[johnmflores]

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

Oh wait, that's just the second curtain.

[bobmaxja]

I read somewhere that GFX is now top 10 on amazon selling list, and also top 10 on BHphoto selling list (though I can't find the list).

Pentax 645 series will probably have a hard time going mirrorless.
main reason is Pentax don't really have any EVF tech where Fujifilm already several generations in this EVF.

Almost all new carema , are in the to^p 10 anywere, this is meaningfull.

[Kiwipixter]

I don't understand the doom and gloom message of this article. Firstly it would be stupid for Ricoh not expecting competition coming into the MF market. Secondly, competition is good for everyone, including Ricoh. Thirdly, if competition is driving down prices to FF level, then the losers are the companies with large FF market share and investments, thats not Ricoh.

[Digitalis]

Fujifilm's new GFX 50S mirrorless medium format body raises new questions.

It doesn't raise any new questions, it is just an alternative to what is dominant on the market.

If you recall your history: once in the early days of photography mirrorless was supreme and was supplanted by a new way of seeing, but mirrorless never went away, it never died: It persisted. And now mirrorless is on the rise again, it is riding on the shoulders of new technological industry push, it has big demands placed upon it, but try as it might to displace it, the mirror will never go away: it will persist and rise again. It has always been this way with fads and fashion.

Mirrorless cameras are just different, they have their place. People sound hyperbolic when using the term "paradigm shift" regarding mirrorless cameras, most of whom wouldn't know what a paradigm was if they caught it eating their lunch.

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 01-21-2017 at 05:05 AM.

[clackers]

I know people have a right to make errors, but:

"And if the GFX 50S's autofocus system is anything like the systems in the X-series cameras, it will be faster and more flexible than the aging SAFOX array in the 645Z"

How can the contrast detection system match PDAF?

A low light wedding could be a nightmare!

@Deadwolfeye, try different kinds of photography flicking your K-1 or 5D Mk III or D810 or whatever into Live View!

If all you're doing is landscape or product, fine ...

[deadwolfbones]

Deadwolfbones has always been more of a mirrorless guy than a Pentax guy.

That said, I assume most people buy into these sorts of systems for the glass, not for the camera bodies and it isn't exactly there yet for Fuji.

Not true at all, actually.

I have owned exactly two mirrorless bodies—the NEX-5N and the E-M5—and I got rid of the Sony after just a couple months because I hated shooting with it so much. In contrast I've owned about 10 DSLRs, and 75% of them were Pentax bodies. I currently own a DSLR (D700), a mirrorless body (E-M5), and a high-end point & shoot (GR). Most of the time, I shoot with the GR or my phone.

That being said, I've been a professional camera reviewer for years, and I've had the privilege of testing and shooting with pretty much every body released in the past half-decade—mirrorless and DSLR bodies alike, and often alongside one another. I got to see over time where mirrorless cameras improved on their initial weaknesses and became a legitimate rival to DSLRs. Based on my experiences, I'm convinced mirrorless is the way of the future.

I don't think an EVF is necessarily better than an OVF; in fact, I generally prefer shooting with OVFs, despite how good some EVFs have gotten. But I think most manufacturers will eventually move to EVFs simply because they're cheaper, less complex, lighter, and more versatile than reflex systems. If you need an example in another industry, consider LCD and plasma. Plasma was universally considered the superior display technology, but LCD was cheaper, more reliable, and more power efficient. LCD won.

In general, I think monochrome has it right. Barring another category-defining shift like the move from film to digtial, Pentax will never rival CaNikon in terms of sales. Companies like Fuji are its real rivals, in the fight to be the most attractive alternative for those who don't like what the big two are selling. That's what this article is saying.

And for the record, I'm not down on Pentax at all. I love its current lineup, and I think it's producing the best cameras it's made in the digital era. If anything it's on an upswing. I just want to see Ricoh make the right decisions to keep the momentum going.

---------- Post added 01-20-17 at 11:12 PM ----------

I know people have a right to make errors, but:

"And if the GFX 50S's autofocus system is anything like the systems in the X-series cameras, it will be faster and more flexible than the aging SAFOX array in the 645Z"

How can the contrast detection system match PDAF?

A low light wedding could be a nightmare!

It's indeed a little disappointing that the GFX doesn't use PDAF points on the sensor, but recent mirrorless CDAF systems have made huge strides in this department. Have you used the latest Panasonic or Olympus bodies with pure CDAF?

[2351HD]

What the introduction of this Fuji has done is highlight some of the major flaws in the current 645Z. These are:

- Lack of shutter options. The 645z could well do with the array of shutter (mechanical, EFC and full electronic) options that the GFX supports. This becomes painfully obvious when using the Z in troublesome focal lengths and shutter speeds. The shutter kills resolution at times, especially in portrait mode on a tripod.

- Size. I don't mind the size of the Z. In fact I love its feel in the hand, so very comfortable. But it could very well be somewhat more slim and still keep the mirror. Anything up to 1kg is acceptable but the Z is a touch on the heavy side.

- Lack of EVF. I love EVFs but also still like OVFs. My ideal 645z would have a clip on EVF that tilts up, like the current Leica M has.

- Screen. The 645z needs the screen from the K-1. Its the best movable screen I have ever used, so quick and easy. The screen on the X-T2 and GFX I doubt would survive a solid hit like the K1 screen would.

- Lens cost. Pentax DA and DFA lenses are way too expensive. Heck the 28-45 is only a DA lens for crop bodies and its a ridiculous price. The Fuji lenses are much more fairly priced.

[Digitalis]

Pentax DA and DFA lenses are way too expensive

Really? they are cheap in comparison to Leica S, Hasselblad H, Rollei, Sinar, Rodenstock and Schnieider lenses.

Pentax SMC- DA55mm f/2.8 $1,196 USD - current price @ B&H
Hasselblad CFi 50mm f/4 Distagon $3,569 USD - last catalog price P.2012

The Fuji lenses are much more fairly priced.

But are they optically superior to what Pentax is offering?

[2351HD]

Really? they are cheap in comparison to Leica S, Hasselblad H, Rollei, Sinar, Rodenstock and Schnieider lenses.

Pentax SMC- DA55mm f/2.8 $1,196 USD - current price @ B&H
Hasselblad CFi 50mm f/4 Distagon $3,569 USD - last catalog price P.2012



But are they optically superior to what Pentax is offering?

Mainly referring to the 25, 28-45 and 90mm

You can't really go around claiming a cheaper system with a cheaper body then having lenses just as expensive. However, it is a smaller market.

What I am shocked about is that the GFX has reached no 1 in sales, I thought nobody had any money???

[Kunzite]

Pentax 645 series will probably have a hard time going mirrorless.
main reason is Pentax don't really have any EVF tech where Fujifilm already several generations in this EVF.

They're made by Epson...

[clackers]

It's indeed a little disappointing that the GFX doesn't use PDAF points on the sensor, but recent mirrorless CDAF systems have made huge strides in this department. Have you used the latest Panasonic or Olympus bodies with pure CDAF?

No, and don't want to, Deadwolfbones. Nor should Pentax, PhaseOne or Hassy owners currently enjoying PDAF.

CDAF is a dead end. I have owned plenty of pure CDAF bodies - more than you.

Low light equals low contrast equals a lens hunting desperately.

Sony and others are trying to make on-sensor PDAF good enough to compete with a dedicated mirror module.

Fuji is putting yesterday's technology in this thing.

[Rondec]

Not true at all, actually.

I have owned exactly two mirrorless bodies—the NEX-5N and the E-M5—and I got rid of the Sony after just a couple months because I hated shooting with it so much. In contrast I've owned about 10 DSLRs, and 75% of them were Pentax bodies. I currently own a DSLR (D700), a mirrorless body (E-M5), and a high-end point & shoot (GR). Most of the time, I shoot with the GR or my phone.

That being said, I've been a professional camera reviewer for years, and I've had the privilege of testing and shooting with pretty much every body released in the past half-decade—mirrorless and DSLR bodies alike, and often alongside one another. I got to see over time where mirrorless cameras improved on their initial weaknesses and became a legitimate rival to DSLRs. Based on my experiences, I'm convinced mirrorless is the way of the future.

I don't think an EVF is necessarily better than an OVF; in fact, I generally prefer shooting with OVFs, despite how good some EVFs have gotten. But I think most manufacturers will eventually move to EVFs simply because they're cheaper, less complex, lighter, and more versatile than reflex systems. If you need an example in another industry, consider LCD and plasma. Plasma was universally considered the superior display technology, but LCD was cheaper, more reliable, and more power efficient. LCD won.

In general, I think monochrome has it right. Barring another category-defining shift like the move from film to digtial, Pentax will never rival CaNikon in terms of sales. Companies like Fuji are its real rivals, in the fight to be the most attractive alternative for those who don't like what the big two are selling. That's what this article is saying.

And for the record, I'm not down on Pentax at all. I love its current lineup, and I think it's producing the best cameras it's made in the digital era. If anything it's on an upswing. I just want to see Ricoh make the right decisions to keep the momentum going.

---------- Post added 01-20-17 at 11:12 PM ----------



It's indeed a little disappointing that the GFX doesn't use PDAF points on the sensor, but recent mirrorless CDAF systems have made huge strides in this department. Have you used the latest Panasonic or Olympus bodies with pure CDAF?

Well, as I said in the comment above, I just don't see this as a paradigm shift. This camera with a zoom is going to run 8500 dollars. There is no way that that brings the price of medium format to within reach of the masses. It is going to be wealthy people or high end photographers who purchase these and the difference in pricing between the 645z and GFX isn't going to make that much difference.

As Clackers says, people keep acting like this is an over sized XT-2, which it isn't. It won't have an X-Trans sensor, it won't have PDAF on the sensor -- it just takes a 645z and takes away the mirror, puts in an EVF and shrinks the body a little bit. Images will be good quality for sure, but so are the images from the 645z. In the end, the question I have is whether the GFX will actually make better images than the 645z and I kind of doubt it. It may do a little better in certain situations, but in low light, it probably will actually be more difficult to use.

I do wonder if Pentax couldn't release an update to give an option for an electronic shutter in live view, like the K-1 has. Seems like it should be easy to do with a firmware update.

[Kunzite]

Low light equals low contrast equals a lens hunting desperately.

You're forgetting something: this is Fujifilm, so the subject - when confronted with the camera - will literally shine with delight, offering a nice contrasty target even in absolute darkness.
Fujifilm fans already know this; it's time for us to see the light, too.

[clackers]

You're forgetting something: this is Fujifilm, so the subject - when confronted with the camera - will literally shine with delight, offering a nice contrasty target even in absolute darkness.
Fujifilm fans already know this; it's time for us to see the light, too.

Well, that shine can blind them to financial truths:

Fujifilm's latest financials show strong sales of Instax products, shrinking sales of digital cameras: Digital Photography Review

http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/finance/materials/ff_fy_2017q2_001_note.pdf

Revenue in the Imaging division is down 11 percent ... sales of digital cameras are down.

Whatever they're paying Zack Arias and the advertisers, their poor results match those of the other companies.

We have claims that their cameras are successes - but no one is giving us any numbers as evidence.

[Kunzite]

They're reporting increased sales of flagship products, though with all that marketing are they breaking even?