 |
| Snow geese before dawn in Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge, Assateague Island, Virginia (click to enlarge) Nikon D810, Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 lens @ 230mm; 1/100th sec. @ f/9; ISO 800 |
I don't plan on buying either one of these cameras but both are, from what I have read, superb image making tools. But I have interest in all things photographic and was thinking about which is really more attractive to me and why so.
I will concede now that it is my belief that a medium format sensor of 50 mp will perform at a higher level than a 46.7 mp 35mm sized sensored camera. We know why; larger individual photosites (pixels). Larger pixels are better pixels in regards to noise and dynamic range.
Sensor size alone shouldn't be the only criteria a photographer would use to decide what to buy. Certainly, the first consideration is what types of photography one would want to do with one of these new high pixel wonder cameras. Also, the breadth and depth of available lenses, the dedicated electronics for the strobe system, the availability of professional level accessories, the number of frames per second that can be made as well as the in-camera buffer depth for sustained image recording, battery capacity, focus speed/accuracy all play into the decision. Then add in how a camera feels and works in the photographer's hands. Again, it depends upon what you intend to do with the camera as a major determining factor. Not just the number of pixels.
If a wide variety of lenses is important for your types of photography, the choice may be easier. For example, I count 6 lenses in Fujifilm's current GFX lens lineup. There are more on the way, but they are not here now and you may need other lenses now.
Here are the lenses now available for the GFX:
23mm f/4
45mm f/2.8
63mm f/2.8
110mm f/2
120mm f/4 macro
32-64mm f/4
I'm not going to list them here but when I looked at Nikon's website I believe I counted about 70 full frame Nikon lenses that are currently available for purchase new. That is a staggering number. Then add in the independent manufacturers who also make lenses for the Nikon F system. But, again, it may not matter that Nikon has all of these lenses and you may only need what Fujifilm is now producing as well as what is on their new lens road map.
Now consider lens/camera focusing speed, sensor dynamic range, strobe availability along with the electronics that go with them as well as remote control lighting. That can be a deal maker or deal breaker.
Fujifilm designed these new lenses specifically to handle the 50mp resolution of the GFX and, I believe I read, future higher pixel cameras. That is also important. Now, If the vast majority of the NIkon FX lenses can't accurately resolve the full 46.7 mp of the D850, I predict that Nikon will have some disappointed customers. I don't think anyone wants to have to purchase several new lenses just to take advantage of the new, high pixel sensor. I would also predict that Nikon will be redesigning some of their best lenses to not only handle this sensor better, but for cameras they will produce in the next 10 years, which we know will have even more pixels. Most of Nikon's lenses were designed long before 45.7 mp became a reality.
It just isn't the awe we experience with the introduction of a new, fantastic high resolution camera, either medium format or full frame 35mm DSLR one has to consider, but also all of the supporting parts in order to be able to achieve what you want to achieve and get the results you want (and deserve for that kind of money!). Nikon, it seems, has gotten the first part exactly right. Let's see what happens with the rest of the story.
One last thing—these same thoughts translate to any camera you are considering. Are all the other supporting pieces in place so you can accomplish what you need to accomplish with your new camera. It is not just the number of pixels...
Dennis A. Mook
All content on this blog is © 2013-2017 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
Dennis, great analysis. I recently rented the GFX50S (I'm a X T-2 user) to "get it out of my system." I went to all my old favorite haunts to compare the two cameras to see if I could justify the size and cost penalty of 50MP. My conclusion was that for me, and my print sizes, the X T-2 was quite sufficient. A number of years ago, I was about to buy a used Phase One back for my V Hasselblad when the D800 hit the market. Interestingly I'm considering the GFX just at the time when the D850 is hitting the market. I really love the GFX files, but for whatever compromise may be needed for the D850, the price difference is pretty startling, (two D850's for the price of one GFX) even given that the GFX is a medium format digital "bargain."
ReplyDeleteI LOVE fine detail and always want more and more and more. I'll let others beta test the D850, I'm pretty happy where I am, and will see if it or Nikon's future mirrorless can tempt me away from Fuji where I've been rather happy for a number of years. Thanks for your blog, great insights as always.
Eric, thank you for the kind words and sharing your experiences. I'm sure others will benefit from your comment.
Delete"Nikon D850 = Beta Test" >>> I think you're right. Nikon had (and still has) Problems with their FF DSLR's. Just think of the Nikon D600/610/750. I think the D850 is a great camera and I must say, as a Fuji X-T2 user, I'm really excited about it and could imagine going back to Nikon. On the other hand ... DSLR's are big and heavy. With my X-T2 I have no problems carrying it around for hours and hours, even with one of my heaviest lenses, the XF90mm f2. But if I had to choose between the GFX and the D850 I would pick the D850. Just because I cannot see that much of a difference between the GFX and D850 Files and the D850 has a lot more to offer.
DeleteComparing the files available on the internet, I don't see visible advantage for the Fujifilm. First, what we call MF today is not that much larger than FX (in Nikon-language). While in film days MF was about 56mm in height and something from 45 to 90 mm in width, compared to 24x35 mm, digital MF is 33x44mm only, or just 1.72 times the FX surface, compared to factor 3 even for the smalles MF format in film days. With the factor 1.72 MF is not even as much larger as FX compared to APS-C (factor 2.26).
ReplyDeleteNow, if you look at differences in sensor quality, compare the Fujifilm 24 MP APS-C sensor to Nikons 24 MP FX-Sensor. FX is more than twice the size, but is it more than twice the quality? Not really, I think, or better: not at all.
With the D850, Nikon has another advantage: quantity. Quantity brings prices down, allowing for more r&d, more advanced technology in material as well as higher overall costs in production. To me, the difference in price between D850 and GFX is mainly due to differences in sales units, not in technical quality.
In other words: with the best technique available, the difference in sensor size at this level should be negligible. Higher prices of the GFX system have more to do with fewer units to be sold and a smaller market share, less with iq or product quality.
While I jumped ship from D750 to X-T2, for my landscape and portrait work I will get the D850 soon, not the GFX. Thank you for your article, I enjoyed it, and it had me think and compare.
Holger, thank you for taking time to write and comment with your thoughts. As a past medium format film camera user, I agree the differences today are not what they used to be between the formats. Prices, however, are even more different than in the film days.
DeleteAs an admitted Fuji fanboy (I shoot with the X-T1 and X100S), I would probably say that if given the choice, i'd probably go with the D850. Despite the GXF being the best value medium format on the market, I think the D850 wins in the value to quality and performance ratio. The D850 at nearly half the price is just more versatile. The D850 will excel in sports, wildlife, landscapes, weddings, Photojournalism, commercial, portraits...basically everything. I feel like the GFX (like all medium format cameras) is more pigeonholed for commercial, portrait and landscape work (I'd never go off and shoot a full wedding with that thing). Value for money, I think the D850 wins. I think Nikon's lenses (for the most part) will be more than sufficient for resolving the detail.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I, too went from the D750 to Fujifilm (X-T1) and haven't looked back. I've been using the X-T1 for weddings, real estate, portrait work and personal work for a year and a half now and I've never regretted it. I'll be upgrading to the X-T2 eventually (mostly for the duel card slots and impoved AF system), but for now, The X-T1 is still giving me what I need! :)