When it comes to medium format photography in 2025, two cameras stand at the pinnacle of innovation and performance: the Hasselblad X2D 100C and the Fujifilm GFX 100 II. Both cameras boast over 100 megapixels of resolution and represent the cutting edge of what’s possible in digital photography. After spending hundreds of hours shooting with both systems across various genres—from commercial work to fine art landscapes—I’ve discovered that while they may seem similar on paper, these cameras offer distinctly different experiences and results. In this comprehensive comparison, I’ll break down every aspect of these medium format powerhouses to help you determine which system deserves your investment and which will better serve your creative vision.
Medium Format Photography: A Brief Overview
Before diving into the specifics of these two cameras, let’s talk about what makes medium format special. I first fell in love with medium format years ago when I shot with a film Hasselblad. There was something magical about those larger negatives—the detail, the tonal transitions, the three-dimensional quality that smaller formats just couldn’t match.
Fast forward to today, and digital medium format has become more accessible than ever. Both the X2D and GFX 100 II use sensors significantly larger than full-frame cameras—roughly 1.7 times larger, to be exact. This larger surface area captures more light and detail, resulting in images with incredible dynamic range, smoother tonal gradations, and that signature medium format “look.”
What I’ve discovered after shooting with both systems is that modern medium format isn’t just about resolution anymore. It’s about the entire imaging pipeline—from the sensor design to the image processing to the lens quality. Both Hasselblad and Fujifilm have approached this challenge differently, resulting in two cameras that, while similar in specifications, produce quite different images.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Sensor and Image Quality
At first glance, both cameras seem evenly matched in the sensor department. The Hasselblad X2D features a 100MP BSI CMOS sensor, while the Fujifilm GFX 100 II boasts a slightly higher 102MP BSI CMOS sensor. But megapixels tell only part of the story.
I’ve found that the Hasselblad produces images with a certain “je ne sais quoi” that’s hard to quantify but immediately apparent when you look at the files. The colors have a richness and depth that reminds me of shooting film. There’s a naturalness to the skin tones and a subtlety in the color transitions that I’ve rarely seen in other digital cameras. During a portrait session last month, my client immediately noticed the difference, commenting on how “alive” the images looked compared to what they’d seen from other photographers.
The Fujifilm, on the other hand, delivers files that are technically impressive in their own right. The images are incredibly sharp straight out of the camera, with a crispness that can be almost startling at times. I’ve found the GFX 100 II’s files to be slightly more flexible in post-processing, particularly when recovering shadows. During a landscape shoot in challenging light, I was able to pull back an incredible amount of detail from the shadows without introducing noise.
Dynamic range is excellent on both cameras, but I’ve found the Fujifilm to have a slight edge, particularly in highlight recovery. The Hasselblad, however, seems to render colors more naturally, especially in the red and orange spectrum. This became evident during a sunset shoot where the Hasselblad captured the warm tones exactly as I remembered them, while the Fujifilm rendered them slightly more saturated.
Autofocus Performance
This is where we see one of the most significant differences between these two cameras. The Fujifilm GFX 100 II features a sophisticated autofocus system with 425 phase-detection points covering almost the entire frame. In my experience, it’s fast, accurate, and reliable—even in challenging lighting conditions.
During a recent fashion shoot with a constantly moving model, the GFX 100 II’s face and eye detection worked flawlessly, keeping the subject’s eyes sharp in nearly every frame. I was particularly impressed with its ability to track subjects moving toward or away from the camera, something that has traditionally been a weak point for medium format systems.
The Hasselblad X2D, with its 294-point phase detection system, has improved significantly over previous Hasselblad cameras, but it still lags behind the Fujifilm in terms of speed and reliability. I’ve found it to be perfectly adequate for portrait and landscape work where subjects aren’t moving quickly, but it struggles a bit with action and fast-moving subjects.
That said, the Hasselblad’s autofocus has a certain deliberateness that I’ve come to appreciate. It doesn’t hunt as much as the Fujifilm in low contrast situations, and when it locks focus, it’s absolutely confident. During a product photography session, I found myself preferring the Hasselblad’s methodical approach to the Fujifilm’s sometimes twitchy behavior.
Build Quality and Design
Both cameras are beautifully built, but they represent different design philosophies. The Hasselblad X2D is a study in Scandinavian minimalism—clean lines, uncluttered design, and a thoughtful layout that puts the most important controls at your fingertips. I’ve found the grip to be exceptionally comfortable, even during long shooting sessions, and the overall balance with XCD lenses is superb.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II, by contrast, has a more traditional DSLR-like design with a substantial grip and numerous physical controls. It’s slightly larger and heavier than the Hasselblad, but I’ve found it to be incredibly well-balanced with larger GF lenses. The build quality is exceptional, with weather sealing that gives me confidence when shooting in challenging conditions.
One area where the Hasselblad shines is its user interface. The large, high-resolution touchscreen is responsive and intuitive, and the menu system is refreshingly simple compared to the Fujifilm’s more complex layout. I’ve found that I can make adjustments on the Hasselblad without taking my eye from the viewfinder, something that’s more difficult with the Fujifilm.
The Fujifilm, however, offers more customization options, with numerous buttons and dials that can be programmed to your specific shooting style. Once I took the time to customize the GFX 100 II to my preferences, I found it to be incredibly efficient for my workflow.
Lens Ecosystems
The lens systems for both cameras are exceptional, but they have different strengths. The Hasselblad XCD lens lineup is smaller but more focused, with around 13 lenses covering focal lengths from 21mm to 230mm. What I love about the XCD lenses is their consistency—every lens I’ve used produces images with the same color science and rendering characteristics, creating a cohesive look across my entire portfolio.
The build quality of XCD lenses is exceptional, with smooth focus rings and precise aperture control. During a recent commercial shoot, I was able to switch between three different XCD lenses without any noticeable change in color or rendering, which saved me significant time in post-processing.
The Fujifilm GF lens system is more extensive, with over 20 lenses available and more on the way. The range includes not only high-quality primes but also some impressive zoom lenses that don’t exist in the Hasselblad system. I’ve found the GF lenses to be incredibly sharp, sometimes almost too sharp for portrait work where a softer look might be desired.
One advantage of the Fujifilm system is the availability of adapters that allow you to use older Hasselblad lenses. I’ve experimented with using some classic Hasselblad V-system lenses on the GFX 100 II, and while the autofocus doesn’t work, the results can be stunning with a unique character that’s different from native GF lenses.
Video Capabilities
While neither camera is primarily designed for video work, both offer respectable video features. The Fujifilm GFX 100 II can record 4K video at up to 60fps, with 10-bit 4:2:2 output available via HDMI. I’ve used it for a few commercial projects where the medium format look was desired, and the results have been impressive, particularly in terms of dynamic range and color rendition.
The Hasselblad X2D, on the other hand, is more limited in its video capabilities, offering 4K recording at up to 30fps. The quality is good, but the lack of advanced video features makes it less suitable for serious video work. I’ve used it primarily for behind-the-scenes footage and personal projects where image quality was more important than technical features.
User Interface and Experience
This is where personal preference plays a significant role. The Hasselblad X2D offers a streamlined, almost zen-like shooting experience. The touchscreen interface is intuitive and responsive, and I’ve found that I can adjust most settings without diving into menus. The built-in 1TB SSD is a game-changer, eliminating the need to constantly manage memory cards during long shoots.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II offers a more traditional camera experience with numerous physical controls and a more complex menu system. While it has a steeper learning curve, I’ve found that once customized to my preferences, it allows for faster operation in many situations. The lack of built-in storage means you’ll need to invest in high-quality CFexpress cards, which can be expensive.
One area where the Hasselblad shines is its color science right out of the camera. The “Natural Color Solution” produces JPEGs that are so good I often find myself using them directly for client delivery, saving significant time in post-processing. The Fujifilm’s colors are excellent but typically require more adjustment to achieve my desired look.
Battery Life
Battery life is a consideration with any medium format system, and both cameras have their strengths. The Hasselblad X2D uses a larger battery that I’ve found lasts for approximately 400-500 shots per charge. During a full-day wedding shoot, I typically need to change the battery once, which is reasonable given the power requirements of the large sensor.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II uses a smaller battery but offers more efficient power management. I’ve gotten similar shot counts from the Fujifilm, though the battery indicator isn’t always accurate, which has led to a few unexpected shutdowns during critical moments.
Both cameras offer USB-C charging, which I’ve found incredibly useful when traveling. I can charge the batteries using a power bank or my laptop, eliminating the need to carry a dedicated charger.
Also Read: Canon 1D Vs 5D
Price and Value
The Hasselblad X2D 100C is priced at $8,199 for the body only, while the Fujifilm GFX 100 II comes in at $7,499. While the Fujifilm is less expensive initially, the total cost of ownership depends on your lens choices and accessories.
I’ve found that Hasselblad XCD lenses tend to be more expensive than their GF counterparts, sometimes significantly so. A complete Hasselblad system will typically cost more than a comparable Fujifilm setup, but many photographers (myself included) believe the unique Hasselblad look justifies the additional expense.
That said, the Fujifilm offers tremendous value for money, delivering image quality that’s 95% of the Hasselblad at a lower price point. For professionals who need to balance image quality with budget considerations, the GFX 100 II represents an excellent compromise.
Real-World Performance
Portrait Photography
For portrait work, both cameras excel, but in different ways. The Hasselblad X2D produces images with a three-dimensional quality that’s hard to describe but immediately apparent. Skin tones are rendered naturally and beautifully, with a smoothness that doesn’t look artificial. During a recent portrait session, my client was moved to tears when she saw the images, commenting that they captured her essence in a way no other camera had.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II, while not quite matching the Hasselblad’s rendering of skin tones, offers incredible detail and sharpness. For beauty and fashion work where texture and detail are paramount, I’ve found the Fujifilm to be slightly better suited. The eye-detection autofocus is also more reliable, ensuring critical focus in situations where the subject is moving.
Landscape Photography
For landscape photography, both cameras are exceptional, but again with different strengths. The Hasselblad’s color science shines in natural settings, rendering greens and blues with remarkable accuracy. I’ve found that landscape images from the X2D require less post-processing to achieve the look I want, particularly in terms of color balance.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II offers slightly more dynamic range, which can be crucial in high-contrast scenes. During a sunrise shoot with extreme contrast between the bright sky and dark foreground, I was able to recover more detail from the Fujifilm files. The availability of wider lenses in the GF system is also an advantage for landscape photographers.
Commercial/Product Photography
In commercial work, both cameras deliver outstanding results, but the Hasselblad’s color accuracy can be a significant advantage when color matching is critical. During a product shoot for a client with very specific brand colors, the Hasselblad required minimal adjustment to achieve perfect color reproduction.
The Fujifilm’s higher resolution and slightly sharper rendering can be beneficial for product photography where fine details are important. The availability of specialized lenses like the GF 120mm f/4 Macro also gives the Fujifilm system an edge for certain types of commercial work.
Street Photography
Street photography isn’t typically associated with medium format cameras due to their size and weight, but both the X2D and GFX 100 II are more portable than previous medium format systems. The Hasselblad’s smaller size and quieter shutter make it slightly more discreet, while the Fujifilm’s superior autofocus can be advantageous for capturing fleeting moments.
I’ve used both cameras for street photography, and while they’re not as inconspicuous as a compact camera, the image quality is so exceptional that it’s worth the extra effort. The medium format look adds a unique perspective to street scenes that stands out from the typical full-frame or APS-C images.
Also Read: Sony 85mm 1.8 vs Tamron 28-75
Who Should Choose Which Camera?
Choose the Hasselblad X2D if:
- You prioritize color accuracy and natural skin tones
- You prefer a streamlined, intuitive user interface
- You value the unique Hasselblad rendering and color science
- You shoot primarily portraits, fine art, or commercial work
- You appreciate minimalist design and build quality
- Budget is less of a concern than achieving a specific look
Choose the Fujifilm GFX 100 II if:
- You need the most reliable autofocus for moving subjects
- You shoot a variety of genres including action and sports
- You want more lens options, including zooms
- You value customization and physical controls
- You need maximum dynamic range and resolution
- You’re looking for the best value in a medium format system
Pro Tips for Medium Format Photography
After years of shooting with both systems, I’ve learned a few things that can help you get the most out of these cameras:
- Use a sturdy tripod: With such high resolution, camera shake becomes more apparent. I never handhold either camera below 1/125s, and for critical work, I always use a tripod.
- Invest in quality memory cards: Both cameras benefit from fast, reliable memory cards. For the Fujifilm, I recommend CFexpress Type B cards for the best performance. The Hasselblad’s built-in SSD is fantastic, but having a fast backup card is still important.
- Master your exposure technique: With such high dynamic range, exposing to the right (ETTR) can yield incredible results, but be careful not to blow out highlights. I’ve found that both cameras respond well to slight overexposure (by about 0.7 stops) followed by careful adjustment in post-processing.
- Embrace the file size: These cameras produce enormous files. Make sure your computer can handle them—I recommend at least 32GB of RAM and a fast processor for smooth editing.
- Focus carefully: With such shallow depth of field, focus accuracy is critical. I always use focus magnification for critical shots, and for portraits, I focus on the subject’s near eye.
- Leverage the medium format look: Don’t just use these cameras like oversized full-frame systems. Embrace what makes medium format special—the rendering, the tonality, the three-dimensional quality.
FAQ
Is medium format really better than full-frame?
Yes and no. Medium format sensors capture more light and detail, resulting in images with superior dynamic range and a unique look. However, full-frame cameras offer advantages in speed, autofocus, lens selection, and often low-light performance. For many photographers, full-frame is the more practical choice, but if image quality is your top priority, medium format delivers results that full-frame simply can’t match.
Can I use these cameras for sports or wildlife photography?
While possible, neither camera is ideal for sports or wildlife work. The Fujifilm GFX 100 II has better autofocus and faster burst shooting, making it the more suitable of the two, but both lack the speed and buffer depth of dedicated sports cameras like the Canon R3 or Sony A1.
How do the lenses compare between the two systems?
Both systems have excellent lenses, but with different characteristics. Hasselblad XCD lenses are known for their consistent rendering and beautiful color reproduction, while Fujifilm GF lenses are often sharper and more clinically accurate. The GF system also offers more variety, including zoom lenses that aren’t available in the XCD lineup.
Is the Hasselblad worth the extra cost?
This depends on your priorities. If you value the unique Hasselblad color science and rendering, and if you shoot primarily portraits or commercial work where color accuracy is critical, the Hasselblad may be worth the investment. However, if you need more versatility and better autofocus, the Fujifilm offers better value.
How do these cameras handle high ISO performance?
Both cameras perform surprisingly well at higher ISOs, though they’re not as clean as the best full-frame cameras. I’ve found the Fujifilm to have a slight edge in noise control, with usable images up to ISO 6400. The Hasselblad produces beautiful files at lower ISOs but shows more noise above ISO 3200.
Can I use these cameras for professional video work?
While both cameras offer 4K video, they’re primarily designed for still photography. The Fujifilm GFX 100 II has more advanced video features, including 4K/60p and 10-bit output, making it the better choice for occasional video work. For serious video production, a dedicated video camera would be a better choice.
What are the storage requirements for these cameras?
The Hasselblad X2D has a built-in 1TB SSD, which is fantastic for long shoots. The Fujifilm requires external memory cards, and I recommend high-capacity CFexpress Type B cards for best performance. Both cameras produce large files (approximately 200MB per RAW image), so you’ll need substantial storage for your workflow.
How portable are these cameras compared to full-frame systems?
Both cameras are larger and heavier than typical full-frame cameras, but they’re significantly more portable than traditional medium format systems. The Hasselblad X2D is particularly compact for a medium format camera, making it feasible for travel and location work. Neither camera would be described as lightweight, but they’re manageable for most photographers.
Conclusion
After extensive shooting with both the Hasselblad X2D 100C and the Fujifilm GFX 100 II, I can tell you that there’s no clear winner—only the better camera for your specific needs and shooting style. The Hasselblad offers a unique shooting experience and produces images with a distinctive character that’s hard to replicate with any other system. Its color science and natural rendering make it my go-to for portrait and fine art work where image quality is paramount.
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II, on the other hand, offers incredible versatility and value. Its superior autofocus, more extensive lens system, and slightly better technical performance make it the more practical choice for many photographers, particularly those who shoot a variety of genres.
For my personal work, I find myself reaching for the Hasselblad when I want that special medium format look and when color accuracy is critical. The Fujifilm becomes my choice when I need faster autofocus, more dynamic range, or when I’m shooting in situations where the camera’s versatility is important.
Ultimately, both cameras represent the pinnacle of what’s possible in digital photography today. Whichever you choose, you’ll be getting a system capable of producing images of extraordinary quality and detail. My advice is to try both if possible, as the decision often comes down to personal preference and the specific look you’re trying to achieve in your images.
If you found this comparison helpful, be sure to bookmark this page for future reference. I’ll be updating it as I continue to test these cameras with new lenses and in different shooting scenarios. And don’t forget to check out my other articles on medium format photography and equipment reviews!
Which of these cameras would you choose for your photography? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!