p.37 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
robsonj wrote:
Back to my wondering about WCL & TCL from a Fuji interview with dpreview…
As for whether the GFX100RF will ever get add-on optical lenses to change its field of view, similar to those for the X100 series, the company says it thinks the digital teleconverter is the way. "At this moment, we think that because of the 102MP, the digital teleconverter works," said Yoneda. "But depending on the users' feedback, we can, of course, consider any possibility of the wide-angle and teleconverter."
Another reason is the digital teleconverter. If it comes with an OVF, we'd have to cover 20mm of range when using the teleconverter, which would make the guide-lines much smaller. So, from a practical point of view, we decided to install the EVF."
p.37 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
After downloading and editing some RAF files, I must say that the IQ of the lens is very good. 3x crops are still very usable (edited in LR with Enhance function used). Why does Fuji not provide for more crop options in-camera?? Without cropping, the file size has just no use for me, though. There is no difference on the PC, TV, and printed to A3 to files from the Sony a7cR, which gives me 2.5x crop (with 3x still okay). So, no, the camera is not for me.
p.37 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
After downloading and editing some RAF files, I must say that the IQ of the lens is very good. 3x crops are still very usable (edited in LR with Enhance function used). Why does Fuji not provide for more crop options in-camera?? Without cropping, the file size has just no use for me, though. There is no difference on the PC, TV, and printed to A3 to files from the Sony a7cR, which gives me 2.5x crop (with 3x still okay). So, no, the camera is not for me.
What you mean by more crop options? I think GFX100RF crops just like the good old circa 2001 Ixus
There is a very widely framed portrait in the dropbox. It can be cropped surprisingly much without hugely visible technical loss of image quality. However, when cropping deep the look of picture changes - as one can expect - from miniMF to m43
p.37 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
jjcha wrote:
Ok final shot. Same night. This one - heavily back lit. No flash. These guys were right in front of me, 1 - 1.5 meters away? Not even -- I vaguely recall leaning back (pushing back against the crowd) to get this photo.
I pushed the shadows hard on this one in post. Again, I wouldn't mind at all more shadow recovery. I'm abusing the image quality here and I would love to have some of it back. I have to believe the GFX sensor can do that better than the GRIII.
I need a camera like the GRIII or X100 to take these photos. It needs to be one handed. I need to be able to compose with the LCD - there's a freedom there that's like shooting from the hip. It needs to be fast. It needs to be zone focused.
I need 1/125th. I can't slow the shutter speed more. I need F5.6 (full frame equivalent) for depth of field. I am pushing these natural light shots as hard as I can. I will take what I can from any sensor. The GFX100RF will do these shots better.
Image quality means different things to different people. This is what it means to me.
In addition to the aspect ratio ergonomics (I am so bored with 3:2, I want to change aspect ratio in the field), which is the primary reason I am buying this camera, I certainly don't mind taking advantage of better image quality than the GRIII or X100V.
You wonder why the designers worked so hard to make the GFX100RF so small. Why they didn't fit in IBIS. Why they didn't sacrifice a little for F3.0 maybe.
Well. I can't say I know the answer to that question.
But I guess I'm glad the answer includes a use case for guys like me....Show more →
@jjcha, thank you for rescuing this thread. Speaking in terms of prior shooting experience and recasting it with the GFX100RF is an excellent way to discuss the potential value of this camera.
It’s all too easy to get trapped in a mantle of technical authority and losing sight of photography as an art, hobby, or profession. (I also thank those who linked the Fujifilm short marketing films, which I thought were tasteful and spoke to the photographic experience we should expect with this camera.)
Another simple example is from a trip I took last year to Kennedy Space Center. This was a family excursion, so I only brought my X100VI. I also brought the wide angle converter knowing there would be large spaceships in closed-in areas where the 35mm effective focal length would fall short. The image below was shot with the converter (so 28mm effective focal length) at f/5.6, 1/30s, ISO 6400. Clearly not a masterpiece but a photo I enjoy with impressive quality from the X100VI.
With the GFX100RF I would have taken this at the native 28mm except it would have yielded much higher resolution and less noise. Does that matter for this shot? Not when viewed on a typical screen at normal resolution. But I like zooming in to view details on images like this one: the rivets in the rocket, people’s expression as they look on, the details in the mission patches, even the geometric texture of the ceiling—all would be amplified by the GFX100RF. But more importantly, I would have likely experimented with different aspect ratios when taking this image. Would 4:3 have helped capture more people context at the bottom? Would a panoramic ratio have focused my composition better? Hard to know in retrospect, but I know that’s what I would have explored.
Would this picture have made it worthwhile spending the premium for this camera over the X100VI? No, not for me. But I hope the accumulated experience across hundreds of situations like this one will.
p.37 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Another example from my KSC outing: when we entered the hangar I tried taking a picture of the Saturn V engines using the X100VI native lens. This decidedly poor composition quickly brought out the wide angle converter. With the GFX100RF I would’ve had 28mm natively but I could also match the 35mm focal length here but with a 4:3 aspect ratio which probably would have been a great shot at higher resolution than this one. Best of all, I would’ve been able to do all this without fiddling with the converter.
p.37 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Here is a 28mm shot that would not be possible with the GFX. The X100VI IBIS let me shoot this at f/4, 1/4s, ISO 8000.
The people motion blur is ok here—I think it’s a nice contrast to the people fixed in place looking at the Apollo capsule. With the GFX, I’d have to shoot this at 1/30s to avoid camera shake blur pushing ISO too much. Maybe I would use the railing to brace and squeeze 1/15s but an unlikely shot. Would that have been a regret? Yes, but not one that would have undermined my outing and overall results of the day. Especially when I would have followed with this shot (f/4, 1/60s, ISO 8000) probably better at 4:3….
p.37 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
the accumulated experience across hundreds of situations
I think this ^ is part of the bell curve that the camera presents. Every camera has its curve of uses that it covers well vs. those that are outliers for it. Hopefully, you get plenty of matches to bring the overall experience to your liking.
p.37 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
the problem i have with the digital zoom or aspect ratio dial is you just end up with a full frame , APSC or even a micro four thirds camera which to me is silly.
with my Leica Q2 i can just assign something else to the digital crop and forget all about it.
much better to work on your framing technique and use the full image available i think.
nothing wrong with a slight crop but otherwise i just do not buy into this concept.
p.37 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
vertigo1959 wrote:
the problem i have with the digital zoom or aspect ratio dial is you just end up with a full frame , APSC or even a micro four thirds camera which to me is silly.
with my Leica Q2 i can just assign something else to the digital crop and forget all about it.
much better to work on your framing technique and use the full image available i think.
nothing wrong with a slight crop but otherwise i just do not buy into this concept.
I see where you are coming from, but keep in mind the GFX100RF will offer more resolution at all effective focal lengths than the Leica Q2. That is, any aspect ratio or crop will have more pixels than the same in the Q2.
p.37 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
I see where you are coming from, but keep in mind the GFX100RF will offer more resolution at all effective focal lengths than the Leica Q2. That is, any aspect ratio or crop will have more pixels than the same in the Q2.
yes but whatever camera you have you surely always want the maximum resolution available? the counter argument is that nobody can tell the difference between resolution even on pretty large prints but thats another subject.
p.37 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Here are a couple of panoramic shots from a recent family trip to Miami. These were taken with the Leica Q2. I remember visualizing these as panoramic compositions but fighting to ignore the other elements that were visible in the 3:2 EVF. With the GFX100RF, I would have selected the aspect ratio with the dial and clarified my composition at the time of shooting. Both shots would have been higher resolution that my Q2.
Incidentally, I enjoy the Q2. Those who struggle with the “brick feel” might consider a half-case with a grip. I use an Oberwerth leather case and it makes it much more pleasing to shoot while still retaining the relatively compact form-factor. I agree with criticisms the camera is front-heavy. I don’t like that either but doesn’t bother too much once I get into a shooting groove.
p.37 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
Here are a couple of panoramic shots from a recent family trip to Miami. These were taken with the Leica Q2. I remember visualizing these as panoramic compositions but fighting to ignore the other elements that were visible in the 3:2 EVF. With the GFX100RF, I would have selected the aspect ratio with the dial and clarified my composition at the time of shooting. Both shots would have been higher resolution that my Q2.
Incidentally, I enjoy the Q2. Those who struggle with the “brick feel” might consider a half-case with a grip. I use an Oberwerth leather case and it makes it much more pleasing to shoot while still retaining the relatively compact form-factor. I agree with criticisms the camera is front-heavy. I don’t like that either but doesn’t bother too much once I get into a shooting groove.
i have the leica grip with my Q2 and i love the ergonomics and handling of the camera with the grip. if the aspect ration dial is a positive for you then i fully respect that , its just not something i would use
p.37 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
vertigo1959 wrote:
yes but whatever camera you have you surely always want the maximum resolution available? the counter argument is that nobody can tell the difference between resolution even on pretty large prints but thats another subject.
Why do you want the maximum resolution all the time? What do you do with your images that demands 102mp images?
Have you ever used a zoom. There is typically better primes that will yield better results but people still use zooms for convenience…very much like people will use the aspect ratio for convenience.
p.37 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
tuomkok wrote:
What you mean by more crop options? I think GFX100RF crops just like the good old circa 2001 Ixus
There is a very widely framed portrait in the dropbox. It can be cropped surprisingly much without hugely visible technical loss of image quality. However, when cropping deep the look of picture changes - as one can expect - from miniMF to m43
Am I mistaken or is the in-camera crop only to about 2x? Why no 2.5x or 3x option? It is hard to find a use case for the camera w/o those crop options. Not a € 5.800 use case, anyway.
p.37 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I ordered this camera, I want to test side by side with my A7RV+35GM set. I just can't rely on online tests, I've found always the best way to test myself considering my needs. After 1-2 week window either the GFX100RF will go back, or list my Sony setup for sale.
p.37 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I mean the 80mm crop is getting pretty aggressive, how much further do you wanna crop in and still be left with any data
Nielk Mike wrote:
Am I mistaken or is the in-camera crop only to about 2x? Why no 2.5x or 3x option? It is hard to find a use case for the camera w/o those crop options. Not a € 5.800 use case, anyway.
