Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Depends on what you want to do but for street I would say either the 45mm  or even the 63mm, both are light and not too large. Both are faster than 50/3.5. Anything smaller and lighter would be a bonus for this type of photography.

Coupled to a slightly lighter camera in the 50R this could be a winner, but not for me!

Edited by Him
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now I have handled the 50R next to my 50S I have a few simple opinions of my own.

I personally love rangefinders and this style of camera, however for me the 50R falls short.

1) The grip feels as if nought is there so not comfortable.

2) Battery moved from the side and the USB cable also on the bottom of the camera. Sorry for me a big fail.

3) Left hand side of camera empty space. No ISO dial.... yes I know it is available in a round about fashion, but that is not as simple and straightforward as a dial.

4) Viewfinder is good, I would not have missed the 50S if I had changed to the 50R.

5) 50R uses the new USB-C, but did not recognise my Cfast 2.0 card, that would be a great way to have a backup or to use for video.

6) Size surprised me! The 50R is slightly taller and slightly wider! It is however lighter and not so deep. After reading all I could on the web, I was suprised by the size, I expected smaller.

So there you have it. I keep my GFX50S, in my view it is a better camera. By better I mean more comfortable to hold and has more convenient controls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks H.  Well I have ordered one along with the 63, 23 and 110. Will try the 50/3.5 once its out mainly due to its smaller size.

I used to use my Pentax 645Z on the street and even with older/smaller lenses like the 35 found it easy to manage.  I just loved this sensor before so now with C1 I might be loving it even more.

Edited by algrove
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...

What don't I like?  The fact I don't have a second 50R body as I'm trying to sell some of my X bodies and lenses.  LOL.  Oh, and the fact the rear LCD doesn't articulate properly when the camera is in portrait orientation.  That's it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jlmphotos said:

Oh, and the fact the rear LCD doesn't articulate properly when the camera is in portrait orientation.

What do you mean by that? Could you describe that a little more precisely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jlmphotos said:

The LCD only works horizontally (?). If you place the camera in a portrait/vertical orientation the rear LCD does not title upward like the XT2, X-H1 and other cameras.

Thanks, now I know what you mean.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I do not like that it does not have a BIS CMOS at it's core.  If you're going to tout enhanced ISO and better light gathering, it really needs to be done on a BIS CMOS.  Now the question is do I buy this 'reduced medium' format w/o BSI or do I buy a less expensive full frame with BSI?

Edited by jw432
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

I picked up the 50r and love it ... the only things I don't like are minor.

The biggest irritation: The USB port is on the bottom opposite the on/off switch.  I find it cumbersome to set down, usb-c plug in and turn on.  I can't set the camera on its base (because the cable is on the bottom) like I can with my x-e3.  So now I let the edge of the base dangle over my computer case.  That works but it took me a while to get there.  The usb cover feels a bit cheap and the way it opens means I have to struggle a bit to get it out of the way to get the usb-c plugged in.  Also it would be nice if I could switch the card access from usb transfer to raw convert mode without having to unplug the cable, but that issue is not specific to the gfx 50. 

One of the reasons I like it (besides all the obvious stuff) that I don't have to learn a whole new system after being really comfortable with my x-e3.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
    • First post here but long time fuji shorter. I use the XT2 with the 23mm f2 / 35mm 1.4 / 16-80mm f4 I'm considering the 23mm f1.4 r (Non-WR) About me: - I shoot black and white only. - I like macro details to wide open landscapes and everything in-between. - I shoot mostly for art, intrigue and creativity of the image. My question - is the 23mm f1.4 going to offer me any meaningful difference over the f2 for the above scenarios Thanks and sorry for bringing it up again...
    • I discovered this unmarked government installation today.  

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

×
×
  • Create New...