p.38 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Just come closer😜
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.
p.38 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
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.
I cropped a 14MP down to around 5MP in post and printed it to about 24 x 48, many years back. You can always crop in post as much as you want.
But, I understand that's not what you're talking about.
For a tighter in camera view, crop ... you can choose the 3:4 ratio (6544 x 8736) format, which effectively cuts the image in 1/2 vs. the native 4:3 (11648 x 8736) via the crop mode.
Then, you can apply (iirc) the teleconverter in addition to the crop mode and get your additional 2X-ish "zoom" into the smaller 3:4 format ... resulting in closer to a 4X total crop from the original pixels (ballpark 3300 x 4400 = 14 MP-ish), landing you in the 110 (85) mm-ish range. Inexact math, but you get the gist.
Essentially, the use of the 3:4 crop mode puts you into a FF territory, and the combination with the max teleconverter zoom puts you into a m43 format territory for the WA > Normal > Short Tele Portrait FOV versatility with the fixed lens. This is then accompanied with the pixel reductions as you drop through MF > FF > APS-C > m43 format dimensions.
Other combinations of crop mode + teleconverter zoom ratios provide a matrix of options, etc. ... but, that should get you a range of 28 - 85 (FF terms) in camera, ballpark.
Maybe more, my math is wonky today.
Either way ... I'd not let that be a major concern, when trying to assess this camera. If you're gonna "live" in 85mm territory, then pick a different tool. But, it's an okay "you can" if you find yourself needing to. That's where I think it makes sense to carry this camera and have a second body with a short tele mounted in the bag, for a 1-2 punch. Only want to carry one, then the reduction of MP's is the trade-off for the convenience of cropping that deeply.
Although, even with excellent glass ... my experience has been that cropping 300% reveals itself a bit. 400% will be an even tougher hit on the glass. Doable in a pinch, but not gonna be the IQ King.
Y'all gotta be smarter than this. Half of those photos are taken with a 100S II and GF 110 by a Fuji ambassador, that is NOT a sample gallery of the RF.
p.38 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Y'all gotta be smarter than this. Half of those photos are taken with a 100S II and GF 110 by a Fuji ambassador, that is NOT a sample gallery of the RF.
I think that sums up the unique position of mission, here ... the camera has been reduced from an ILC (yet with MF sensor) to increasingly facilitate the "Be There" (and with the MF sensor). Simply put, the X100V on steroids, with an MF sensor for a corresponding IQ potential diff.
It's not that it can't be more than that, but I think it is those folks who can connect with this ethos best, who will find the camera most to their liking.
Others can / do / will dissent and find any number of reasons not to embrace its strength, while being focused on what it isn't, rather than what it is. Dissenters will dissent.
p.38 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
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.
Thank you for sharing. Very helpful since those are the type of shots I would be trying to take.
Based on your recent shots and comparison to 100VI/Q2 is very helpful. Coming from an xpro 2 I'd have to (a) switch lenses, and (b) there's no IBIS on my camera. So by going to the GFX100RF, I'd avoid switching lenses (or adding the teleconverter) and (b) work with a sensor that should have better noise at higher ISO. I also noticed your pano posts using the Q2. The options with (according to the manual) was to use the 100VI pano option (right now I'm using my iphone). The GFX i can choose an aspect ratio quickly.
In my research on I did see one of the pre-release reviewers set the front ciricular ring on the GFX100RF to simulations and can cylce through film simulations very quickly. IF there was one thing I did the most on my last two trips with my x-pro2 was switch film simulations. That can make the shooting experience much better.
p.38 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gdanmitchell wrote:
At 13:42.
There’s a lot of that. ;-)
Sure, but isn’t photography a hobby for most people here and we really don’t NEED our gear, but really want our gear to enjoy going out and taking photos. I ask you, do you NEED your gear or only want your gear.
p.38 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
"F4 and be there"...but also with your GFX MILC and long fast prime that you didn't disclose to your audience.
My point isn't about what he did or didn't do (nor the IQ or his images) ... my point is the ethos of the camera lends itself to his paragraph header. The age old adage of "F8 and be there" concept has preceded this camera for decades. But, we haven't seen it like this in a digital MF capable sensor.
If you want to carry a GFX MILC with a long fast prime (ummm, I carried the X1D II with the 80/1.9) as your "F4 and be there" rig ... go for it. There are reasons to carry an MF MILC. This is simply an option to that. Don't like it ... then, don't do it.
Folks that don't like it, or don't get it ... that doesn't invalidate it for others who might.
Which, btw ... not sure that we even need to concern ourselves with the IQ from online examples of ISO performance, etc. (lens variance, sure ... sensor, not so much).
I mean, it is the same sensor that Fuji is using in their (already, well established / known IQ expectations) GFX MILC ... right?
Although, I am curious if its readout speed is that of the 100 II vs. the 100 S. But, either way, it is a known commodity.
Unless there is a significant difference in heat dissipation / buildup, it shouldn't stray much from those in the MILC.
p.38 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
I cropped a 14MP down to around 5MP in post and printed it to about 24 x 48, many years back. You can always crop in post as much as you want.
But, I understand that's not what you're talking about.
I use all kind of work arounds with the Sony a7cr, the RX1R MKII and my Fujis. Mostly using the Grid to display a 2x frame, and 1.5 APSC with a7cR. It bothers me that Fuji did not implement more crop options. It makes framing on the street so much easier. Of course, you pay a price for 3x and (more so) for 4x. But not every image is printed large or shown on 8K TVs. Sure hope that the a7cR MkII will offer more cropping options (with the crop factor being written to EXIF as with the Leica Q).
p.38 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Smogg wrote:
Just come closer😜
Thanks for the professional advice :-) As an amateure, it is just that quite often you can't move closer, or not fast enough, or moving closer if going to change the persepctive ....
p.38 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
robsonj wrote:
I mean the 80mm crop is getting pretty aggressive, how much further do you wanna crop in and still be left with any data
What is agressive abozt a 3x crop? You still get data to display 4K. Done that with the samples images I have downloaded and the results are very usable, if not say just fine.
p.38 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
jturn00 wrote:
Thank you for sharing. Very helpful since those are the type of shots I would be trying to take.
Based on your recent shots and comparison to 100VI/Q2 is very helpful. Coming from an xpro 2 I'd have to (a) switch lenses, and (b) there's no IBIS on my camera. So by going to the GFX100RF, I'd avoid switching lenses (or adding the teleconverter) and (b) work with a sensor that should have better noise at higher ISO. I also noticed your pano posts using the Q2. The options with (according to the manual) was to use the 100VI pano option (right now I'm using my iphone). The GFX i can choose an aspect ratio quickly.
In my research on I did see one of the pre-release reviewers set the front ciricular ring on the GFX100RF to simulations and can cylce through film simulations very quickly. IF there was one thing I did the most on my last two trips with my x-pro2 was switch film simulations. That can make the shooting experience much better.
I’ve used the iPhone panoramic mode and actually find it pretty impressive. But, I dislike having to pan and the sensor quality isn’t in the same league. I haven’t tried the pano feature in the X100 yet.
p.38 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
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.
That Sony combo does not have 28mm FOV but it is better in 90% of other scenarios I can imagine. But still GFX100RF is tempting... I write this as a Sony A7rV shooter loving his 35 GM
robsonj wrote:
I mean the 80mm crop is getting pretty aggressive, how much further do you wanna crop in and still be left with any data
I would not expect too much fron the so called 80mm crop. Waste of a good camera - better walk closet to take the pic. 35mm and 50mm crops might do more justice to GFX.
