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

[Andrew Gifford]

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 March 8, 2022 by Andrew Gifford
Re-ordered for easier read

[Andrew Gifford]

Just learned about 5k monitors, am catching up!

 

 

[Andrew Gifford]

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.