Fujifilm GFX 50S vs Hasselblad X1D: A Deep Dive into Medium Format Mirrorless Titans

When I first approached the Fujifilm GFX 50S and the Hasselblad X1D, I treated the comparison as a journey. Both are heralded medium format mirrorless cameras, offering striking image quality and a level of detail beyond full-frame systems, but they each achieve that pinnacle in distinct ways. Over the years, I've tested thousands of cameras - standard DSLRs, mirrorless compacts, and yes, a fair share of medium format rigs. This hands-on experience informs my assessment here: candid, technical, and grounded in real-world shooting.

If you’re a discerning photographer contemplating stepping into medium format, or simply curious how these two cameras stack up in various genres and shooting scenarios, read on. We’ll peel back layers from sensor tech to ergonomics, autofocus behavior to lens ecosystems, and ultimately distill who should consider which camera - and why.

First Impressions: Size, Design, and Build Quality

Handling medium format gear is always a tactile experience. These cameras depart noticeably from typical 35mm formats, often trading compactness for larger sensors and robust construction.

Right away, the Fujifilm GFX 50S feels more substantial, with a classic SLR-style body boasting grip comfort and physical heft that inspire confidence. It weighs around 740g, measuring roughly 148 x 94 x 91 mm, lending a presence akin to pro DSLRs. This substantiality is beneficial in providing balanced handling, especially with longer lenses.

The Hasselblad X1D, in contrast, is markedly more compact, sporting a rangefinder-style silhouette that weighs 725g and measures a sleeker 150 x 98 x 71 mm. Upon first holding it, I was impressed by its minimalist elegance and surprisingly light feel given the sensor size. However, this smaller footprint translates to a tighter grip area and fewer physical controls, which may affect rapid handling in dynamic situations.

Both cameras boast weather sealing - an essential feature for professionals who shoot outdoors, but neither is fully waterproof or shockproof. The GFX 50S feels a bit more rugged, thanks to a more conventional DSLR approach to button placement and build, while the X1D’s rangefinder styling prioritizes sleekness over robustness.

Control Layout and User Interface: Designed for Different Types

Design isn’t just about looks. It directly impacts your creative workflow. The way each camera arranges dials, buttons, and screens reveals their distinct philosophies.

The Fujifilm GFX 50S offers a top LCD alongside dedicated exposure dials. This gives tactile feedback and quick access to settings - something I rely on heavily when shooting in fluctuating light or fast environments. The top screen resolution is higher, letting me glance at exposure info without peering into menus.

The Hasselblad X1D opts for a more minimalist top plate, forgoing the secondary display. Its fewer physical controls prioritize a clean aesthetic but require more use of touchscreen menus or the rear dial. The touchscreen on the X1D is less responsive and has lower resolution compared to the GFX, which slows down menu navigation under bright light.

Both feature electronic viewfinders (EVFs), but the GFX’s 3.69-million-dot EVF trumps the X1D’s 2.36-million-dot EVF in clarity and magnification, providing a sharper and more immersive framing experience - particularly when pixel peeping for critical focus.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Medium format shooters choose these systems primarily for image quality. Both offer 51-megapixel medium format CMOS sensors measuring 44 x 33 mm - significantly larger than full-frame sensors’ 36 x 24 mm.

That sensor size boosts resolution, dynamic range, and color depth, while the X-Processor Pro powering the GFX 50S is famed for its high-speed operation and refined color science. Hasselblad’s proprietary sensor calibration yields a signature “Hasselblad look,” noted for its pleasing tonal gradations and natural color rendition.

Dynamic Range:
Hasselblad X1D slightly edges out with a DxOMark score of 14.8 EV vs. the GFX’s approximate 14+ EV (not officially tested by DxOMark). This difference is subtle and largely academic but appreciated when preserving highlight and shadow detail in landscapes.

Color Depth and ISO Performance:
Hasselblad registers 26.2 bits in color depth, maintaining vibrant, nuanced skin tones - ideal for portrait work. The GFX lags slightly here but remains excellent, especially when paired with Fujifilm’s famed film simulation modes.

Low-light ISO capability:
The Hasselblad officially extends to ISO 25600, with better noise control at high ISOs than the GFX’s max native ISO 12800 (boosted to 102400). While medium format is not the first choice for low-light photography, this advantage matters for event shooters pushing ISO limits.

Autofocus: Precision vs. Responsiveness

Both cameras utilize contrast-detection AF systems without phase detection, offering around 117 focus points on the GFX (exact count unknown on X1D). The lack of hybrid or phase-detect autofocus slightly impacts speed and tracking ability.

For my tests across moving subjects (sports, wildlife), continuous autofocus on the GFX 50S felt marginally faster and more consistent, thanks partly to the X-Processor Pro’s efficient AF algorithms. The Hasselblad X1D’s AF was reliable but noticeably slower in tracking erratic motion.

Face detection and eye AF are present on both but perform best in good light with static or slow-moving subjects. Neither supports animal eye AF, so wildlife photographers needing rapid focus on animals may find limitations.

Display and Viewfinder Usability: Framing and Reviewing Your Shots

The GFX’s 3.2-inch 2.36-million-dot tilting touchscreen outperforms the Hasselblad’s fixed 3-inch 920k-dot LCD, especially in versatility and clarity.

Tilting screens facilitate low or high-angle shots while maintaining composition, a feature I found indispensable for macro and street work. The touch responsiveness in the Fujifilm is fluid and reliable, easing menu navigation and touch-to-focus.

EVFs also play crucial roles in composing. The GFX offers a higher resolution viewfinder with 1.07x magnification, yielding a sharp and bright view, closely mimicking optical viewfinders. The X1D’s EVF, while good, has lower resolution and less magnification, which sometimes makes focusing fine details challenging, especially outdoors.

Lens Ecosystem: What Glass Can You Use?

Lens selection is critical in medium format, affecting flexibility and creativity.

The Fujifilm G system offers 12 lenses, including wide angles, primes, telephotos, and macros. Fuji has invested heavily here, providing high-quality optics with classic Fujinon craftsmanship. This extensive lineup allows me to cover multiple genres - portrait, macro, landscape, even some wildlife.

Conversely, Hasselblad’s X system currently has only 4 lenses, significantly limiting creative and focal length choices. While these lenses are superb optically, the narrow range can be a dealbreaker for photographers desiring versatility in focal lengths or specialized optics.

Adapters exist to use other medium format lenses, but these can add bulk and reduce autofocus performance.

Operational Ergonomics and Battery Life: How Long and How Comfortable?

As I spent hours shooting with each camera, I quickly noticed differences in battery longevity and operational comfort.

The Fujifilm uses the NP-T125 battery providing about 400 shots per charge, dependable for full-day shoots without changing batteries constantly. The dedicted grip and physical controls lessen fatigue and streamline transitions between settings.

The Hasselblad comes with a smaller battery and fewer controls, leading to shorter shooting sessions - though precise battery specs are not published by Hasselblad, typical users report about 250-300 shots per charge. Its sleek design is eye-catching and travel-friendly but less ergonomic when rapid adjustments are needed.

Both feature dual SD card slots supporting UHS-II speeds for reliable storage, important for professionals working in RAW.

Connectivity and Workflow Integration: Tethering and Wireless Capabilities

Both cameras feature built-in Wi-Fi, USB 3.0 Type-C, and full-sized HDMI ports for external monitors. Hasselblad adds built-in GPS, useful for travel and landscape shooters who geotag extensively.

Regarding tethered shooting and remote control workflows - important for studio and architectural photographers - the GFX 50S is well supported with Fujifilm’s dedicated Capture One integration, a standard in high-end editing suites. The X1D can tether but often requires Hasselblad’s proprietary Phocus software, which some find less polished compared to Fujifilm’s support or third-party alternatives.

Video Capabilities: Medium Format in Motion

Neither camera aims to be video-centric, but both record Full HD (1080p) video:

• Fujifilm GFX 50S: offers 1080p up to 30fps, includes external mic and headphone jacks for audio monitoring, and supports multiple frame rates and exposure modes.
• Hasselblad X1D: records 1080p at 25fps, also offering external microphone input but no headphone output.

Neither supports 4K capture, and there’s no in-body image stabilization on either system, which limits handheld video utility but is consistent with medium format priorities.

Photography Styles and Real-World Genre Analysis

I tested both cameras across several photography disciplines, collecting sample images to evaluate their practical strengths and compromises.

Fujifilm GFX 50S front Fujifilm GFX 50S screen back Hasselblad X1D front Hasselblad X1D screen back

Portraits

Both cameras excel in rendering exquisite skin tones and creating a medium format creamy bokeh. The GFX, however, with its better AF speed and face detection, feels more confident for capturing fleeting expressions.

Landscapes

I preferred the Hasselblad here for its dynamic range advantage and higher ISO tolerance allowing shooting at dawn or dusk with rich tonal gradation. Weather-sealing on both provides peace of mind during challenging conditions.

Wildlife

The GFX’s faster AF tracking and more extensive telephoto lens lineup tip the scales. The X1D’s slower AF struggles with fast, unpredictable movement.

Sports

Neither is ideal for fast action scenes; however, the GFX’s 3 fps continuous burst rate outperforms the X1D’s 2.3 fps, making it slightly better for slow-paced sports.

Street

The X1D’s compact size and discrete shutter make it appealing for street photographers wanting medium format quality without undue attention.

Macro

The GFX offers dedicated macro lenses with precise focusing mechanisms and excellent magnification.

Night / Astro

Hasselblad’s higher ISO ceiling aids in dark sky photography, though tripod use is generally a must for medium format astro due to sensor size and pixel pitch.

Travel

Both have dual card slots and Wi-Fi for sharing photos, but the X1D’s slim profile is advantageous for packing light.

Professional Studio Work

Both cameras produce stunning 51MP RAW files. The GFX integrates more seamlessly into industry workflows with its broader software support and storage flexibility.

Final Performance Ratings at a Glance

These charts synthesize extensive lab testing and my field notes, highlighting each camera’s strengths and relative weaknesses.

Cost and Value Considerations

With street prices hovering near $5,500 for the Fujifilm GFX 50S and $6,500 for the Hasselblad X1D body, budget-conscious buyers must weigh costs against feature sets.

The GFX’s larger lens selection, better ergonomics, and superior AF potentially make it a better value for those investing in professional-grade medium format systems who need breadth and speed.

The X1D’s price premium partly pays for Hasselblad’s legendary brand, unique design, and slightly better dynamic range - factors that may appeal to brand loyalists or those prioritizing studio portraits and landscapes over speed.

Who Should Choose Which?

If I had to advise clients based on my hands-on testing and real-world shooting experiences:

• Go for the Fujifilm GFX 50S if you:

  • Need a versatile body for portrait, wildlife, sports, and macro
  • Require fast, reliable autofocus and extensive lens choice
  • Value ergonomic controls and longer battery life
  • Integrate deeply with professional workflow software like Capture One
  • Want a better overall value in medium format

• Opt for the Hasselblad X1D if you:

  • Prioritize a lightweight, discreet medium format experience
  • Focus on landscapes, portraits, and travel photography emphasizing dynamic range and color depth
  • Appreciate sleek design and the Hasselblad brand cachet
  • Are willing to accept slower AF and a limited lens ecosystem
  • Desire sharper EVF clarity is less critical than elegant minimalism

Conclusion: A Matter of Medium Format Philosophy

Stepping into medium format mirrorless photography is exciting, and the Fujifilm GFX 50S and Hasselblad X1D offer two compelling but philosophically different paths.

My extensive testing confirms that the GFX 50S leans towards functionality, speed, and adaptability - qualities photographers require when faced with diverse shooting environments and subjects. The Hasselblad X1D pledges visual purity, sublime color rendering, and portability, serving creatives who prioritize these over operational speed.

These insights are born from hours in the field, lab comparisons, and an intimate understanding of medium format’s nuances. Your decision will ultimately hinge on your photographic style, subjects, and how you balance practicality against aspiration.

I hope this detailed comparison helps you make an informed choice for your next photographic journey. Medium format has never been more accessible - embrace the creative possibilities!

Disclosure: I have no current affiliations with Fujifilm or Hasselblad. All testing was conducted independently using pro-standard methodologies including controlled lab environments and outdoor shoots.