I use my Fujifilm GFX 50s II daily. I have it with me at work - and when I finish in the morning - it is already bright. Yet, i do have sometimes the opportunity to take photos during my work - for example when I turn around the train at Gullmarsplan - giving me a lovely wide outlook towards the horizon in the east. Sometimes dull and boring with foggy clouds, sometimes burning orange during a misty sunrise very early around 04.00

The Fuji GFX with my super favorite lens, the GF 30mm f 3.5 (24mm) is basically glued to the camera - that much i love the perspective the 30mm (= 24mm) lens gives me when using the XPan panoramic format. It is kind of strange how powerful the combo has gotten to me - that I suddenly use the Fujifilm GFX 50s II on daily basis as a digital "Hasselblad XPan" camera.

I never thought it would capture me that much.

Since the Fuji GFX is a slower camera, only contrast based - I am also more careful, more thoughtful when I use it - and maintain a stronger shooting discipline. I know that when I work too fast with it - it results into missed focus (often front focused). Therefore I am more disciplined- because i have learned to understand the traps and quirks of the camera.

 

I like that "slowing down" procedure

Because I feel the ultimate quality is only achieved, when being more careful. After all - what is the meaning of a larger digital mediumformat camera - if you spoil its sensor advantages by being too sloppy. Then you/one don't really need a mediumformat camera in the first place.

Overall - I have really fun with the thougher challenge of using a digital mediumformat camera.


 

Less depth of field than expected, when stopping down

One thing that astonishes me is - that despite the sensor is 70% larger in surface - but a LOT smaller than true mediumformat... Yet, when you look more closely in the images - i get startled over what feels like a far more limited depth of field from those images. Even with a 30mm wide angle (equivalent to a 24 mm wide angle), you would think that stopping down to let's say ƒ 11 gives you plenty more depths of field. But in reality you still have a blurry background. So, it does indeed feel more like mediumformat - as if the margins are after all smaller than with fullframe.

I can't fully explain it.

When I think i would get more depth of sharpness - as I stop down more - only to realize, that the effect appears to be smaller than anticipated. This effect really makes is feel more like a mediumformat camera, because I need now to be more careful also with what i believe is still sharp (due to stopping down the aperture) and what really isn't (but i thought it was)

I can't remember having to think like that as much with a fullframe camera. Perhaps the reason is, that with fullframe cameras i often work only with 20 MP. But the Fuji/Sony sensor, which is not only larger, but at the same time also exhibits more Megapixels; 51 MP. (The fullframe equivalent if you cut the sensor down to would be that of a 30 MP camera, like the original Canon EOS R)

So, yeah, I do get more details from the Fuji, not only because of the larger sensor, but also because it does shows overall higher resolution when compared to the 20 MP camera on fullframe.

Maybe that is the effect that I see as "less depth of field than expected, despite stopping down" !?

 

Maybe not such a good idea with a 6x6 sensor after all ?

Another thought follows - and that is - if we would have a true 6x6 sensor. We would probably get overwhelmed by the excessive limitation such a huge sensor would give us in terms of "depth of field". Since the digital sensors overall work MUCH cleaner than traditional mediumformat film... you get more as well finer separation in fine details. But a sensor THAT big, would demand excessive, utmost tough shooting discipline.

Forget hand held. I believe that is also the case with those special Phase One camera (50.000 €), whose sensors can be as large as traditional 6x4.5 cm film negatives. But in order to utilize the sensor, you need not only extreme sharp lenses - but also tightly controlled shooting discipline; e.g. tripod, electronic shutter etc.

Of course, instead of developing a true 6x6 sensor - it likely would be best not to combine it with extreme high Megapixels, but limit it to something like let's say 50 MP instead. Big large pixels, without going overboard with how many. Because that would stress everything; from developing new lenses that resolve extreme high MP counts, to everything else that would need to be nanometer perfect.

So instead a low MP sensor but with large surface - that would be cool. But which companies would develop such a system these days ?

I think that train has passed decades ago.


89 / 2024