# Fuji Medium Format is coming



## ahsanford (Jun 30, 2016)

http://petapixel.com/2016/06/30/fuji-release-affordable-mirrorless-medium-format-september-report/

Fuji created a slight breach of etiquette by skipping the (FF) triple dare and going right for the (medium format) throat! 

- A


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jun 30, 2016)

LOL. I personally think it is smart considering they will be competing in a less saturated market combined with the fact that they already have a solid portfolio of lens designs and history in MF. 

APSC for their compact/light system and MF for maximum IQ. Brilliant. 

Let's just hope the rumor about the Fuji system being more affordable than the new Hassy is true.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 30, 2016)

JohnDizzo15 said:


> LOL. I personally think it is smart considering they will be competing in a less saturated market combined with the fact that they already have a solid portfolio of lens designs and history in MF.
> 
> APSC for their compact/light system and MF for maximum IQ. Brilliant.
> 
> Let's just hope the rumor about the Fuji system being more affordable than the new Hassy is true.



This is good news/rumor, as I always like fuji body style. I'm willing to spend good $ for MF sensor and some fast primes. Snappy af speed, decent af tracking, eye/face af.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jun 30, 2016)

I'm going to have to give it some serious thoughts if it is anything like the x-pro2 setup and priced very competitively like the rumors suggest.


----------



## Sporgon (Jun 30, 2016)

OK, I'll make a prediction and whip my arse in Sept if I'm wrong 

Fuji won't move into DMF.


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Jun 30, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> OK, I'll make a prediction and whip my arse in Sept if I'm wrong
> 
> Fuji won't move into DMF.



Also a very real possibility.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 30, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> OK, I'll make a prediction and whip my arse in Sept if I'm wrong
> 
> Fuji won't move into DMF.



This is the same Fuji that has said they studied full frame and APS-C before launching their X-Pro line and determined that APS-C was the optimal size for mirrorless. Now they are going to leap into the shrinking medium format market?


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 30, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > OK, I'll make a prediction and whip my arse in Sept if I'm wrong
> ...



When an "icon" camera company can make /sell mf for $9k, I strongly believe we soon will see others to follow. There is nothing wrong with healthy competition in technology.


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 1, 2016)

unfocused said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > OK, I'll make a prediction and whip my arse in Sept if I'm wrong
> ...



Sony wasn't offering a 44mm sensor back then.
For a consumer level mirrorless body they're probably right about APS-C (the whole angle of incidence thing). Maybe it all balances out in the end, but the APS-C sensor will always be an order of magnitude cheaper.

If you're making a high end product, then the sensor costs aren't so much of a concern. Ok, really I'd bet it's mostly all marketing speak, but Fuji is a veteran in this segment so it was probably always on the books, they just needed to wait until it was technically feasible.

And isn't the Medium Format market just shrinking because it's not competetive? As soon as they get competetive it'll be popular. That's exactly what this product sounds like.
I don't really even consider this "Meduim Format" anyway, this is just 35mm+9mm, not even giving a full stop of extra light gathering, Canon can almost fit these sensors inside the EF mount as-is (and I think they should).


----------



## unfocused (Jul 1, 2016)

9VIII said:


> ...isn't the Medium Format market just shrinking because it's not competitive? As soon as they get competitive it'll be popular. That's exactly what this product sounds like.



The market is shrinking (or rather has already shrunk) because the advantages of medium format are outweighed by the disadvantages. 

When photographers shot film and magazines required large transparencies to get good reproduction 35mm was insufficient. Today, even APS-C is better than what used to be available in medium format. Modern full frame sensors are more than adequate for publication and even billboard sized printing. And, of course, hardly any images even make it to print today, most live on the internet. The need for medium or large format has shrunk to just a tiny few specialty applications. 

The disadvantages of medium format (large expensive lenses, lack of portability, etc. etc.) outweigh the advantages for all but the most niche of niche uses. So, there is only a tiny commercial market for medium format. Which means that any new player in the market must depend on enthusiasts, of which there are very few with the resources or desire to invest in medium format. 

I suppose in a strict sense, you are correct that the market is shrinking because medium format is not competitive. But it's not the price that is the major factor in medium format not being competitive.


----------



## jebrady03 (Jul 1, 2016)

So the company offering the most expensive apsc mirrorless camera (even more expensive than Leica on B&H) is supposedly going to offer a MF mirrorless which is seen as affordable?


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 1, 2016)

unfocused said:


> I suppose in a strict sense, you are correct that the market is shrinking because medium format is not competitive. But it's not the price that is the major factor in medium format not being competitive.



Lots of people would rather have a Hasselbald instead of an A7RII, if everything cost the same.

I was doing some tests with my 1100D at ISO 6400 and Small JPEG quality. I can barely tell the difference between ISO 100 and ISO 6400, and I usually post things at a maximum of 800 pixels wide due to forum limitations, so a Small JPEG is just about perfect.

Despite this, I still want a full frame camera. Really I'm all wishy washy on the issue and have been for years, I should probably just buy a T6i tomorrow and be done looking at cameras for the next three years, but I know that Full Frame "can" do things that a crop body can't, artistically and technically. Hobbyists will flock toward the new 44mm sensors as soon as they're affordable.


----------



## Hillsilly (Jul 1, 2016)

unfocused said:


> The need for medium or large format has shrunk to just a tiny few specialty applications.


If they put a larger sensor in there, I'd be curious. The ability to get a wider field of view with a narrower depth of field would be the main attraction (ie replicating the look I get from film medium format cameras). I don't know if that's a speciality application or not.


----------



## IglooEater (Jul 1, 2016)

Honestly, since they don't already have a full frame lens lineup, it sounds like a great idea! Canon/Nikon would be in a bad place to do so having thrown so much money into their full frame lineups. Sony could do the same as Fuji, given they only have a half a dozen lenses anyways.

As to MF not being competitive, it would be if it weren't for the cost and because of features, lens lineup, etc.. Honestly. If you had the choice of full frame or MF, and didn't already have a lens commitment to either, and the two were identical in price and features, which would you choose?


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 1, 2016)

As Fuji currently make MF lenses for Hasselblad, they would have a ready-made range of lenses (with some cosmetic changes naturally) and Fuji like to be different to other brands, and see themselves as makers of upscale and technically advanced cameras, so a MF mirrorless would be a good fit for them.

I think the new Hasselblad will be huge seller for them and from the initial press reaction, I'm sure all the camera companies are following it closely.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 1, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> As Fuji currently make MF lenses for Hasselblad, they would have a ready-made range of lenses (with some cosmetic changes naturally) and Fuji like to be different to other brands, and see themselves as makers of upscale and technically advanced cameras, so a MF mirrorless would be a good fit for them.
> 
> I think the new Hasselblad will be huge seller for them and from the initial press reaction, I'm sure all the camera companies are following it closely.



I agree. The price tag will drive the market and that new x1d seems attractive in every aspects - size, ergonomic and price.


----------



## moreorless (Jul 2, 2016)

I would certainly welcome the option if it does arrive but I'm still taking these rumours with a pinch of salt, just seems too much like the collective desires of Fuji fanboys bouncing off of each other.


----------



## dak723 (Jul 2, 2016)

9VIII said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I suppose in a strict sense, you are correct that the market is shrinking because medium format is not competitive. But it's not the price that is the major factor in medium format not being competitive.
> ...



I had the original rebel for 9 years and often dreamed of going FF. When I did replace my camera, I bought a 6D - which I really like and have no complaints about. But was it worth it? If I had to buy a camera today and had no existing lenses to put into the equation, I would go APS-C. Unless you are a photographer that really needs a narrow DOF, or shoot in very low light, I see no advantage to FF over crop. I had an SL-1 for a time, and compared shots taken with the 6D and SL-1. No difference when printing up to 8 x 12. No difference on the computer screen. The narrow DOF has actually been a detriment, and I ended up buying a crop sensor camera to do all my flower and semi-macro photography, as well as having the extra reach for wildlife. So, FF was not quite the "dream' camera that I thought it would be. Going MF would be complete overkill for the vast majority of folks. Most will buy it so they can say they have MF, not because it will be the best choice, in my opinion.


----------



## moreorless (Jul 5, 2016)

dak723 said:


> I had the original rebel for 9 years and often dreamed of going FF. When I did replace my camera, I bought a 6D - which I really like and have no complaints about. But was it worth it? If I had to buy a camera today and had no existing lenses to put into the equation, I would go APS-C. Unless you are a photographer that really needs a narrow DOF, or shoot in very low light, I see no advantage to FF over crop. I had an SL-1 for a time, and compared shots taken with the 6D and SL-1. No difference when printing up to 8 x 12. No difference on the computer screen. The narrow DOF has actually been a detriment, and I ended up buying a crop sensor camera to do all my flower and semi-macro photography, as well as having the extra reach for wildlife. So, FF was not quite the "dream' camera that I thought it would be. Going MF would be complete overkill for the vast majority of folks. Most will buy it so they can say they have MF, not because it will be the best choice, in my opinion.



Some may but I think theres also a viewpoint many have that "I don't print big(or print at all) so nobody does" when the reality is a lot of people still do.


----------



## kaihp (Jul 5, 2016)

Fuji needs to find a way to seriously extend the total available market for MF cameras, in order to make it worthwhile. AFAIK, the current market size is in the order of 6,000 units/year.


----------



## DomTomLondon (Jul 5, 2016)

A bit off topic but... I picked up a used Fuji X-E1 a month ago to use as a walk around compact camera. Unfortunately for some reason Fuji's X lens lineup use focus by wire technology for Manual focusing, which is very frustrating to use. I ended up getting a Voightlander Leica M mount lens for the X-E1 and I'm very happy going full manual with it. But MF is definitely not for everyone.
The camera/lens combo is smaller then my 24-70f2.8ii lens. and goes with me everywhere.


----------



## Floydian (Jul 5, 2016)

Bennymiata said:


> As Fuji currently make MF lenses for Hasselblad, they would have a ready-made range of lenses (with some cosmetic changes naturally) and Fuji like to be different to other brands, and see themselves as makers of upscale and technically advanced cameras, so a MF mirrorless would be a good fit for them.
> 
> I think the new Hasselblad will be huge seller for them and from the initial press reaction, I'm sure all the camera companies are following it closely.



When you look and listen (YouTube) to the X1D introduction, the Hasselblad CEO (Perry Oosting) is telling you that Fuji has nothing to do with this camera. The camera is made in Sweden en the glass is coming from Nittho.
But if it's really true that Fuji is coming up with something in the MF range i be more than interested....


----------



## Aglet (Aug 2, 2016)

I anyone _needs_ MFD, the Pentax product is pretty good and they'd be using it.
The Fuji is more likely for someone who will want fashionable bragging rights on top of an IQ bump.

I'll be watching it for the IQ bump vs size and cost and a possible JOI (Joy on Investment) return.

But, as many have pointed out here and elsewhere, APSC is more than adequate for _most_ real work.
A decent 30 inch print can even be made from a MFT system.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Aug 2, 2016)

I wonder how well the enthusiast market would take a Fuji MF ML camera. Would they understand that a "slower" lens aperture is actually not so slow when total light gathering and DOF of the larger sensor are taken into account? 

Seems like there are many photographers out there who think a f2.8 lens on a micro 4/3 sensor is fast and "pro", yet and f4 lens on a FF sensor is slow and amateurish. ;D

Even many experienced photographers fall for the same logic trap.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 2, 2016)

PhotographyFirst said:


> I wonder how well the enthusiast market would take a Fuji MF ML camera. Would they understand that a "slower" lens aperture is actually not so slow when total light gathering and DOF of the larger sensor are taken into account?
> 
> Seems like there are many photographers out there who think a f2.8 lens on a micro 4/3 sensor is fast and "pro", yet and f4 lens on a FF sensor is slow and amateurish. ;D
> 
> Even many experienced photographers fall for the same logic trap.



My guess is much smaller market due to price and native lens selection. 

I'm keeping my eyes on this MF mirrorless market(hasseblad x1d) and rumor Fuji. Some f2 primes at starting point would be nice


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Aug 2, 2016)

Dylan777 said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder how well the enthusiast market would take a Fuji MF ML camera. Would they understand that a "slower" lens aperture is actually not so slow when total light gathering and DOF of the larger sensor are taken into account?
> ...



To be honest. I have never owned or even used a MF camera (Polaroid counts as MF though doesn't it? ). If I had money burning my pocket, I would get one for $2K just to play with a MF camera. 

On the other hand though, I've been going backwards in time and technology with my gear. 5D to 6D to 60D to a Rebel T1i I now use. LoL 

Yeah, basically a modern-day Luddite.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 2, 2016)

PhotographyFirst said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > PhotographyFirst said:
> ...



As long as you enjoying your photos, there is nothing with that 

I never own MF either. Would love to get the feel of it in near future.


----------

