p.28 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Completely agree. It’s not even like I live at wider apertures but I do certainly use them. Mostly around the house with the kids or for effect on certain things to make them stand out or get that “look” etc etc. excuse the newbie lack of technical terms.
I suppose I could just do that stuff on the zf only.
I’m also worried about seeing my hands moving with 102 mp unless I use a fast shutter, with no ibis.
chez wrote:
For me what’s tempting the most is the size of the body / lens wrapped up with a great sensor. Making the body larger takes away from the uniqueness of the camera.
p.28 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
And there are many who complain about the no ibis on the m11 leading to shaky photos. Personally I’ve never had an issue, I think sometimes it just comes to knowing the limitations and working within them
newyork wrote:
Like many others here this camera has interested me. For some reason the x100 never really did.
Currently I shoot an m10 and zf and consider the zf my main camera.
I’d have to rid myself of the m10 to acquire anything whether it’s the RF, a Z8, Q3 or a gfx100s. I’m not a professional. Wish I was. I get paid for a couple things that require a zoom lens on my zf.
The gfxRF is intriguing but f/4 with no way to go faster is a hmmmm to me. My m10 has no ibis but it’s not 102mp. If it had ibis and 2.8 lens it’d be sooooo tempting ...Show more →
p.28 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
The RF is the kind of camera that won’t cut you slack for being lazy with your technique and composition because of its limitations. For highly intentional shooting, it will be fantastic.
p.28 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
The same is said of the Leica m. At 24mp it’s a breeze.
RoamingScott wrote:
The RF is the kind of camera that won’t cut you slack for being lazy with your technique and composition because of its limitations. For highly intentional shooting, it will be fantastic.
p.28 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
1758 g
735 g
Physical size difference is noteworthy.
Odd. For years I’ve heard people claim - in this very forum - that they chose to shoot with larger, heavier cameras because the mass made them less subject to vibration/blur. Now the opposite is true? Hmmm.
As to IBIS, again, it isn’t that we cannot photograph without IBIS. We can!
It is that IBIS exists, it is useful, it extends the range of what we can do, it has no real downsides, it is on most cameras today (including Fujifilm’s other GFX bodies). And, oddly, I’m not hearing that “we can shoot without that” logic applied to things like aspect ratio knobs… ;-)
p.28 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
The RF is the kind of camera that won’t cut you slack for being lazy with your technique and composition because of its limitations. For highly intentional shooting, it will be fantastic.
Yes, but when purchasing expensive gear, I would think most people would be doing intentional shooting. I take my A6000 with a little lens when I just want to fool around.
p.28 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chez wrote:
Yes, but when purchasing expensive gear, I would think most people would be doing intentional shooting. I take my A6000 with a little lens when I just want to fool around.
Have you SEEN the average output from folks spending $5000+ on their single FL cameras
Most people don't have the foggiest notion of what they are doing, let alone need to be shooting ultra restrictive gear that punishes their lack of knowledge.
p.28 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I think heavier helps dampen mirror slap for sure. But that is far less applicable to a leaf shutter
gdanmitchell wrote:
Odd. For years I’ve heard people claim - in this very forum - that they chose to shoot with larger, heavier cameras because the mass made them less subject to vibration/blur. Now the opposite is true? Hmmm.
As to IBIS, again, it isn’t that we cannot photograph without IBIS. We can!
It is that IBIS exists, it is useful, it extends the range of what we can do, it has no real downsides, it is on most cameras today (including Fujifilm’s other GFX bodies). And, oddly, I’m not hearing that “we can shoot without that” logic applied to things like aspect ratio knobs… ;-)
p.28 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gdanmitchell wrote:
Odd. For years I’ve heard people claim - in this very forum - that they chose to shoot with larger, heavier cameras because the mass made them less subject to vibration/blur. Now the opposite is true? Hmmm.
As to IBIS, again, it isn’t that we cannot photograph without IBIS. We can!
It is that IBIS exists, it is useful, it extends the range of what we can do, it has no real downsides, it is on most cameras today (including Fujifilm’s other GFX bodies). And, oddly, I’m not hearing that “we can shoot without that” logic applied to things like aspect ratio knobs… ;-)
Well, I think that in terms of mass ... there is the matter of weight for carry vs. weight for shooting. Then, there's also the matter of vibration damping. With a focal plane shutter vs. a leaf shutter, the linear vibrations vs. the radially opposing vibrations have different amount of resonance. So, with a focal plane shutter vs. the leaf shutter the need for mass damping can be different.
More than one piece to the mass puzzle ... depending on how it is incorporated with other factors. In some regard, it isn't unlike recoil in a firearm. Mass can dampen it, but depending on other factors, such as trigger pull force needed and caliber, etc. the mass can provide damping to the recoil. But, depending on the person, something with too much mass is unwieldy for them.
I think that folks coming from shooting M's will see very little concern for the lack of IBIS. Folks who are conditioned to stabilization may take some adjusting to an "old school" approach of well designed vs. more tech. An age old debate / preference kind of thing.
But, with 735 g of mass, it's not likely it is a body that is dinky and fiddly. (On Paper) It strikes me Goldilocks here, again.
I think this is gonna be one of those things where "on paper" won't tell the real story. The real story will be once it is in your hands ... how you feel about using it in your workflow, moreover than what it can / can't do. It'll be what does it inspire YOU to do with it.
p.28 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Have you SEEN the average output from folks spending $5000+ on their single FL cameras
Most people don't have the foggiest notion of what they are doing, let alone need to be shooting ultra restrictive gear that punishes their lack of knowledge.
Yep, plenty of people try to buy their way into great images.
p.28 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
Well, I think that in terms of mass ... there is the matter of weight for carry vs. weight for shooting. Then, there's also the matter of vibration damping. With a focal plane shutter vs. a leaf shutter, the linear vibrations vs. the radially opposing vibrations have different amount of resonance. So, with a focal plane shutter vs. the leaf shutter the need for mass damping can be different.
More than one piece to the mass puzzle ... depending on how it is incorporated with other factors. In some regard, it isn't unlike recoil in a firearm. Mass can dampen it, but depending on other factors, such as trigger pull force needed and caliber, etc. the mass can provide damping to the recoil. But, depending on the person, something with too much mass is unwieldy for them.
I think that folks coming from shooting M's will see very little concern for the lack of IBIS. Folks who are conditioned to stabilization may take some adjusting to an "old school" approach of well designed vs. more tech. An age old debate / preference kind of thing.
But, with 735 g of mass, it's not likely it is a body that is dinky and fiddly. (On Paper) It strikes me Goldilocks here, again.
I think this is gonna be one of those things where "on paper" won't tell the real story. The real story will be once it is in your hands ... how you feel about using it in your workflow, moreover than what it can / can't do. It'll be what does it inspire YOU to do with it....Show more →
Just reviewed my image library and two trips I made for cultural photography to India and Tanzania had 1.3% and 0.6% respectively of the images taken with a shutter less than 1/60. With today’s high iso abilities the need for ibis is not so demanding as previous generations. My understanding the Fuji sensor even pushes this high iso to another level…so I have very little worry for the lack of ibis in the RF for my photography.
Some people need to realize not everyone shoots the same subject or the same way. Pick the right tool for the job comes to mind. Some people cannot see past their needs to realize other people have differing needs…just pick the equipment that does what you need. For me, a 1765gm setup is a total show stopper for my travel / documentary photography…even if you get ibis with that system.
p.28 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I think people who use shutter speed as an ISO crutch in either direction have lost the plot.
Shutter speed is a crucial aesthetic choice for photography, not a value to just float willy nilly, or be compromised just to get less noise. It is THE way to imply motion in a photo, and if you feel your camera has a limitation that will prevent you from using shutter speed in this intentional way, consider another camera.
It's like people who shoot m4/3 and shoot at 1 second to keep the ISO low.
p.28 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
I think people who use shutter speed as an ISO crutch in either direction have lost the plot.
Shutter speed is a crucial aesthetic choice for photography, not a value to just float willy nilly, or be compromised just to get less noise. It is THE way to imply motion in a photo, and if you feel your camera has a limitation that will prevent you from using shutter speed in this intentional way, consider another camera.
It's like people who shoot m4/3 and shoot at 1 second to keep the ISO low.
I typically use manual mode, setting the shutter and aperture appropriately for the image I want, letting ISO float. This has worked for me for many years. The only time I set the iso is when shooting off a tripod and shutter is not important for the image.
p.28 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
I think people who use shutter speed as an ISO crutch in either direction have lost the plot.
Shutter speed is a crucial aesthetic choice for photography, not a value to just float willy nilly, or be compromised just to get less noise. It is THE way to imply motion in a photo, and if you feel your camera has a limitation that will prevent you from using shutter speed in this intentional way, consider another camera.
It's like people who shoot m4/3 and shoot at 1 second to keep the ISO low.
+1 ... SS has influence on the message of the story. ISO has influence on the quality of the capture.
Sure, we all have an eye to the IQ, but if I have to forego a smidgen of IQ (i.e. higher ISO) to get the story presented how I want it, I'll make that trade. In the end, it really means I'll either have to do more cleanup in post with NR, or I'll just not print as large, etc. if I bump the ISO in order to get the SS I want. But, in recent years the penalty for ISO is so much more malleable than in the past. That said, I'll sometimes use Auto ISO (Chez's point), but mostly I place it manually where I want it.
ISO, that can be dealt with in post to recover (some) of the diff. SS choices ... that's a decision to be made at time of capture.
p.28 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
Not sure if I missed it ... any feedback on manually focusing the lens?
I am guessing much the same as a x100, imho… terrible, but for manual focus I’m in the… take my ranger finder over my cold dead hands, camp for manual focusing 😀
p.28 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
robsonj wrote:
And there are many who complain about the no ibis on the m11 leading to shaky photos. Personally I’ve never had an issue, I think sometimes it just comes to knowing the limitations and working within them
I’ve never had an issue either - but I have the option of using a fast lens when I need it. In many ways, the M11 has provided the most enjoyable photographic experiences I’ve had. There’s no doubt the RF can perform incredibly, it’s just a bit more limited - like an M. I think that’s fine, it’s just disappointing to people who wanted something more versatile like an X100, Q, or even the GFX100S. It’s really more akin to the M in that way- powerful tool if it does what you need, and definitely not for every use or everyone.
p.28 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
itai195 wrote:
Sorry, I’ve had a 100S and no, I don’t think shooting at 25600 will beat an X100 by enough to matter to me.
Well I HAVE a 100S and have been doing A/B tests against the V (a camera with virtually the same DR as the VI) for this exact line of curiosity. I'll take my hard results vs your feelings
