came down to $10K etc. It is only a matter of time before this happens with MFD sensors, both cropped and full frame.

[Sator-Photography]

Pentax went with focal plane and I don't believe have any leaf shutter lenses, however, they did have at least one leaf shutter lens for the film 6×7. Leica has a mix. Leaf shutters historically have been primarily for medium and large format cameras.

 

Pentax is the odd man out in going virtually exclusively with focal plane shutters. Other than Pentax, central shutters are standard issue for medium format systems. As previously mentioned, some of the Leica S MFD lenses only lack a central shutter because of technical difficulties in implementing this on faster lenses. Other than that, central shutters are a standard feature of Leica S system lenses too.

 

As for digital cameras with central shutters, Fuji actually already offer one—and I own it. I am, of course, referring to the Fuji X100T. This reflects the fact that Fuji has longstanding experience with implementing central shutters, so it would be most disappointing, and frankly rather surprising, if they were to leave this standard feature out of any new MFD system they were to develop. It would be one of their major selling point over the rival Pentax 645 system at the approximately $8-10K price point.

 

In a sense, in their rangefinder styling and use of central shutters, you can perhaps glimpse features of the Fuji X-series that suggest that this may have always been conceived in the Fuji secret Master Plan as a practice run in miniature for their future medium format digital system.

[danwells]

Also remember that Fuji is probably largely responsible for the leaf shutter technology in the current generation Hasselblad lenses (they make it, and I'm almost sure . The classic V-system lenses were Zeiss with Copal and Compur shutters. The H-system lenses are more or less Fujinons, and, I believe, were sold as such in Japan (the early bodies were certainly sold as Fuji, and I believe the lenses were branded Fujinon). I know they're presently branded "Hasselblad", but, at least until that point, Hasselblad had never made a lens, and I don't believe they make those - Hasselblad knows how good Fuji lenses are!. Hasselblad is actually NOT an optical company - their genius was in body mechanics, and in picking great lensmakers to collaborate with .

 

Fuji has decades of experience with leaf/central shutters (I don't know whether they've ever made one themselves, but they have been sourcing and integrating them forever). They have been a respected manufacturer of large format lenses, both for their own 612 and 617 rollfilm cameras (which stretch the line between medium and large format) and for other makers' view cameras. In medium format, the lenses for their GX680 and every variant of the Texas Leicas all used leaf shutters, and the Hasseblad Fujinons are probably the most modern set of leaf shutter lenses around. Some of these may even be Fuji's own shutters.

 

As for the f1.6 lens, yes, it would be the fastest medium format lens ever sold commercially - I don't want to say that no spy ever saw faster on an airplane or satellite. I think they'd want to have a portrait lens in that speed range (it's more like a full-frame f1.4 lens, or an f1 or f1.2 lens on APS-C, rather than an f0.7 lens) - remember that this is a 33x44 mm system, with focal lengths comparable to Leica S, rather than conventional medium format, so it has something like a 1/2 to 1 stop more DOF than 645 or 6x6. A f1.6 lens would provide beautiful shallow DOF effects, and studio photographers would love it (and some would shell out $5000-$10,000 for it).

 

As for whether one could build the right leaf shutter for that lens - yes, it is possible. At least one shutter like that has already been built (as a matter of fact, it could support a 90mm f1.35 or a 100 mm f1.5) - the company who built the lens it's in is none other than Fuji! The issue with leaf shutters is how fast they can open and close (and the larger the  aperture opening, the trickier it is to build a fast enough shutter to cover it). The lens with an extraordinarily large, fast leaf shutter is the Hasselblad H-system 300 f4.5 - a maximum opening of 66 2/3 mm (1/800 max shutter speed, $5700 at B&H). A 90mm f1.5 only needs a 60mm aperture opening.

 

Mamiya built a 500mm f6 for the RZ system, which they claim used a #1 shutter, but there is no way it could have - a #1 has a maximum aperture opening of 30mm, and this monster would have required an 83mm opening.

 

A few large format lenses may have had even larger openings (some very long focal lengths for 8x10 and larger), but if those lenses had shutters at all, they were very slow (maximum speeds of 1/60 or 1/125 second, or even slower). Since these lenses were mainly used for multi-second exposures, many of them probably had no timed shutter at all - exposure was controlled with two presses of a cable release, or even with a lens cap!

 

 

[Sator-Photography]

BTW I think we might be getting just oh-so-slightly slightly ahead of ourselves going into raptures imaging the sort of lenses a hypothetical Fuji MFD system might have. LOL! We don't even know if Fuji really are going to commit to the digitisation of their medium format expertise in the imminent future. 

 

The only thing I can say is that there is no other company in better position to present us with some solid competition to the highly successful Pentax 645 system than Fuji. None of their immediate competitors has amassed even a fraction of the amount of medium format expertise over the years as Fuji has—certainly not Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung...nor even Leica. Minolta ("Sony") haven't made a medium format camera within living corporate memory, and last offered one way back in the 1950-60s. So, that means that all eyes are now on Fuji.

 

Fuji seems to have recently rolled back on their manufacture of medium format film cameras, and have stopped making the GF670, for example. While that could mean they have sadly started to close the door on this chapter of their corporate history, I would rather prefer to hope that it is a prelude to their opening a new chapter in the story of digital medium format. We live in hope!

[Sator-Photography]

How far off do we think this might be assuming it's actually being developed by Fuji right now? 2017? 

 

The million dollar question!

 

There are a number of issues I suspect Fuji need to consider:

 

1. Whether the handling of an experimental MFD version of the X-Pro has sufficient speed e.g. mirrorless EVF has little lag and few blackouts

2. Mirrorless MFD system doesn't drain batteries excessively or run too hot

3. Can they manufacture these units at a price competitive with the Pentax 645 system?

4. Are they sure that MFD sensors have come down sufficiently in price yet?—or should they wait just a little bit longer?

5. Should they buy cropped sensors from Sony or wait until they can manufacture full frame MFD sensors in house?

6. Should they offer a SLR version instead of a mirrorless MFD camera? A digital version of the GX645AF might be easier to develop

 

Then there is the question of what sort of video performance they should strive for. Do they need 4K video in there too?

 

As for the name of this putative MFD series, I would suggest they should probably continue with the "GX" terminology into the digital age, especially if it involves a MFD X-trans sensor. Phase One call theirs the XF series, so Fuji should emphasise their longstanding expertise in the medium format field by continuing the previous terminology. Maybe the first iteration of the mirrorless MFD Fuji camera might be called the GX-Pro1? I hope they don't copy Pentax and misleadingly apply the "645" terminology to cropped 44x33mm sensors. Pentax should call their cameras the 4433 series and not the 645 series. Only full frame MFD should be called "645". 

 

Some of you might be asking if this is all just airy fairy speculation. Fair enough. On the other hand, Fuji would be crazy not to be thinking of offering MFD, thereby throwing away decades of medium format expertise without digitising it. The bigger question is why Fuji has not made a move in the digital medium format arena already. I would suggest that they thought of it around 4-5 years ago, decided MFD sensor were still too expensive, and shrewdly elected instead to proceed to hone their experience with mirrorless cameras by developing an APS-C X-series first before upscaling that technology to MFD proportions, by which time MFD sensors might have come down sufficiently in price. 

 

I think Fuji have been secretly plotting a mirrorless MFD revolution all along.

[danwells]

I like the name GX-Pro1... Fuji's not a sensor maker, and Panasonic (their partner on the organic sensor project, who do have fabs) would probably not be interested in some portion of a few thousand sales per year. Leica (in a Forbes interview) estimated that there were about 6000 medium format cameras sold per year (in 2013). This was before the 645z - let's say that Pentax and Fuji between them manage to double the market to 12,000 cameras/year, and eat a substantial portion of Phase One's lunch (Phase sells about 2500 cameras/year, almost certainly mostly CCD) and most of Leica's (about 1200, many of them CMOS). At the very high end of possibility, medium format CMOS (mostly Pentax and Fuji, but also a few Leica S models with a different CMOS sensor, and a vanishingly small number of Phase and Hasselblad cameras that cost $30,000 for the same sensor that costs $7000 from Fuji and Pentax) might account for 10,000 cameras/year - does Panasonic want to challenge Sony for a piece of that small pie?

     I was a little surprised to see Sony jump into a market that small, and I can't possibly see someone else big jumping in with Sony already there (the tiny non-Sony players are derivatives of a military/industrial market). Assuming Fuji doesn't want to mess with CCDs, their one logical choice is the Sony sensor or its successor, and they could possibly get the 37.5 MP CMOS sensor Leica uses instead. That sensor is a different shape (3:2 instead of 4:3), but actually a bit smaller, and substantially lower resolution.