fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  

FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              3       4       end
  

Archive 2024 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?

  
 
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


MaTiHH wrote:
I am using the 100 II (after using the 100s in the past) alongside with Sony and Leica.

To me: the 100 II kept all the good things about image quality from the 100s but with the better IBIS and the much better AF it ist now also an all-round camera I can rely on in daily use and even some more AF demanding situations where in the past I would always have brought my Sony for this use because of the much better AF in that system and the also very decent image quality.

So I am a very happy user.
...Show more →

I would be very interested to hear more details about the differences in the AF with the 100 II, especially since you have had a 100S. How much better is it than the 100S? I know this is hard to quantify, but can you describe the differences as much as possible? For example, what do you now shoot with the 100 II that you would not have done with the 100S?

Also, I would be very interested in more details and examples of the IBIS from your own experience. What shutter speeds are you able to get down to with the 100II's IBIS? Are you shooting more landscapes hand-held?

Also, how much bigger does the 100 II feel in use? How well does it handle for you?



Feb 05, 2024 at 08:56 AM
MaTiHH
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


I was frustrated with the 100s in daily life. I have four year old twins and the camera simply wasn't fast enough. This applies to all handling but especially to the AF. With the 100 II now even when the kids are running or generally moving the AF now is reliable. Speed is better but also subject recognition is much better with the new camera. This also helps for street photography.

I also used it for some sports (gymnastics) and it worked ok but I will prefer to use my a1 for that matter.

As for the size I simply didn't really recognize the difference in daily handling. The ergonomics of the new camera is very pleasing and it is very enjoyable to use.

The EVF of the 100 II also helps much more when manually focussing. Especially in low light situations it is much easier to focus the camera. I'm using this a lot whith the 30 TS.

As for the IBIS: I am able to take sharp photos with up to 1/5 of a second with the 30 TS. I am typically not very strong with handheld photos so this for me is quite a good value.



Feb 05, 2024 at 11:43 AM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


MaTiHH wrote:
I was frustrated with the 100s in daily life. I have four year old twins and the camera simply wasn't fast enough. This applies to all handling but especially to the AF. With the 100 II now even when the kids are running or generally moving the AF now is reliable. Speed is better but also subject recognition is much better with the new camera. This also helps for street photography.

I also used it for some sports (gymnastics) and it worked ok but I will prefer to use my a1 for that matter.

As for the size I simply didn't really
...Show more →

That is all very interesting and helpful, and it does give a clear sense of the degree of difference that you have experienced in the autofocus systems of the two cameras. The reviews I have read have been universally positive about the 100 II and have all described the AF as faster and more accurate. They have also said the 100 II handles faster--that it turns on more very quickly and is ready to shoot quickly and that its handling while shooting is much quicker. All of these factors would be very attractive to me as a reason to trade up from the 100S. Several reviewers seemed to be saying that the speed of the autofocus and the responsiveness of the camera generally were key reasons to upgrade, and that for landscape usage there was not so much reason to upgrade from the 100S.

In my own usage of my 100S, I have taken some portraits, including of children, that I cherish and that I think show the advantages of medium format. However, while the 100S does have Efe-AF that can work, it is generally a slower though beautiful camera. Its gorgeous results have made me love it and it does handle quite well given that it is a medium format. But in practice, I have tended to use it for landscapes or still lifes and used my Sony cameras for people shots.

It sounds like the 100 II would expand the occasions on which would be happy to use medium format with people.

I also very much value IBIS because I hate using a tripod and this would help with all kinds of shooting in dim light. So that is a significant advantage also. You seemed to feel the two stops difference between the 100S and the 100 II as significant.

Reportedly, the 100 II also has better high ISP, low light performance. Have you noticed that?



Feb 05, 2024 at 04:53 PM
MaTiHH
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


I didn't see much difference on the low light performance except for better focus.

For kids just make sure you use one of the lenses with an LM focus system, it really makes a difference on 100 II.



Feb 05, 2024 at 06:13 PM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


I was shooting a scrambling three-year-old this morning, using a 100S. I got some good shots, but the child was close to the camera, was playing at being a T-Rex and so moving around jerkily. There were also many occasions when the camera failed to find focus and also many moments when the slowness of focusing (I was using an LM lens) and the general slowness of the camera muddied the photographic waters considerably.

The experience does confirm me in my trend toward getting a 100 II. It is hard to estimate how much difference the 100 II would have made in this morning's shooting situation, but judging from what MaTiHH wrote about his experience of the differences between the 100S and the 100 II, the 100 II might have made a considerable difference for me with the T-Rex.

I have checked out renting one to see the differeneces in my own usage, but the cost is close to $500 for a week. Doesn't seems like a good investment to spend 7% of the cost of the new camera on a week-long try-out.



Feb 06, 2024 at 10:50 AM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


MaTiHH wrote:
I didn't see much difference on the low light performance except for better focus.

For kids just make sure you use one of the lenses with an LM focus system, it really makes a difference on 100 II.


One more series of questions that I meant to ask:

In using Eye-AF or Subject Recognition with your kids, especially when you were at a wide aperture, how often did you get critical focus on the eyeball rather than on eyelashes or eyelids?

Which lenses were you using and usually what apertures do you use for your kids?

Did you notice differences among lenses in eyeball accuracy?

Did you notice lighting differences in getting or not getting eyeball accuracy?



Feb 06, 2024 at 05:28 PM
liggy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


I still haven't tried the 100II but if I had kids and wanted shots of them moving I'd grab the A1 or A7RV before the 100II. Hard to imagine it is *that* much better than the 100S or still remotely close to what the better FF systems offer.

Pure conjecture on my part admittedly - in any event for casual shooting like that 102mp seems like overkill regardless.



Feb 06, 2024 at 06:39 PM
olegkin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


You know folks, just because you have 100s, it does not mean you have to shoot everything with it
There is a reason technology Gods gave us many different cameras, good to be used for different purposes. I photograph kids with OM1, same aspect ration, no issues with quality unless you pixel peep.



Feb 06, 2024 at 07:09 PM
MaTiHH
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


chiron wrote:
One more series of questions that I meant to ask:

In using Eye-AF or Subject Recognition with your kids, especially when you were at a wide aperture, how often did you get critical focus on the eyeball rather than on eyelashes or eyelids?

Which lenses were you using and usually what apertures do you use for your kids?

Did you notice differences among lenses in eyeball accuracy?

Did you notice lighting differences in getting or not getting eyeball accuracy?


I get more that 80% when the kids are not moving too fast and about 60% if they are moving. Especially when they are moving I prefer the 110/2 since it has linear motor and the AF-C just gives better results with that motor. I shoot that lens wide open most of the time (just love the results).

I have also been using the 80 and 55 for my kids and both give very good results. Just when there is too much movement they tend to be slower following the kids. So when they are running towards me the delay is visible in the pictures. Sometimes when walking around I am using the 45-100 and the results are very similar to the 110 in terms of focus accuracy.

Lighting did not make that much of a difference. The position that the eye has to the camera and how wide the eye is open tends to more important.

As I said - I find the 100 II very useful for this and I definitely love the results. Do I get more keepers with my a1 or R5? Yes, sure. But these results just have not been taken with MF!



Feb 07, 2024 at 08:05 AM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


A colleague of mine who has owned GFX 100, the GFX100S and the GFX 100 II responded elsewhere to some of the questions I asked about the !00 II. I thought his comments were worth bringing here:

Question: In using the GFX 100 II and Eye-AF or Subject Recognition with your kids, especially when you were at a wide aperture, how often did you get critical focus on the eyeball rather than on eyelashes or eyelids?
Answer: I often shoot portraits and I almost always got critical focus with the 100 II. More problems on this issue with my full-frame kit.

Question: Which lenses were you using and usually what apertures do you use for images of kids or moving people?
Answer110 F2, 55 1.7, 32-64, 45-100, 100-200. DOF can be razor thin, so I avoid wide-open unless I am back a bit. I like the new 55/1.7 a lot.

Question: Did you notice differences among lenses in eyeball accuracy?
Answer: The lenses with Linear Motors did better with eyeball AF, but the differences were not huge.

Question: Did you notice lighting differences in getting or not getting eyeball accuracy?
Answer: No

He also wrote:
"I've owned every Fuji MF camera, the 100 was good (too big), the 100S was simply great but the 100 II is off the charts. There are so many things not mentioned as improvements. AF, that gorgeous EVF, Ergos, looks, low light performance, the IQ isn't night and day over the 100s, but it's there, or was to me. It was so fun to use. The IBIS also helps because I avoid tripods unless I have to use one. The size of the 100 II feels about the same as the 100S after 5 minutes although it's .2 pounds heavier and it is taller."

His responses to the 100 II seem generally in line with the review Andy Westlake wrote for Amateur Photographer:
https://amateurphotographer.com/review/fujifilm-gfx100-ii-review/

It does sound like if you are using the camera mainly for still subjects (of whatever category) that the GFX100S is just fine and there is less reason to upgrade. But if you want to shoot moving subjects, the GFX100 II confers significant advantages as well as some nice enhancements.



Feb 10, 2024 at 11:51 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


^^^
I'm sensing a bit of GAS...

I'm not saying that one would never use a GFX for photographing the kids, but I'm thinking that the non-professional (and even professional) situations in which such gear would make a difference with that subject are... limited.



Feb 10, 2024 at 01:55 PM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


gdanmitchell wrote:
^^^
I'm sensing a bit of GAS...

I'm not saying that one would never use a GFX for photographing the kids, but I'm thinking that the non-professional (and even professional) situations in which such gear would make a difference with that subject are... limited.


I think you're being just a bit dismissive of the process of making photographs of one's family. Whether medium format is appropriate very much depends on the kind of image you are trying to make. Sally Mann used an 8X10 view camera for most of her family images. Some of Alfred Stieglitz's greatest images were large format images of his lover and wife, Georgia O'Keeffe. There are many other examples (e.g., Harry Callahan and Eleanor; Emmet Gowin, Edith, and their family), and there are also great examples of wonderful photographs of family members made with smaller format cameras, e.g., those made by Elliott Erwitt or by Jessica Harper.

Personally, I see a clear difference in image quality between small medium format and full frame, notably in the color and tone transitions and the overall smoothness of the image, as one might expect since the GFX sensor is about 70% larger than a full frame sensor. You give up something and you get something by using medium format. I love small and nimble full frame cameras, but I also have long appreciated the look of medium format.

Why should image quality matter more for a commercial photograph of a can of soup or a model's lips than for a photograph of one's child? Which will be looked at longer and more intensely by the audience for whom it is intended? Image quality is certainly not the only criterion by which to evaluate a photograph, but it can be an important criterion, depending on what the photographer wants. What is deeper or more important than family?

My own expectation is that in the coming years, Sony will be obliged to move into the medium format arena as this becomes more a focus of enthusiast photography. Fuji is ahead there. I'll be very interested to see what Sony can do with medium format and autofocus.



Feb 10, 2024 at 03:17 PM
Rand47
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


chiron wrote:
I think you're being just a bit dismissive of the process of making photographs of one's family. Whether medium format is appropriate very much depends on the kind of image you are trying to make. Sally Mann used an 8X10 view camera for most of her family images. Some of Alfred Stieglitz's greatest images were large format images of his lover and wife, Georgia O'Keeffe. There are many other examples (e.g., Harry Callahan and Eleanor; Emmet Gowin, Edith, and their family), and there are also great examples of wonderful photographs of family members made with smaller format cameras, e.g., those
...Show more →

I have to disagree. I own two GFX (102 mp) cameras and almost all of the lenses available - so I’m definitely biased in favor of the system for the work I do. But, I also have a good friend who has 3 GFX bodies and a full compliment of lenses, and a Nikon Z9 and good compliment of the best Z lenses. I sometimes do file editing for him. And I sometimes make artist proof prints for him. I’ve made 24x36 portrait prints from the Z9 that are every bit as good as my GFX portrait prints. And the reason his portrait was shot on the Z9 (in this case) was that with the light and conditions the GFX just didn’t cut it.

For still life, landscape, and “some” handheld work, the GFX’s detail rendering is great and pretty much state of the art (with the exception of the IQ4 150 Phase back), but it’s suboptimal for anything moving much at all compared to the Z9. I’ve actually been surprised by this (and to be honest, a little grumpy).

Rand



Feb 11, 2024 at 11:11 AM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


Rand47 wrote:
I have to disagree. I own two GFX (102 mp) cameras and almost all of the lenses available - so I’m definitely biased in favor of the system for the work I do. But, I also have a good friend who has 3 GFX bodies and a full compliment of lenses, and a Nikon Z9 and good compliment of the best Z lenses. I sometimes do file editing for him. And I sometimes make artist proof prints for him. I’ve made 24x36 portrait prints from the Z9 that are every bit as good as my GFX portrait prints. And the
...Show more →

Fair enough for your experience, and I appreciate your thoughtful response. But some of my favorite shots of my grandchildren were made with my GFX100S. And others were made with my A1. The A1 autofocus is of course way better. But the GFX, while it misses some shots, has the image quaoities of medium format.

And what do you say to Sally Mann or to Emmet Gowin?



Feb 11, 2024 at 11:29 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


chiron wrote:
I think you're being just a bit dismissive of the process of making photographs of one's family. Whether medium format is appropriate very much depends on the kind of image you are trying to make. Sally Mann used an 8X10 view camera for most of her family images. Some of Alfred Stieglitz's greatest images were large format images of his lover and wife, Georgia O'Keeffe. There are many other examples (e.g., Harry Callahan and Eleanor; Emmet Gowin, Edith, and their family), and there are also great examples of wonderful photographs of family members made with smaller format cameras, e.g., those
...Show more →

I’m not being generically dismissive of that. I’m acknowledging that most people making pictures of the kids are not doing work like that of the people you mention. (I’m quite familiar with most of it, and I’ve seen it actual prints of some of it.)

Now, if that is where our OP is coming from — an extremely talented, experienced, and dedicated photographer working to produce great art with the family as the subject — I acknowledge that possibility, and there's room to read my post without offense.

But even if that is true, there’s a valid argument that the GFX system is not the ideal one for that kind of family photography in all but a subset of even those cases, particularly when smaller, less expensive systems today can produce utterly first rate image quality of this subject. Even looking at what we might call “serious photographers” (a shorthand description, lacking a better short one), many would get better photographs using something else — a DSLR with greater lens options, a smaller and lighter system that would be readily available in more situations, etc. And any of these alternatives can — as the history of photographic art proves — produce great photography.

And all of that aside, the question remains: is our OP this sort of photographer, a person like those you named, whose primary occupation and objective in professional life is, in fact, photography?

Or is it possible that this is a person who wants to make some fine photographs of family activities and wants them to be pretty good photos, a person for whom photography is not their professional focus but more of an ancillary one. And what about this person’s photography of the kids rises to the level where something like the GFX system will a) be the best option and b) even make a difference?

I think it is fair — and even helpful for the OP — to ask this question. There is a (small) chance that this person (whose photography knowledge does seem at least somewhat less that that of the photographers you mentioned) has a notion that the “very best camera” is necessary for making family pictures. Most often that’s not true — or perhaps, more accurately, the "very best camera" is not such an expensive and large and (in some ways) limited one. It could be useful to the OP to hear this and think seriously about what they are trying to do and how to do it. (And even when it is true, “the very best camera” is not always the one with the largest format available, particularly for this subject.)

In the end, the answer to the question by someone (who seems perhaps less that photographic advanced), “Should I buy this extremely expensive and sophisticated thing now for what I plan to do?” Is not alnays “YES!” In fact, more often than not, the better answer leads to “not really,” and “perhaps this other thing would be a better choice for you.”

Dan

Edited on Feb 11, 2024 at 12:50 PM · View previous versions



Feb 11, 2024 at 11:35 AM
Sharona
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


chiron wrote:
Fair enough for your experience, and I appreciate your thoughtful response. But some of my favorite shots of my grandchildren were made with my GFX100S. And others were made with my A1. The A1 autofocus is of course way better. But the GFX, while it misses some shots, has the image quaoities of medium format.

And what do you say to Sally Mann or to Emmet Gowin?

I have no skin in the game, but how long do you suppose it takes Sally Mann to make just one of her images? This may not be the right kind of comparison.




Feb 11, 2024 at 12:28 PM
vineyard
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


With wet plate, it takes her a couple minutes. Cleaning and coating the glass, getting the exposure, developing and fixating the whole thing. I think you could say middle format is to digital what wet plate is to film photograph, just not as drastic of a slow down. But you have a more deliberate process, get rewarded with higher detail, a different character (I disagree with the poster above that Nikon Z9 or Sony A1/A7RV files are similar, I see a difference), and have to take a penalty in convenience and performance.


Feb 11, 2024 at 01:51 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


vineyard wrote:
With wet plate, it takes her a couple minutes. Cleaning and coating the glass, getting the exposure, developing and fixating the whole thing. I think you could say middle format is to digital what wet plate is to film photograph, just not as drastic of a slow down. But you have a more deliberate process, get rewarded with higher detail, a different character (I disagree with the poster above that Nikon Z9 or Sony A1/A7RV files are similar, I see a difference), and have to take a penalty in convenience and performance.


Small but not insignificant point: You can choose to slow down and use a more deliberate process with a system that is also capable of working more quickly. I often do.



Feb 11, 2024 at 02:30 PM
chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


gdanmitchell wrote:
I’m not being generically dismissive of that. I’m acknowledging that most people making pictures of the kids are not doing work like that of the people you mention. (I’m quite familiar with most of it, and I’ve seen it actual prints of some of it.)

Now, if that is where our OP is coming from — an extremely talented, experienced, and dedicated photographer working to produce great art with the family as the subject — I acknowledge that possibility, and there's room to read my post without offense.

But even if that is true, there’s a valid argument that the GFX system is
...Show more →

It depends on what you are trying to do. Not being Sally Mann has nothing to do with it--that's just condescension. It's like saying you shouldn't use a Leica because you're not Cartier-Bresson.

To my mind, it is actually silly to argue that you shouldn't use medium format for pictures of family. You may prefer not to, but so what?


Edited on Feb 11, 2024 at 03:36 PM · View previous versions



Feb 11, 2024 at 03:22 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · GFX100 II --- What do owners think?


chiron wrote:
It depends on what you are trying to do. Not being Sally Mann has nothing to do with it--that's just condescension. To my mind, it is actually silly to argue that you shouldn't use medium format for pictures of family. You may prefer not to, but so what?


Your replies will make more sense if you actually read and understand the posts you reply to first.

I did not make the Sally Mann point, so whatever your point s about condescension, it is irrelevant to what I wrote.

And, of course, asking if the OP is doing something similar to what Sally Mann (and the other mentioned photographers) does is relevant if the point (made by the poster to whom I was replying) had suggested that using a miniMF system for photographing the family makes since because Sally Mann uses a large format.

I did not argue that one “shouldn’t” use miniMF for pictures of the family. I argued for asking whether or not that is the best option for the particular use by this poster. If a poster asks for advice, it is reasonable to offer it.

Edited on Feb 11, 2024 at 03:42 PM · View previous versions



Feb 11, 2024 at 03:37 PM
1              3       4       end




FM Forums | Fuji Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1              3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register