FUJI vs HASSELBLAD
APS-C vs MEDIUM FORMAT
is that nonsense? the comparison is flawed. in many ways. but somehow, it holds. both cameras are made for portraits. both have their place. all photos you see here were taken by myself and only quickly edited a bit or not edited. don´t consider this as an example for a real portrait work, please.
a breakfast surprise
i met dennis, a social media expert, for a morning café in palma. and i surprised him. on the table: the hasselblad x2d 100c with the 90mm v. next to it, the fuji x-t5 with the new 75mm viltrox. one costs 13,500 euros, the other 2,600. two cameras for portraits. two worlds.
the size does not differ so much …
outside
the difference in weight and size is relatively minor. the hasselblad is surprisingly small and light for a digital medium format camera. so is the lens. the viltrox, on the other hand, weighs more than the fuji. ergonomically, probably not the best partner for a long shoot.
i photographed poor dennis with both cameras while he was having breakfast.
dennis drinks café / hasselblad
of course, i’m comparing apples and oranges here. and the medium format sensor of the hasselblad is technically superior to the fuji’s aps-c sensor, which is maybe half its size. 16-bit color depth, an insanely high dynamic range – those are the key factors for me.
dennis drinks tee / fuji
the only question is: do you really need it for great portraits?
when i showed dennis some shots on the camera display, he was more often excited about the fuji than the hasselblad. that probably has a lot to do with the film simulations. i had negative pro set up, which gives a nice, contrasty look. hasselblad, on the other hand, with its hncs (hasselblad natural color science), delivers probably the most accurate colors you’ll ever find.
but when it comes to portraits, i don’t really care about colors straight out of the camera. i always end up tweaking things anyway—retouching, adjusting colors, making reality just a bit more beautiful. but if you want to capture reality as it is, the hasselblad is a beast!
hunger … / Hasselblad
the lenses, of course, are not really comparable. the 75mm viltrox, when converted to full frame, lands at just over 110mm, while the 90mm hasselblad is slightly above 70mm. the viltrox has a maximum aperture of 1.2, while the hasselblad only goes to 2.5. you can and should convert that, since the sensor sizes are different. but the fact remains: 1.2, even when adjusted, creates a stunning look at this focal length. and the viltrox lens, which costs just around 600 euros, does an incredibly good job. if you like shooting wide open, the viltrox is a fantastic choice. despite the crop. you can see in the images that the hasselblad has more depth of field, simply because 2.5, even with the crop factor, is still the limiting factor.
indoors
then we moved inside. warm lights everywhere, a perfect chance to frame the subject with bokeh and those signature round light spots that always look good.
and? can you clearly say which ones you like better?
not that easy, right? in the end, the subject’s expression often matters more than the camera.
personally, i really like the finer details the hasselblad delivers. but i also love the softer background from the viltrox lens. both have their own charm.
headshot outdoors
headshot / fuji
autofocus
for me, the keeper rate was higher with the fuji because the eye autofocus is decent. the viltrox, by the way, isn’t any worse than fuji’s latest lenses. but fuji as a whole is clearly not on the level of sony.
hasselblad doesn’t have eye autofocus at all. it detects a face. and often, the eye ends up being sharp—at least if the subject stays still. but if you have a model dynamically posing, you can completely forget about it.
headshot / hasselblad
for me, the hasselblad is just slightly ahead here. but it's simply a different kind of rendering, and maybe that's also because of my rather basic editing. the difference isn't really that big that i’d call a clear winner…
conclusion
does the hasselblad take the technically better photo? yes. there's no debate about that. but was i able to excite dennis just as much with the fuji combo as a potential client? also yes!
i think the hasselblad has only a few areas where it truly plays to its strengths. it’s very slow (there’s no real burst mode, while the fuji shoots up to 15 frames per second), the autofocus is mediocre, and the lenses could definitely be faster (just look at the fuji gfx). but for some specific use cases, it’s fantastic.
if you want a camera that can do pretty much everything, then fuji —even setting the price aside— is, for me, the better choice.
personally, i’ll be using the fuji more often for portraits now. especially on the street. for truly high-end shots, i go with the gfx 100 ii and the 110mm f/2 or the 55mm f/1.7. if the subject moves quickly, i switch to sony with the 85mm gm ii f/1.4 or the 50mm gm f/1.2.
honestly, i don’t use the hasselblad enough. maybe i’ll sell it...
am i being unfair to the hasselblad? or do you see it the same way?
