Fujifilm GFX Size Comparison… Kind of… Not Really…

A reader asked me about some “comparison” photos that I want to address. Photosku released some “comparison” photos of the Fujifilm GFX 50s, Hasselblad X1D-50c, and Pentax 645Z that have been passed around as a “comparisons”, but if you read the translation

Since “GFX 50S” has not yet been published full specifications, I compared only the appearance.”

It’s nothing more than promotional photos side by side “clickbait.” Fujiaddict is pretty sure we know the exact size of the camera based on using the known sensor size to build a model camera (152.4 x 93 x 75 mm) w/o vf (152.4 x 113.71 x 75 mm) with viewfinder. Our Printable GFX is the only known accurate comparison photo at this time. It’s impossible to do much better at the moment.

It’s always nice to see how these cameras look next too each other, but the GFX 50S and X1D are much closer in size then these photos show, which misrepresents the GFX 50S.

Make sure to join our Facebook groups at GFX owners group and Facebook page if you want to participate in more factual analysis of the Fujifilm GFX system in the future. I hope to have a camera on day one so I can be an active part of the community.

This entry was posted in Fujifilm GFX, Fujifilm GFX 50S and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Thylmuc

    The X1D’s dimensions are 150 wide, 98 tall, and 71 mm deep. (from HB Website)

  • Thylmuc

    On my computer screen, the GFX measures 62 mm (including lugs) width. The depth is 42 mm. IF 62 mm correspond to 152 in real life, then 42 correspond to 102 mm, not the 75 mm you assumed.

    • These are not accurate… only the printable. That is my point. The person that made them just made an approximation and they said so in their post. Mine is sized based on the sensor.

      • Thylmuc

        So you assume that the image where the camera is shown from above is distorted? How did you come to the conclusion that the depth is only 75 mm?
        If not distorted, the equation will be

        152/62 = x/42
        ->
        x = 42 * 152/62 = 102 (rule of three)

        • I don’t assume it’s distorted. I assume it was roughly put together so the sizes aren’t exact for all the cameras involved. The creator stated as much.

          • Thylmuc

            My calculation is solely based on the image of the GFX, so, the others are of no importance.

            I have now looked at the official Fuji GFX site, http://fujifilm-x.com/de/gfx/. There is an image showing the GFX from above, probably the same that is depicted above. The width to depth ratio on this image is 1.5. So, if I divide your assumed width of 152 mm by this ratio, the result will be 101.333 mm which will then be the depth in real life. If, otoh, I use the ratio to calculate the width based on your assumption of 75 mm, I end up with a width of 112 mm, much smaller than the X1D, which seems less plausible.

          • You can’t just work off any image. First you need an image where you’re sure the sensor size is correct. Then you have to work back from there. So many of the photos out there are resized for look/fit. I found the whole processes of working it backward frustrating because I found a lot of images that were off by a mm or two. My measurements are based on images that were checked on screen and in real life with prints and rules. You can rough things out and get close, but it takes time to get closer.

          • The X1D and GFX are very close in size. They just look very different in layout.

          • Oh and when I was trying to put together a depth overlay I found that the vast majority of the X1D images were manipulated so they didn’t match Hasselblad’s dimensions. It’s probably the most difficult image to create accurately because the images seem to all be sized incorrectly.

          • 147.5mm (W) x 94.2mm (H) x 91.4mm (D) (Minimum Depth : 41.6mm) is the official measurements… I guess I didn’t do too bad considering the amount of manipulation that tends to go into product photos…