Fujifilm GFX 50S versus Fujifilm X-Pro1
The Fujifilm GFX 50S and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in September 2016 and January 2012. Both the GFX and the X-Pro1 are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are based on a medium format (GFX) and an APS-C sensor. The GFX has a resolution of 51.1 megapixel, whereas the X-Pro1 provides 16 MP.
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Fujifilm GFX 50S and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also toggle the display to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the GFX – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 is notably smaller (17 percent) than the Fujifilm GFX 50S. Moreover, the X-Pro1 is substantially lighter (39 percent) than the GFX. It is worth mentioning in this context that the GFX is splash and dust resistant, while the X-Pro1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Fujifilm GFX 50S (⇒ rgt)||148 mm||94 mm||91 mm||740 g||400||YES||2016||6,499||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||158 mm||168 mm||83 mm||1530 g||1210||YES||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon 5DS R (⇒ lft | rgt)||152 mm||116 mm||76 mm||930 g||700||YES||2015||3,699||latest||check|
|Canon 5DS (⇒ lft | rgt)||152 mm||116 mm||76 mm||930 g||700||YES||2015||3,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||141 mm||83 mm||46 mm||495 g||350||YES||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||133 mm||92 mm||49 mm||507 g||340||YES||2016||1,599||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||38 mm||350 g||350||no||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Hasselblad X1D (⇒ lft | rgt)||150 mm||98 mm||71 mm||725 g||..||YES||2016||8,995||latest||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||39 mm||660 g||210||no||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||147 mm||104 mm||39 mm||847 g||400||YES||2015||7,450||latest||check|
|Nikon D850 (⇒ lft | rgt)||146 mm||124 mm||79 mm||1005 g||1840||YES||2017||3,299||latest||check|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||160 mm||159 mm||92 mm||1415 g||3780||YES||2016||6,499||latest||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The X-Pro1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 74 percent) than the GFX, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Fujifilm GFX 50S features a medium format sensor and the Fujifilm X-Pro1 an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the X-Pro1 is 75 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 0.79 and 1.5. The sensor in the GFX has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the X-Pro1 offers a 3:2 aspect.
With 51.1MP, the GFX offers a higher resolution than the X-Pro1 (16MP), but the GFX nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 5.33μm versus 4.80μm for the X-Pro1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the GFX is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 years and 8 months) than the X-Pro1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Fujifilm GFX 50S (⇒ rgt)||MF||51.1||8256||6192||1080/30p||..||..||..||..|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.0||5472||3648||4K/60p||24.1||13.5||3207||88|
|Canon 5DS R (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||50.3||8688||5792||1080/60p||24.6||12.4||2308||86|
|Canon 5DS (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||50.3||8688||5792||1080/60p||24.7||12.4||2381||87|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Hasselblad X1D (⇒ lft | rgt)||Medium Format||51.3||8272||6200||1080/25p||26.2||14.8||4489||102|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||no||24.4||13.2||2133||86|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||25.0||13.4||1821||88|
|Nikon D850 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||45.4||8256||5504||4K/30p||26.4||14.8||2660||100|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||20.7||5588||3712||4K/30p||25.1||12.3||2343||88|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the GFX provides a higher frame rate than the X-Pro1. It can shoot video footage at 1080/30p, while the X-Pro1 is limited to 1080/24p.
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the X-Pro1 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the GFX relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Fujifilm GFX 50S and Fujifilm X-Pro1 along with similar information for a selection of comparators. If needed, the dpreview camera hub, for example, contains further detail on the cameras' specs.
|Fujifilm GFX 50S (⇒ rgt)||no||YES||3.2||2360||tilting||YES||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1620||fixed||YES||8000||16.0||no||no|
|Canon 5DS R (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1040||fixed||no||8000||5.0||no||no|
|Canon 5DS (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||1040||fixed||no||8000||5.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1620||fixed||no||8000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||8000||14.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||YES||no|
|Hasselblad X1D (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||920||fixed||YES||2000||2.3||no||no|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1037||fixed||no||4000||5.0||no||no|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||4400||YES||3.0||1040||fixed||YES||8000||11.0||no||no|
|Nikon D850 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||2359||tilting||YES||8000||9.0||no||no|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||YES||3.2||2359||fixed||YES||8000||14.0||no||no|
The GFX is a current model that online retailers, such as amazon, will have in stock. In contrast, the X-Pro1 has been discontinued (but it can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the X-Pro1 was succeeded by the Fujifilm X-Pro2.
So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Fujifilm GFX 50S or the Fujifilm X-Pro1 – has the upper hand? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Arguments in favor of the Fujifilm GFX 50S:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (51.1 vs 16MP) with a 75% higher linear resolution.
- Better image quality: Features a larger and more technologically advanced imaging sensor.
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/30p vs 1080/24p).
- Easier setting verification: Has an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (2360k vs 1230k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (400 versus 300) on a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- More modern: Reflects 4 years and 8 months of technical progress since the X-Pro1 launch.
Advantages of the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image framing and settings control.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (6 vs 3 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- More compact: Is smaller (140x82mm vs 148x94mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 290g or 39 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (74 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in January 2012).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the GFX is the clear winner of the match-up (11 : 6 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the handling experience and imaging performance when actually working with the GFX or the X-Pro1. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate. This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Fujifilm GFX 50S (⇒ rgt)||-||85/100 Gold||5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||6,499||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ lft)||HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Canon 1D X Mark II (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2016||5,999||latest||check|
|Canon 5DS R (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2015||3,699||latest||check|
|Canon 5DS (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||2015||3,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||86/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||1,599||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||5/5||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||77/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Hasselblad X1D (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||-||-||4/5||2016||8,995||latest||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica SL (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||84/100||4.5/5||4/5||4/5||2015||7,450||latest||check|
|Nikon D850 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||..||5/5||2017||3,299||latest||check|
|Nikon D5 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||89/100 Gold||4.5/5||5/5||5/5||2016||6,499||latest||check|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool. If you cannot find the camera you are interested in, please contact me, and I will try to locate and add the respective data to the application.
- Canon 200D vs Nikon D7200
- Canon 6D Mark II vs Canon 1D X Mark II
- Canon 800D vs Nikon D7200
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Canon 1D X Mark II
- Fujifilm X30 vs Fujifilm X70
- Leica Q Typ 116 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
- Nikon D7000 vs Canon 700D
- Olympus E-5 vs Nikon D300S
- Olympus E-M1 vs Nikon D7500
- Olympus E-M10 III vs Sony A6300
- Olympus E-M5 II vs Sony A6000
- Sony A7R III vs Canon 10D