# Fuji About to Launch a Medium Format System?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 26, 2015)

```
In a short post, <a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon_medium_format_2ff.html" target="_blank">Northlight Images</a> is reporting that someone in the dealer network for Fuji told them that a medium format system is indeed on the way.</p>
<p>Could it sport a version of the 51.4mp Sony sensor found in the current Pentax 645Z?</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
```


----------



## distant.star (Nov 26, 2015)

.
Let's hope for just such a thing!!


----------



## MrToes (Nov 27, 2015)

Hope Canon gets into MF with all new lenses!


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 27, 2015)

Now this is a system I could invest in.

Compact body, huge sensor, lots of dials and amazing glass.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Nov 27, 2015)

Fuji had some nice all-in-one medium format rangefinders for 120 film. Compact (for medium format) and simple to use and relatively affordable. If they could make the same models with a digital medium format sensor it would be great. To be popular would need to be priced lower than Pentax?


----------



## Bennymiata (Nov 27, 2015)

Makes sense for Fuji to get into MF.
They have always done things a little bit different to most other manufacturers and as they already make Hasselblad lenses, they just have to change the cosmetics a little, and hey presto, a whole line of MF lenses ready to go!

What I wonder is will they go cheap and dirty and use the Sony sensor, or have they developed their own sensor for this?


----------



## Aglet (Nov 27, 2015)

FujiRumors has been posting this bit for a while.
If such a product arrives, it's got a lot of potential. I'd love to have one.
Considering how good the images are out of Fuji's current APSC bodies, a medium format X-Trans type sensor with the same rez as the Pentax 645z would be very _very_ nice.
I'd consider dropping all my Nikon FF kit for that once there's enough good glass to attach to it.
As it is, using Fuji gear, where appropriate, can save me lots of editing time.


----------



## LDS (Nov 27, 2015)

MrFotoFool said:


> Fuji had some nice all-in-one medium format rangefinders for 120 film. Compact (for medium format) and simple to use and relatively affordable. If they could make the same models with a digital medium format sensor it would be great. To be popular would need to be priced lower than Pentax?



Fuji also made the GX680 which was a full-fledged MF camera, althout able to use also the then "strange" 6x8 format, thereby it's not really new to it.

Its MF rangefinders were IMHO camera aimed at some type of photography only, they missed most of the MF advantages when using film, especially the interchangeable backs and viewfinders.


----------



## BeenThere (Nov 27, 2015)

Something along the lines of the Mamiya 7 range finder camera with an x-trans sensor would be interesting to me.


----------



## RGF (Nov 27, 2015)

wonder how they think they can make money on MF? As I understand it, the mark is very small (I heard around 5,000 units per year - not sure if this is true).

With the investment in R&D for the body (even if they leverage current technology - they still need to engineer the body), new lenses, etc. the cost will be very high. Could they charge enough to recover this investment? 

Or is this an lost leader flagship to give them prestige? It would be interesting to been a fly on the wall to hear the discussions on this decision.


----------



## Perio (Nov 27, 2015)

RGF said:


> wonder how they think they can make money on MF? As I understand it, the mark is very small (I heard around 5,000 units per year - not sure if this is true).
> 
> With the investment in R&D for the body (even if they leverage current technology - they still need to engineer the body), new lenses, etc. the cost will be very high. Could they charge enough to recover this investment?
> 
> Or is this an lost leader flagship to give them prestige? It would be interesting to been a fly on the wall to hear the discussions on this decision.



I guess one of the reasons MF market is small is high cost of the system. If Fuji introduces MF system at a relatively affordable price, I guess many people may choose it over DSLR/mirrorless.


----------



## deleteme (Nov 27, 2015)

RGF said:


> wonder how they think they can make money on MF? As I understand it, the mark is very small (I heard around 5,000 units per year - not sure if this is true).
> 
> With the investment in R&D for the body (even if they leverage current technology - they still need to engineer the body), new lenses, etc. the cost will be very high. Could they charge enough to recover this investment?
> 
> Or is this an lost leader flagship to give them prestige? It would be interesting to been a fly on the wall to hear the discussions on this decision.


Fuji does already have a lot of MF manufacturing experience. They made the GX680 studio camera that was very advanced and capable (albeit heavy) for the time. The G690 and G670 Professional lines were interchangeable rangefinders that preceded the Mamiya 6 and 7 cameras by many years. The folding rangefinders were relatively popular niche cameras but still exhibit their competence in the format.
Fuji also designed a number of lenses and components for the Hasselblad H series cameras and thus has current MF tech understanding.
I had looked very long and hard at the Fuji G690 in the 70's and the only reason I decided against it was the fact that the 65mm lens was f5.6. They also offered the standard100mm f3.5 a 150 and a 180mm les but WA was what I wanted and it didn't meet my needs at the time.

As for the size of the total market, I have no idea what it is but I suspect that Pentax has actually grown the market with their moderately priced (for MF) 645Z. Fuji are no fools and would enter the market knowing their costs, the potential market and the margin expected from each camera.

I would also point to the revolutionizing effect on SLR ownership the Canon AE-1 had when it was introduced. A MF digital that is easy to use is far more appealing than a V series Hasselblad or a Mamiya RZ-67. The Pentax 67 was a brilliant camera but never got traction with amateurs because of cost and the fact that 120/220 film was never that easy to deal with compared to 35.
Changing that equation could be the winning formula.


----------



## martti (Nov 28, 2015)

Of course Fuji has all the needed know how, experience and materials to pull out such a stunt.
What would be the sense of it, that is another question.
One sollution would be to have a hand-focusing RF camera, like a Leica 262 on steroids.
That way their old lens designs could be used. Constructing a complete series of autofocus lenses for this little niche market does not seem like a business idea. 

I do not think that this project will ever see daylight.


----------



## Efka76 (Nov 28, 2015)

I really doubt whetjer Fuji will invest into MF due to the following:

1) MF market is overcrowded (Hassel, Pentax, Phase One, etc.). The whole worldwide market is 5000 units per year. Companies usually know their customers bu name 
2) Fuji even does not have FF cameras. Their target customer is mass customer.
3) Very significant investments are required in new glasses and camera R&D.
4) Fuji is loss making or near break even level. Even such company as Canon does not go into MF market as it is very expensive investment.


----------



## Photographer-at-Large (Nov 28, 2015)

I hope its flange distance will be short enough to allow use of Canon TS-E lenses via adapter.


----------



## sanfranchristo (Nov 28, 2015)

I'd definitely be into this. I've been ogling the 645z for some time but could never justify it for my hobby with my investment in Canon glass. I wish Canon had gone MF instead of the 5Ds/r (I realize that it wasn't as expensive for them to just put those out and temporarily claim the MP crown). I'd love to have a MF and either a small DSLR or crop/micro mirrorless that used the same lens mount--which FUJI could accomplish. If they do this, I hope they stay in line with their history of rangefinders the and make something reasonably portable for landscapers/travelers rather than trying to compete with the already crowded high-end MF category of studio cameras (whose users can usually justify their costs by the nature of their largely commercial use). A mirrorless, MF with their hybrid rangefinder/EVF and lineup of existing lenses? YES, PLEASE.


----------



## RGF (Nov 28, 2015)

If it would be interesting to have historical data - has the introduction of high MP 35mm cameras, such as the Nikon D8xx series, Canon 5Ds/5DsR and the Sony A7R/A7R II - helped or hurt MF sales.


With these cameras you can easily print 24x36 or 30x45. How much need (or desire) is there for prints larger?

How much better quality does one get with a MF vs high MP 35mm camera? At what size does this difference become apparent?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 28, 2015)

RGF said:


> If it would be interesting to have historical data - has the introduction of high MP 35mm cameras, such as the Nikon D8xx series, Canon 5Ds/5DsR and the Sony A7R/A7R II - helped or hurt MF sales.
> 
> 
> With these cameras you can easily print 24x36 or 30x45. How much need (or desire) is there for prints larger?
> ...



Larger formats are rarely about mp size. The decisions are normally far more nuanced than simple MP numbers, things like colour depth, true 16 bit RAW files and the tonal graduations that gives, agency expectations, and the like play a far larger role than a simple MP value.


----------



## funkboy (Nov 29, 2015)

My guess: Fuji will launch a full-frame 35mm system that they will bill as "equivalent to medium format", given that they market their APS-C sensors as "equivalent to full-frame"...


----------



## dolina (Nov 29, 2015)

A medium format x100t uld be perfect for me. My guess is it will be priced between $3,000-5,000


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 29, 2015)

dolina said:


> A medium format x100t uld be perfect for me. My guess is it will be priced between $3,000-5,000



I think you live in a dream world. The film cameras cost close to that! Even the bargain basement 645z costs $6,995 without a lens...........


----------



## David Littleboy (Nov 30, 2015)

Efka76 said:


> I really doubt whetjer Fuji will invest into MF due to the following:
> 
> 1) MF market is overcrowded (Hassel, Pentax, Phase One, etc.). The whole worldwide market is 5000 units per year. Companies usually know their customers bu name
> 2) Fuji even does not have FF cameras. Their target customer is mass customer.
> ...



When Hasselblad came out with their 645 film AF SLR, it was a joint effort with Fuji, and Fuji produced a version of it in Japan under the Fuji name. Fuji made the lenses.

There's a pic here: http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Fujifilm_GX645AF

Hasselblad claimed that it was a Hasselblad design, Fuji claimed that they brought two or three proposals to Hasselblad, Hasselblad chose one and insisted on some minor modifications. The stories on how much of the 'blad camera were made by 'blad differed as well. At the time, it sounded to me as though Fuji was telling the truth, and the 'blad was a Fuji in a new shell. So I'd guess that the current 'blad MF digital is actually manufactured by Fuji. So in (my version of) real life, Fuji already is in the MF digital business.

I reserve the right to be completely dead wrong, of course.


----------



## dolina (Nov 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> dolina said:
> 
> 
> > A medium format x100t uld be perfect for me. My guess is it will be priced between $3,000-5,000
> ...


It costs more because it's an interchangeable lens camera.


----------

