leaving medium format and use "just" FF? X2D vs SL2 (or SL3)

[Paratom]

As some long time members here might know I am a gear head. I have always liked the IQ of medium format (I just use digital, even though I love film and own and keep some film cameras), coming from Hy6 to Leica S, and later Hassy xcd system, actually x2d.
I am also infected by Leica long term M user since M6, up to M11, and I also own SL system since the original SL came out.
My life has become overloaded and I have a wish for simplifying.
So I think about giving up the x2d system. The color is great, I must say though that the smooth rendering and bokeh of Leica lenses like the 50/1.4SL, the APO35 or the 28/1.4 M (the 28SL seems also great) is something where I feel the Leica lenses compensate somewhat for the little smaller sensor. And while the x2d has become faster, the SL system is still more instant and flexible in regards of lens choices.
I dont own the xcd 55 yet (my plan was to get one as soon as available to replace 45 and 65) , it might be better than let's say the 45/3.5xcd, or the Hassy 65/2.8 (which is not bad) in regards of shallow DOF or bokeh and speed of course. The 80/1.9 xcd seems great, but it's also heavy and big.

What do you guys use your medium format gear for? When do you feel to have a clear advantage over full frame?
I don't print real big any more (if I print at all), I am an active person, with family, dogs, etc (for sports however I use Canon R since the SL system so far has not convinced me with its C-AF), so bringing the gear and getting the shot. Still I have high expectations regarding IQ.
Anybody here shooting SL system and Hassy and would like to share his experiences/ ideas?

 

[Greg Haag]

I will share my thoughts for what they are worth. I shot for years with Canon gear, I still have my 5DSR, 5D Mark IV and occasionally shoot my daughters R5. If I were shooting people and active situations that is probably the system I would go back to because it worked for me, it is familiar and comfortable. At the office we have a Sony a7R IV that I shoot with often. I think it makes a great landscape/architectural camera that in most instances I cannot tell the difference from medium format, but for active situations I still prefer the Canon gear. I follow a number of photographers on instagram for inspiration who capture amazing images that I never will accomplish and most do it with something other than medium format. In my opinion the gap between MF and Full Frame has closed dramatically in the past 20 years. I think for me personally, I shoot medium format because I get pleasure from shooting medium format, not because I think of it as a magic bullet for images that cannot be accomplished with something else. For example with my technical camera, I enjoy that it forces me to slow down. I enjoy the process of setting up for the capture as much as the capture itself. If I were going to point to an advantage MF has within my personal experience, it would be dynamic range but that gap has really closed in recent years. Sorry for the rambling thoughts, good luck!

 

[daz7]

I use medium format backs on a 4x5 camera to have full range of movemnets avialable. It is slow and oftentimes cumbersome, but I am not in rush and I do not shoot moving scenes so it suits me perfectly. No small format could replace that.

 

[nazdravanul]

As some long time members here might know I am a gear head. I have always liked the IQ of medium format (I just use digital, even though I love film and own and keep some film cameras), coming from Hy6 to Leica S, and later Hassy xcd system, actually x2d.
I am also infected by Leica long term M user since M6, up to M11, and I also own SL system since the original SL came out.
My life has become overloaded and I have a wish for simplifying.
So I think about giving up the x2d system. The color is great, I must say though that the smooth rendering and bokeh of Leica lenses like the 50/1.4SL, the APO35 or the 28/1.4 M (the 28SL seems also great) is something where I feel the Leica lenses compensate somewhat for the little smaller sensor. And while the x2d has become faster, the SL system is still more instant and flexible in regards of lens choices.
I dont own the xcd 55 yet (my plan was to get one as soon as available to replace 45 and 65) , it might be better than let's say the 45/3.5xcd, or the Hassy 65/2.8 (which is not bad) in regards of shallow DOF or bokeh and speed of course. The 80/1.9 xcd seems great, but it's also heavy and big.

What do you guys use your medium format gear for? When do you feel to have a clear advantage over full frame?
I don't print real big any more (if I print at all), I am an active person, with family, dogs, etc (for sports however I use Canon R since the SL system so far has not convinced me with its C-AF), so bringing the gear and getting the shot. Still I have high expectations regarding IQ.
Anybody here shooting SL system and Hassy and would like to share his experiences/ ideas?

For me it’s easy - I need to print big (3meters x 2 meters), for gallery distance viewing. And 100 MP is a minimum for me - 400MP would be even better, even if I do composits. In any other use case 35mm is more than enough for dellivering on 99.9% of photographic needs, if you don’t need to print larger than A0 or if the internet is your display medium. Last 35mm camera I had was a Sony A7r2 with Zeiss Otuses, Hartblei Zeiss TS and Sony and Voigtlander lenses, and I still miss the (output)aestetics of some of those lenses.
But the GFX 100 with some GF primes and Rodenstock lenses serves my printing needs a lot better. For additional aesthetic options (colour, rendering, microcontrat, highlights handlingand maybe even some additional resolution) and added portability I’m considering the X2d with some of the newer, lighter xcd-V lenses.
If I decided to stop big prints, I would go for Leica SL and Leica primes, and maybe some Sony with Voigtlander and some of the newer Canon ts-e lenses, as the good enough option for me - and I would be 100% sure that gear would not be a limiting factor for my visual output. But I’m still printing big, so 100 MP MF is the only game in town for me (the 150MP MF one, I cannot afford it )

 

[rdeloe]

I can make photographs with cameras that don't allow movements, but generally not the photographs I want to make. To get what I want, I need a digital view camera and lenses that have a large enough image circle to allow useful movements.

Unlike many people, it's the lens options that brought me to medium format. A 33mm x 44mm sensor is in the sweet spot relative to my budget, the lenses I can use on the mirrorless camera bodies I can afford, and the angles of view I need.

I can neither afford nor use the wide technical lenses from Rodenstock, so at the wide end I need wide angle medium format lenses that cover at least 645 film, and ideally larger. The widest good quality medium format lens I've found is the Pentax-A 645 35mm f/3.5. On full frame, it's not quite wide enough for me, but on 33mm x 44mm, the angle of view it provides covers most of my wider angle needs. I have 28mm and 24mm shift lenses designed to cover full frame that I've adapted for use on my F-Universalis with GFX 50R, but they're not as good as the Pentax.

I remain quite satisfied with the files my GFX 50R gives me. One of these days I may get a GFX 100S, but I'm not in a rush.

 

[SrMphoto]

If you often shoot handheld, it makes sense to question whether Leica SL2 is better. You need to give more light to the sensor to get the benefit of its size.
FF systems are still more flexible, and the lens choices are larger (tradeoffs zoom vs. primes, weight vs. quality).
I also like SL2 features that are missing from X2D (live histogram, LPC), and I like that it is more nimble. However, I also like the X2D's 100MP files.
Maybe wait for SL3, as it hopefully will fix SL2's Achilles heel: high ISO noise. Or you could get the wonderful SL2-S.

 

[Paratom]

Very interesting points and thank you for sharing!
In my (use) case movements as well as big prints are not THAT important. (Eventhough, the one great shot...it doesn't hurt if you can print big)

 

[Paratom]

The "problem" is these system come closer together. FF increases in IQ, medium format cams increase in speed. And in the hand M11/SL/x2d .... feel real good.

 

[Geoff]

Maybe take a look at how these different systems make you feel. Can you identify if the images you take vary depending on the camera?

 

[chriscove]

I just went though this same path. I regularly print 2’x3’ and occasional long panorama’s 2’ high from stitched shots. I had Hasselblad X1D2 and then up graded to a Fuji GFX 100S. I had this for 1 1/2 years. I loved the files but really struggled with the color and ergonomics. I have had Leica M’s for a while and had a M10M with the GFX and loved the small M body and lenses. I decided to try the M11 as a”high end” color camera and used the GFX 100S along side the M11 shooting and printing similar scenes, both landscapes and people images. In the end I sold all the Fuji gear. Looking at the prints clients and friends really could not tell the difference but tended to like the Leica images more. I needed an AF camera and bought a used SL2 and 24-90 SL lens. I am very happy now and the only thing I miss is the 3x4 aspect ratio of MF. For the first time my GAS in under control…. Until the S4 comes out…..

 

[hcubell]

While resolution is important to me as I often make large prints for sale, I think I could make do very effectively with the resolution of a Sony A7R5 by using Topaz Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI to enlarge the files. However, I would never consider switching from my Hasselblad X2D because of the exquisite color and tonal rendering of the Hasselblad files. I know color and tonal rendering are subjective qualities, and there are many who feel that they can get any file from a Sony, Canon or Nikon or Fuji to match the Hasselblad file by fiddling around with sliders in a raw converter, but that has not been my experience. So, whenever I am shooting reasonably static subjects, I would shoot the X2D. When I shoot in a more spontaneous environment like street or travel or wildlife, I would always opt for a FF camera system like the Sony A1 or the A7RV and just accept what I can do with the color and tone. However, the IBIS with the X2D is so good that the use cases for the X2D may expand significantly when and if Hasselblad adds C-AF and Eye Detect AF. There is still the issue of the weight of the system, so I would prefer not to walk around with an X2D system. The Leica SL2 is an interesting option, as some seem to love the color and tonal rendering of Leica digital files, and the AF system and the range of lenses is much better today than the X2D. However, the camera body and the lenses, particularly the zooms, are quite heavy, so I would not choose the SL2 as my portable system with great AF. My choice has been to keep my X2D and use it whenever I can, and then have a second system consisting of a Sony A7RV with a selection of excellent lenses for it. (I rented a Sony A1 to take to Namibia with me in September.) I hate the ergonomics of the Sony and the menu system, but you can't beat the AF system and the portability.

 

[tcdeveau]

I use my medium format stuff (X1D, P1+Alpa) for landscape because they're tools I enjoy using that make me happy when I shoot with them. Going to take my STC and IQ4-150 Achro out tonight for the first time in a long time and I hope I remember how to use it haha.

I appreciate the color (well not with the Achromatic), malleability of the files, tonal transitions, over the smaller-sensored systems. I’m definitely starting to get wary of the cost of carrying/maintaining multiple systems though.

For everything else, I've got a Z9 kit and just bought back into Fuji APS-C (X-T4 for my wife).

 

[Maxx9photo]

I was once in your shoes, I’m a somewhat gear junkie. I changed cameras every at least 3 years.

The past 7 years, I went from Canon 5DsR to Hasselblad X system.

X system is very versatile, I have X1d 2 and 907x used sparingly. All complimented with XCD lenses which all of them are great lenses!

X2D should be a nice option since the improvements are significantly better.

That said, I personally has decided to step up and try uncharted territory for me, which is Technical/view camera, it was short experience when I paired mine with the CFV back. I don’t know I just feel I miss something and that could be me only. So I decided to let go all my Hasselblad stuffs and gone with Phase One.

I think so far, what I’ve learned based on my research, this could be the ultimate choice but again it’s subjective.

 

[Paratom]

The color is certainly one of the things which made me to choose the Hassy. It is certainly great.
How close is Leica SL2 color? Hard to say, sometimes I think very close, sometimes I think the Hassy color just shines.
It is very easy to get the color right with the x2d (I found the same with the x1d).

The more I read all your answers, the more I feel I should not sell the x2d. However, if I want to use it the way I would like to (shallow DOF possibility, lightweight, reasonably fast AF) - I believe there will be no way around the 55mm lens and eventually the 38 one day.

I think I shall also shoot some more the systems side by side and see how they work and how the results look like.

In earlier times I enjoyed to own several different systems. Today it's a little bit a hazzle to have to decide which camera system to bring to which occasion or trip, and switching back and forth all the time. First world problems, I know.

 

[Paratom]

I just went though this same path. I regularly print 2’x3’ and occasional long panorama’s 2’ high from stitched shots. I had Hasselblad X1D2 and then up graded to a Fuji GFX 100S. I had this for 1 1/2 years. I loved the files but really struggled with the color and ergonomics. I have had Leica M’s for a while and had a M10M with the GFX and loved the small M body and lenses. I decided to try the M11 as a”high end” color camera and used the GFX 100S along side the M11 shooting and printing similar scenes, both landscapes and people images. In the end I sold all the Fuji gear. Looking at the prints clients and friends really could not tell the difference but tended to like the Leica images more. I needed an AF camera and bought a used SL2 and 24-90 SL lens. I am very happy now and the only thing I miss is the 3x4 aspect ratio of MF. For the first time my GAS in under control…. Until the S4 comes out…..

Interesting that the Leica images-in somecases people prefered the Leica images. Was it about Bokeh kind of things?

 

[chriscove]

Interesting that the Leica images-in somecases people prefered the Leica images. Was it about Bokeh kind of things?

I think it was mainly color. I often found the GFX occasionally had a strange color cast I could not remove. I would use a specific camera profile using the Passport color checker and still not get realistic colors. The Leica M11 never needed that. Skin tones were even harder. I know many people love Fuji for their color science but I never found that to be true. My favorite skin tones come from the Leica S3 and 120 Macro followed by the Hasselblad X1D2 and the 80/1.7. THe M11 and SL2 are very close to the Hassy.

I have to say that most people could not tell the difference between the M11 shots and GFX shots.

 

[Photon42]

I love the X2D camera and its ergonomics. Probably contrary to you, the Leica SL system never really spoke to me. These things are entirely personal and emotional, if you don't earn money with photography. If you don't need the money, there is no rush. I am pretty certain the X2D will further evolve and maybe you like to be part of it.
If I would have to let go all systems but one, I probably would keep the one I feel most connected to, and not the one which is most practical in most circumstances. But that is me, not you

 

[Paratom]

I love the X2D camera and its ergonomics. Probably contrary to you, the Leica SL system never really spoke to me. These things are entirely personal and emotional, if you don't earn money with photography. If you don't need the money, there is no rush. I am pretty certain the X2D will further evolve and maybe you like to be part of it.
If I would have to let go all systems but one, I probably would keep the one I feel most connected to, and not the one which is most practical in most circumstances. But that is me, not you

The one system I feel most connected for long long time is Leica M. But it is "limited" to certain things.

 

[msstudio]

You have quite the experience with some nice imaging equipment. As you know, some excel in certain situations, whereas they fall short in others, like a M6 etc. shooting strobe outside. My X2D comes out when I have fun, am elevated project, shoot for myself, really need the resolution or the short flash sync. Using flash at any speed is my main reason for being invested in the X system, a close second is the 16 file and color I’m getting out of the system.
But when I have to limit myself, trip with some hiking, always on the go, I‘m happy to limit myself to a Z7 and whatever lens feels like fun, often the 50mm. When I compare the current 35mm high end cameras to MF solely on the image quality, it does became a very close call. System variability, speed and reliability considered, the 35mm kits win every time, I’m currently on Nikon and really love the outcome, even in the studio, with strobe, still life to people.
clients and subjectsl some of them real photo nerds, still love to see a Hasselblad on set as it’s not an every day kit…

 

[Paratom]

You have quite the experience with some nice imaging equipment. As you know, some excel in certain situations, whereas they fall short in others, like a M6 etc. shooting strobe outside. My X2D comes out when I have fun, am elevated project, shoot for myself, really need the resolution or the short flash sync. Using flash at any speed is my main reason for being invested in the X system, a close second is the 16 file and color I’m getting out of the system.
But when I have to limit myself, trip with some hiking, always on the go, I‘m happy to limit myself to a Z7 and whatever lens feels like fun, often the 50mm. When I compare the current 35mm high end cameras to MF solely on the image quality, it does became a very close call. System variability, speed and reliability considered, the 35mm kits win every time, I’m currently on Nikon and really love the outcome, even in the studio, with strobe, still life to people.
clients and subjectsl some of them real photo nerds, still love to see a Hasselblad on set as it’s not an every day kit…

I get you. Since my daughters play handball and soccer, and we have a fast dog, and I like wing foiling, I once added a Canon R and some Zooms for sports, action, Tele etc.
Normally Canon and Nikon and Sony doesnt "touch" me as Leica or Hassy do in kinds of user interface, feel, output.
But I must admit I am pretty amazed what I get from the Canon, specially some lenses like the R70200/2.8 for example, and how fast and instant they are. So now I have not only used it for sports, but sometimes also for travel or allround camera.
I do not only feel the gap between medium format and FF has become smaller, also the (optical/color) "gap" (if there is one?) between Leica and brands like Nikon or Canon or Sony.
Indeed I am somewhat disappointed, that Leica has not yet integrated phase AF into the SL system (I hope the SL3 does), but more that the lens lineup from Leica SL system is still pretty limited. No 70200/2.8 (at least not from Leica itself), no native Macro lens (yes, you can adapt an old and nice 100/2.8), no 21mm yet, no TC for the 90-280,...
Maybe I even - if I stay with x2d for high image quality and high resolution, let the SL system go and use the Canon more often/ add some primes for Canon (I now use mainly zooms, because I want to keep the Canon system slick and just as a sports and action system). If there were not some super nice lenses like the SL50/1.4 or 35/2.0...

sorry, now I got off topic..
Thank you for all the interesting feedback. I think I will not rush to get out of Hassy, will use it for some more time side by side and see how it works and how often I use it.