Shilling for Victory

[MrSMW]

So by my man mathematics, DJI must have given away 10x X2Dii units for every one they have actually sold.

I get the marketing strategy behind getting maybe 10 or so units out to some key Photo World 'influensters', but holy macaroni, just how many of these things have they given away?

Who knew that DJI were such a philanthropic company...

Jealous?

Moi?

Insanely, - it's a dream camera for me, but at ballpark '12k' for the body and 35-100 zoom lens, I cannot make the financials work in my favour. Even if it also did video. Which it doesn't. Not even slightly.

Why is it peak camera for me?

It's looks, the brand heritage, the build, the feel, the handing, the menus and of course the image quality.

Except not quite the image quality.

I have downloaded files from a number of sources and expected to be blown away and drink some of that readily available on-line Kool Aid, except I wasn't.

Yes, they are great and super-detailed...but so are those from my whatshouldbevastlyinferior LUMIX S1Rii.

I have not been able to shoot the exact same scenes side by side, or any of my own stills with the Hasselblad because I don't have access to one, so can only go on similar type shots...and as above, I'm not blown away or seeing any magic.

In fact, quite a few of the shots I have downloaded with human subjects, the focus has been slightly off which suggests to me 2 things:

Thing A: The focus is slightly off.

Thing B: What muppet was given this camera to test and why has said muppet not pixel-peeped their own images they have put out into the world to be pixel-peeped by other (lesser) muppets like me?

I was also considering something Leica. Not as well as, but instead of as in something 'more' than my LUMIX's but maybe not quite Fuji GFX/Hasselblad 100mp level.

But based on my findings, I've dropped the whole idea.

Are there some extra-fine details or other such mojo coming out of these bodies?

Possibly, but nothing real world to my eyes.

Are they better designs, better built and have more brand prestige?

For sure.

Does it (the pics) all look the same on social media?

Of course they do, but that actually isn't the point unless your sole intention is content creation and the tools are just tools, but for some of us creatives, the tools are part of the creative process.

Anyway, the point is, I'm not sure whether the shark has been jumped here, but I suspect there is a maximum amount of shilling going on because come on, you received a 12k gift and you know full well that unless you sing it's praises and go light on the criticism, you are never going to be gifted the next model to 'try out' when that comes along. Nope, you will be off the Christmas Card list faster than writing to Santa and addressing him as You Fat Fucker.

I think I only came across 2 or maybe 3 reviews out of about 30 that I have seen that had bought the thing with their own money and those reviews seemed a bit more balanced, but still almost exclusively positive...but then maybe some of those folks needed to validate their own purchase and also hope to be noticed by Mount Hasselblad and be in the next model gift club...

My answer to all of this?

I went out and bought a pair of f1.4 Sigma lenses to replace my LUMIX f1.8's, ie, another of the most marginal upgrades.

But it's my money so...

...

PS: Unless Hasselblad are reading this, in which case, you fucking rock 🤘and of course I'd love to receive one and here's my address.

[eatstoomuchjam]

I haven't used the X2D II, but I am a GFX 100 II user.  You're totally right that there is minimal practical benefit over a 45 megapixel S1R II or even less practical benefit over a 61 megapixel A7R V or similar.  At f/1.8 or f/1.4 with your new lenses, you'll have all the shallow DOF you'll ever need or want - and almost exactly as much shallow DOF as you'd ever get by using, at least, any of Fuji's native lenses (55/1.7 and 80/1.7 are the two fastest, all of the others are f/2.8 or slower).  Some adapted glass looks other worldly, though - I'm a fan of the Canon EF 35/1.4L II (doesn't quite cover, you'll have dark corners).  Having the equivalent of a 28mm f/1 lens can give some neat effects.

It also makes for some great low light performance - even if there's noise everywhere, it'll look pretty clean at whatever resolution you actually want to use to present it - and detail loss due to some light denoising is practically negligible.

With Fuji's native glass, and I'm guessing Hasselblad's, you will definitely be able to punch in more.  It's always a little crazy to punch in to the eyes on a medium-length/waist-up portrait and see myself clearly reflected in the iris.  That's not a practical need, though, in any way.

It is sometimes, for my needs, really useful, though.  I brought the 500/5.6 on a recent trip to the Amazon and shot some wildlife.  I wasn't even nearly close enough and things are really small in the frame...  until I punch in.  I could make a perfectly usable 8x10 print out of only a very small part of the image.

But... with that said, if I had a 500mm lens on a 61 megapixel FF camera, the resulting print would be exactly the same.  The animal would have just been bigger in the original shot.  And given that you are shooting weddings, you probably don't need to stand 300-500+ meters away from the ceremony.   That is, unless you're the world's first and only wedding photographer who is so unintrusive on the events that they never even leave the parking lot at the venue.

Anyway.

100 megapixels is crazy.  Now Sony have a 180 that fujirumors keeps saying will be shoved into an upcoming GFX.  Unless that also translates to "same or better dynamic range, readout is much faster in video modes," I'm inclined to roll my eyes at it.