p.23 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gdanmitchell wrote:
However, in this case, a (the?) major point of using the larger 102MP sensor is ostensibly to achieve various kinds of technical image quality superiority over smaller formats.
16 bit color + DR bump vs. 14 bit color.
Many will discount this, but that's the attraction for my "superior IQ" over smaller formats. The 102 MP isn't a main attractant, but, since it does offer crop potential to the fixed lens (aka my Q2 on steroids with better color DR in post).
Granted, Q3 and M11 are in the realm of consideration, as is the Hassy and SL3 for gains over my Q2 (in terms of color IQ). Kinda splits the diff between a Hassy and a Q.
Fuji has entered the conversation, so it's at least worth exploring ...sort of along the lines of your "going slow" thing, etc.
p.23 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Such a high MP FF camera sounds interesting, but I wonder how much benefit it will give considering that diffraction will kick in already with low apertures.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Had not heard that, but very interesting. I’ve been in “go slow mode” on plans for my next Big Camera system and have been since it became clear that Canon’s rumored plans for a high MP FF system in the lineage of the 5DsR seem to have evaporated.
A camera like the one you mention would likely trigger a switch for me.
p.23 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
ustjwenew wrote:
Such a high MP FF camera sounds interesting, but I wonder how much benefit it will give considering that diffraction will kick in already with low apertures.
Since aperture is a relative ratio of lens vs. media capture area, the larger capture area means the physical dimension for a given f/stop is larger in the larger format. Hence, the reason why the f/64 club didn't sweat diffraction, the way we would in FF. Thus the diffraction from f/4 is more akin to that of f/2.8 in FF terms, as the light passing the aperture blades causes wave amplitude like dropping a rock in a glass of water and watching the ripples. vs. dropping the same rock in the lack and watching the ripples dissipate in strength as they extend in distance from origination (in the case of lens aperture it is from edges > center < edges creating wave amplitude).
The irony here, is that with the lack of IBIS, folks are concerned about needing a higher shutter speed, thus warranting the limiting aperture of f/4 (griping, not fast enough). Until you get into f/11 (f/8 FF equiv), I doubt you'll see much effect ... even in scrutiny of diffraction.
I don't see diffraction an issue here of any significance more than any other MF system. I mean, how many lenses in MF are f/3.5 (same as f/4 basically) or f/4. No diff with this fixed lens being f/4 (imo).
p.23 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
jj1804 wrote:
Counterpoint - the idea about having a high MP, fixed lens, compact camera is to be able to crop to your hearts desire. It makes the camera that much more usable for different scenarios and I feel like that's kind of the whole point of cameras like the 100RF or the Leica Q3 / 43. The larger the sensor and the more pixel, the better the resulting image quality of the crops. Leica Q3 and Q343 go even further than the 100RF offering even 5MP files at the longest "focal length". Remember that instagram is 1MP and most smartphones have a resolution lower than 3MP, where most of the images online ultimately get viewed on....Show more →
Your counterpoint explains why iPhone 14 Pro the most used camera in Flickr. An even that is way overkill for the 1mp spec which was the baseline of your counterpoint.
jj1804 wrote:
@robsonj If you need 50+MP at 80mm in 65x24 mode the 100RF is the wrong camera for you - look at the GFX then.
Not my problem, I take most of my photos @28-40mm focal length or @600mm. So maybe GFX100RF is the right camera for me... I tell you later, I have placed my preorder
p.23 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
16 bit color + DR bump vs. 14 bit color.
Many will discount this, but that's the attraction for my "superior IQ" over smaller formats. The 102 MP isn't a main attractant, but, since it does offer crop potential to the fixed lens (aka my Q2 on steroids with better color DR in post).
Granted, Q3 and M11 are in the realm of consideration, as is the Hassy and SL3 for gains over my Q2 (in terms of color IQ). Kinda splits the diff between a Hassy and a Q.
Fuji has entered the conversation, so it's at least worth exploring ...sort of along the lines of your "going slow" thing, etc....Show more →
It is that old “balance of pluses and minuses” thing, accompanied by the eternal “how much difference does this actually make?” question.
Sure, if all else is equal, why not have more bit depth in the files. In extreme post processing situations you might get a marginal advantage from that sometimes.
But I still come back to the underlying dissonance. If the technical minutiae of sensor performance is so critical, then how is it that the reduction in IQ from rather radical cropping is a better solution that using a lens that better matches the desired framing? Or, if the technical minutiae are not that important, why not use a smaller and more versatile camera?
I’ve been thinking more about how I feel about the RF recently. While considering how I might write about it (somewhere else) i realized that it is important to acknowledge its strengths and weaknesses. As a piece of photographic technology it is impressive in several ways. I think it is also successful from a pure design perspective. And, of course, it is impressive to put such a sensor into such a relatively small camera.
There are, in my view, a few technical misfires, too. But I won’t go into those here. Again.
But the main issue for me is somewhat illustrated by your desire to both have the better technical specs… and surrender the advantages of them in the face of real photographic needs. To be sure, it can be a fine camera for a certain subset of camera buyers. However, there are problematic dissonances in the thing — in particular the expectation of outstanding technical performance combined with the need to accept some fairly significant compromises of that very thing in real world photography.
p.23 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gdanmitchell wrote:
It is that old “balance of pluses and minuses” thing, accompanied by the eternal “how much difference does this actually make?” question.
Sure, if all else is equal, why not have more bit depth in the files. In extreme post processing situations you might get a marginal advantage from that sometimes.
But I still come back to the underlying dissonance. If the technical minutiae of sensor performance is so critical, then how is it that the reduction in IQ from rather radical cropping is a better solution that using a lens that better matches the desired framing? Or, if the technical minutiae are not that important, why not use a smaller and more versatile camera?
I’ve been thinking more about how I feel about the RF recently. While considering how I might write about it (somewhere else) i realized that it is important to acknowledge its strengths and weaknesses. As a piece of photographic technology it is impressive in several ways. I think it is also successful from a pure design perspective. And, of course, it is impressive to put such a sensor into such a relatively small camera.
There are, in my view, a few technical misfires, too. But I won’t go into those here. Again.
But the main issue for me is somewhat illustrated by your desire to both have the better technical specs… and surrender the advantages of them in the face of real photographic needs. To be sure, it can be a fine camera for a certain subset of camera buyers. However, there are problematic dissonances in the thing — in particular the expectation of outstanding technical performance combined with the need to accept some fairly significant compromises of that very thing....Show more →
Understood, as I've stated elsewhere ... it is a bit of an enigma.
And for some, that enigma presents a level of intrigue and/or inspiration, too. Likely mated to the personality of the shooter, more than the technical merits of the tool, alone.
p.23 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
ustjwenew wrote:
Such a high MP FF camera sounds interesting, but I wonder how much benefit it will give considering that diffraction will kick in already with low apertures.
That issue is over-rated. And it isn’t all THAT different in the 102MP miniMF format. (The size difference between miniMF and FF is about half that of the difference between APS-C and FF.)
What I do know is that
- I can make a very sharp and very large print from 50MP 5DsR images.
- for various reasons, it is eventually going to be time to upgrade from that camera to something newer.
- much of my landscape photography is of a sort where a GFX system would have some pluses, but…
- …the GFX system does not provide the range of focal lengths (without compromises) that I rely on for my landscape photography.
- in optimal cases, there are pluses for detail resolution in a 80MP FF sensor. (If there weren’t, why would anyone ever be interested in, say, a future Sony 150MP miniMF sensor?)
make sense?
I’ll try not to pursue these question in this thread since the GFX 100 RF’s feature set would not make it a candidate for this kind of photography in any case.
p.23 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Prosophos wrote:
Thank you for sharing this.
Guys, CineD has posted a proof of concept video of the GFX100RF with a anamorphic 1.5x adapter for video.
I'm sure those focused on image quality first, and eager to be critical, will point out the obvious -- that this can be done far better and far more cheaply and on APS-C.
Obviously. This is just a quick video with what the guy had on hand just to show it could be done. The edges look terrible, the hacks to get it to work make the exercise pointless. Let's not miss the point of this video here.
With that out of the way, this does confirm that the GFX100RF adapter ring, just like the X100 series, results in a female 49mm thread (and it looks to me the adapter ring, which has a bayonet for the lens hood, is what they used here? I wonder if that worsens the vignetting compared to a potentially thinner one?)
It kinda makes you wonder what would happen if you try to just screw on the old X100 converter lenses (I'm assuming the male threads on the camera itself are also 49mm? obviously I wouldn't be surprised if there were issues... but maybe not?)
Again, as someone who has used 6x6 medium format film for street portraits (whether TLR or 500C SLR style with WLF), the ergonomics of the GFX100RF + adapter and tilting LCD looks promising, just like the Hasselblad 907x + certain XCD lenses.
This is a far cheaper and arguably more flexible alternative for this application -- the only question is how long before there will be conversion lenses (or hacks) for focal lengths of acceptable quality.
p.23 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Prosophos wrote: , yes. The signal to noise ratio is high. I just try to tune out the most outspoken characters here who are very fond of self-identifying as experts.
Back to the GFX100RF, I have no doubt it will be a wonderful camera that will inspire photographers to actually make photographs, despite its (like every camera on the planet) limitations.
—Peter.
That's where I'm at. Lots of comments, repeated over and over by people who will never own it for whatever reason.
I demo'd the camera at the Fuji store in London. It's form factor is wonderful, excellent evf, crop dial and focal length at your fingertips and no doubt the image quality will be fantastic. I pre-ordered it when I got back to my hotel. It'll be my everyday and travel camera.
p.23 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
spyderphil wrote:
That's where I'm at. Lots of comments, repeated over and over by people who will never own it for whatever reason.
I demo'd the camera at the Fuji store in London. It's form factor is wonderful, excellent evf, crop dial and focal length at your fingertips and no doubt the image quality will be fantastic. I pre-ordered it when I got back to my hotel. It'll be my everyday and travel camera.
+1 for demo vs. bench jockey. Some of us haven't had the pleasure of such an opportunity (yet).
When I get it in hand ... and shoot a couple of my "challenging" shots ... I'll quickly learn how much I like the camera and IF its technical foibles are (or aren't) an issue to be contended with for me.
p.23 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
16 bit color + DR bump vs. 14 bit color.
Many will discount this, but that's the attraction for my "superior IQ" over smaller formats. The 102 MP isn't a main attractant, but, since it does offer crop potential to the fixed lens (aka my Q2 on steroids with better color DR in post).
Granted, Q3 and M11 are in the realm of consideration, as is the Hassy and SL3 for gains over my Q2 (in terms of color IQ). Kinda splits the diff between a Hassy and a Q.
Fuji has entered the conversation, so it's at least worth exploring ...sort of along the lines of your "going slow" thing, etc....Show more →
For me having one camera with full frame equivalent of 28mm, 35mm and 50mm at your fingertips without having to change lenses is very appealing during my travels. Not only that…having a monster 100mp image with great dynamic range and wonderful colours in my bag for landscapes is a bonus.
Yes one can get a smaller format camera with a mitt full of primes ( done and still do this for many years ) but having the same ability in one light package is just something totally different.
I’m hoping my favourite camera shop will have one they can lend me…too much talk from people that have exactly zero experience with the GFX system giving out advice of how things should be. Nothing like using the equipment how one would use it to determine for themselves.
p.23 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chez wrote:
For me having one camera with full frame equivalent of 28mm, 35mm and 50mm at your fingertips without having to change lenses is very appealing during my travels. Not only that…having a monster 100mp image with great dynamic range and wonderful colours in my bag for landscapes is a bonus.
Yes one can get a smaller format camera with a mitt full of primes ( done and still do this for many years ) but having the same ability in one light package is just something totally different.
I’m hoping my favourite camera shop will have one they can lend me…too much talk from people that have exactly zero experience with the GFX system giving out advice of how things should be. Nothing like using the equipment how one would use it to determine for themselves....Show more →
We never consider the gear/lens choice/etc when looking at the works of the greats...we just take in the art and enjoy the moment they have captured. If you're about maximizing your chances to do that, the RF seems a treat (short of typical meh Fuji AF and the fact that manually focusing this lens like likely be as dire as the X100 lens).
HCB might as well have been shooting a pinhole camera by today's standards, and he is still regarded as the GOAT.
p.23 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
spyderphil wrote:
That's where I'm at. Lots of comments, repeated over and over by people who will never own it for whatever reason.
I demo'd the camera at the Fuji store in London. It's form factor is wonderful, excellent evf, crop dial and focal length at your fingertips and no doubt the image quality will be fantastic. I pre-ordered it when I got back to my hotel. It'll be my everyday and travel camera.
Thanks for sharing your actual, hands-on experience. I too have pre-ordered it and should be getting it during the first wave of deliveries. Looking forward to it.
p.23 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
It was 25 for black and 16 for silver on the list at the LCS, so I guess black is in the lead. Thought that was a pretty decent amount for the type of camera it is. Not hundreds like the X100 though lol.
p.23 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
A physical filter in the lens.
RustyBug wrote:
Question ... how does the 4-stop ND filter function? Is that essentially an electronic response adjustment to the signal, similar to ISO reduction, or
, yes. The signal to noise ratio is high. I just try to tune out the most outspoken characters here who are very fond of self-identifying as experts.
