Jump to content

IQ: 50s ii <-> 100s, in practical terms


Recommended Posts

Hello, GFX newbie here - living in Bristol, UK.

I bought the 50s ii and 35-70 kit lens three weeks ago, I've only used it a little so far, but am enjoying the camera. I'll add a faster lens soon.

I'm considering swapping the 50s ii for the 100s - for its faster AF, extra dynamic range and more res on tap - also meaning I can crop in tighter to simulate longer focal lengths.

My conundrums and questions, and I'll welcome any thoughts you may share;

- Is the difference in dynamic range discernable? I've not yet found a back-to-back IQ comparison between the two bodies.

- At what point/size - when viewing, printing, or when cropping in - does the difference in res become noticeable; 25%, 50%, 100%? I'm only a hobbyist, and won't likely print very large. I *love* the images I'm seeing from the 100s online, but that may be because there's more online and review content about this body. The detail and tonality is outstanding. I've a decent 2K BenQ monitor at the moment, and will shortly upgrade it to 4K, so I'm almost certainly not seeing the full capability of the 50s.

- Any other points of difference/consideration re IQ that I should mull? I'm ok for computing power, and can add additional storage later.

- Additional: I suspect the 100s will hold its value more strongly than the 50s ii. But then it's a more 'precious' thing, and a larger liability if broken or lost! I take care of my gear, so that ought not happen. The money spent on a hypothetical upgrade to a 100s will mean I have to wait longer to add a third lens, which is ok.

Background; I purposely selected the GFX system to support my desire to take more intentional images and with higher IQ (migrating from a Canon 5D mk iii). I like the ever so slightly 3D look of mMF, although I appreciate it's not as 3D as larger sensors. I'll do almost zero video nor fast-moving wildlife or sports, though a fighting chance at catching moving elements via AF in the natural and human worlds would be welcome. I've found the 50s ii AF to do a bit of hunting in some settings, a minor frustration, but then focusing manually is a breeze, thanks to the focus peaking and reasonably decent EVF.

Many thanks!

Andrew

*apologies if this has been covered in different ways previously, I did search the forums :)

Edited by Andrew Gifford
Re-ordered for easier read
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, after much flip flopping around I went for a used 100s. What swung it: the ability to buy one used, its AF, and most-important the ability to treat such high res as a zoom so I don't have to carry big lenses. I imagine I'd have adjusted to the 50s ii ok, and gotten more refined with manual focus, but a used 100s seemed the way to go for me. Cheers anyway. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...