u/Just-Guest-6385

I bought a used X2D about a month ago and I’m really enjoying it. I absolutely love the image quality and the overall shooting experience.
The one thing I’m really missing is continuous autofocus.
I also own a Fuji, which I use when I need AF-C, so every time I go out I have to decide which camera to take depending on what I’m planning to shoot. It’s not a huge problem, but it’s definitely inconvenient having to choose between the X2D’s image quality and the Fuji’s autofocus.
I’m seriously considering the X2D II, mainly because of the new AF-C.
I know it’s not supposed to be on the same level as the latest Sony/Canon/Nikon systems, and I’m not expecting it to be. What I’d really like to know is how it performs in actual everyday use, rather than what the marketing says.
For those who have been using the X2D II for a while:
Is AF-C actually reliable enough for moving subjects?
How does it perform with people/kids walking or moving around?
Do you get a reasonable percentage of keepers, or are there still a lot of missed-focus shots?
Is subject/eye detection actually useful?
Does it work well in less-than-perfect light?
And, most importantly, does AF-C make the X2D II practical enough that you no longer feel the need for a second camera with better autofocus?
I’m particularly interested in real-world experience from people who have used both the original X2D and the X2D II, because I’d like to know how big the improvement actually feels.
Thanks!

I’ve been into photography for about a year. I actually started because I wanted the best possible photos of my daughter as she grows up. At the beginning I was just using an iPhone, but then I bought my first camera, started learning, took photography courses, and gradually fell in love with the hobby.
What began as family photography has expanded into landscapes and street photography as well.
Lately I’ve been seriously considering moving to medium format, mainly after discovering Hasselblad cameras. I know they’re not for everyone, so I’d love to hear from people who actually made the switch from APS-C or full frame.
What made you move to medium format? Was it image quality, the shooting experience, the rendering, or something else? Looking back, was it worth it?
Would you recommend medium format to someone who is purely a hobbyist and has no professional aspirations?
Right now I’m considering buying a used X2D with the 45P. From what I’ve read, the 45P seems like a reasonable entry-level lens to learn the system. I know I’d probably want to upgrade it later, although I’m still not sure which lens would make the most sense since my main subject is still my daughter.
Do you think I’m approaching medium format the wrong way? Is it a poor fit for someone whose priority is family photography, with landscapes and street as secondary interests? Or is there something about the medium format experience that only really makes sense once you’ve lived with it?
Thanks

I'm currently shooting with a Fujifilm X-T50 and I'm very happy with it. I mainly enjoy landscapes, travel photography, and environmental portraits, so I'm not looking for better autofocus or faster performance.

Lately I've been thinking about buying a used Hasselblad X1D. Unfortunately, the X1D II is probably out of my budget, so I'm mostly considering the original X1D.

For those of you who have used both APS-C Fujifilm cameras and the X1D, is the difference in image quality and overall rendering really significant enough to justify owning both systems?

I'm not talking about autofocus, speed, or modern features. I'm specifically interested in the "medium format look" that people often mention: color, tonal transitions, depth, micro-contrast, and the overall character of the images.

Did switching from a high-resolution APS-C camera (like the 40 MP X-T50) to the 50 MP X1D genuinely change the way your photos looked, or is the difference more subtle than people make it seem?

I'd really appreciate hearing from people who have actually made a similar switch. Thanks!