Medium format digital cameras have sensors that are significantly larger than full frame DSLRs. That also means the lenses are larger and the price tag is usually much larger, as well.
Hasselblad has long been one of the top manufacturers of medium format cameras, and this series of videos compares medium format with full frame. The videos are produced by Hasselblad, so I’m sure you can guess which one ends up being better, but they give a fair insight into some of the advantages of medium format.
Hasselblad, Fuji, PhaseOne and Pentax make some of the most popular medium format cameras and lenses, but most of these are the smaller of the two medium format sensors, 44mm x 33mm. A few years ago, I shot with Pentax’s 645D, and I loved it. I love the different view of the world, and I love the depth and detail that just doesn’t compare with small sensors like DSLR’s have. It’s about a lot more than just megapixels. If you get the chance, I highly recommend trying out some medium format cameras — I can’t wait to get my hands on the Fuji for testing.
In the meantime, check out these videos and see some of the advantages to using medium format cameras.
If you compare a car with 4 Cyl with a 6 Cyl… or a 6Cyl. with a V6Cyl you will see/feel a difference. Comment: Why not say the 35mm is a D850 Nikon, which is a new/very good DSLR, but why not a D5? And, The Nikon costs about $5,000 with a good lens. The H’blad at about 7-8x the price. Next: The pixels size on the H’blad is 5µm-6µm, depending on the model, which has an advantage is the shots show at sunrise/low light. Also, it depends on what you or your client wnats/needs. And, even with useing the… Read more »
I wish there was a chance to edit/correct after posting.
how bout if you compare a 3 cyl moto with a 5 cyl?
The Fuji GFX-50 already has a 23mm Equiv. to 18mm and two 110mm/110mm Macro for 20mm more than the Blads 90mm…
at less than half the price.