p.7 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I definitely need this camera. Not so long ago, I sold out all Sony cameras and lenses. I don't want to post-process RAW images anymore. The main camera manufacturers (Sony/Canon/Nikon) does not offer SOOC. Fujifilm's film simulation and DR400 are great. I chose the GFX100II and GF55mm, which covers 99% of my family photography and video needs. I think that the GFX100RF for daytime walks will be enough for me.
p.7 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I find it difficult to weave my way through these long pages and find what I wrote before or locate original replies that I want to respond to, but I saw a few posts arguing whether or not to get this GFX Q4 or some other GFX MILC and a couple of lenses.
Several points:
1. Apples and oranges. Completely different.
2. Shooters of other systems (APSC & FF) can buy this MF GFX camera and no other GFX gear - just that one GFX Q4. (Like I do the Leica Q3 to complement my GFX MILC gear while owning no other Leica gear).
3. The Leica Q2/3, Fuji X100 series or this new GFX Q4 is a different use case than larger MILC plus lenses. It does not replace your MILC gear and lenses. It compliments them. As a travel photographer, it is refreshing to sometimes leave the heavy GFX gear in the hotel and just go out walking with the Q3. You are much more limited but also have freedom and it is so fun.
4. You can get the Leica Q3 or GFX Q4 in places that you can't take a GFX MILC w a big lens. I have "snuck" the Q3 into countless low light indoor situations (churches, castles, palaces, temples, museums) and shot at F1.7, ISO 1200 and 1/15 sec and had tripod-like stability results. That is a specific use case for my Q3. Handheld dark and wide.
5. I could never own only the Leica Q3 or GFX Q4. Those small sexy fixed lens "compacts" compliments my GFX camera body and lens arsenal. If you took a poll, I bet there are very few if any serious photographers that shoot a Q3 only. It always complements something else.
6. I keep hearing these IQ comparison discussions between the GFX MILC and GF lenses and the GFX Q4. Pe3ple, listen to me.... It is the same sensor, and all GF glass is superb. It is a wash at 35mm. I would much rather have the GFX 100II around my neck with the 20-35 mounted and the 45-100 in a small canvas shoulder bag and walk around with IBIS and that huge range (20-100) vs just 35. But sometimes you just want that small sexy fixed lens camera and go have some light-load fun.
p.7 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Mister Chebak wrote:
I don't want to post-process RAW images anymore.
Good luck and to each his own but paying 5 grand for a MF camera and deciding never to post process is an amazing choice. In my opinion, you are throwing away a significant portion of the advantages of shooting MF. Those files are very powerful in post.
LR is getting much more powerful (AI) and I can beat jpeg output 100% of the time after 25 seconds in post. Not some of the time, I'm saying 100% of the time. No exceptions.
But, that said, if you use the GFX Q4 as a point and shoot and just do jpeg output, you will get some great shots.
But please - storage is fast and cheap. Use a 4 TB external SSD and at least shoot RAW + JPEG. You will have the digital negative for life and if you have a great shot, you will have that negative that you could go in and play with later. Post processing software is getting way better and is non-destructive. JPEGs are a terrible solution for long-term storage. So many disadvantages!
p.7 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Here's Fuji's explanation for why there's no IBIS...a chart they'll forget they ever made when the Mark II comes out in 2029.
The important lines in the chart are the black diagonal lines. In that chart you can see that in order to get sharp images with for example a 250mm lens, you need to shoot at about 250th of a second.
On the very top (over the red line) we have the telephoto lenses that need OIS.
The purple on the left is the range where you need a tripod.
The yellow part shows where IBIS works best.
On the right we see the range that does not need IBIS and can be shot handheld without IBIS and yet get sharp images, and they marked the 35mmF4 in that range.
So, looking at the chart, I’d say that if you shoot at 1/40th of a second or higher, then IBIS would be of little use anyway.
p.7 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Scott, I disagree vehemently with that Fuji IBIS chart. I suppose that there were some Fuji engineers that came up with that who have not shot much GFX. They need to extend that IBIS range way to the right. Silly chart and misleading....
I also respectfully disagree with you about not needing IBIS above 1/40 second. I can think of many situations at many focal lengths where there is great benefit.
Edit later.... I also wonder how much bigger the GFX Q4 would be with F2.8 and OIS. I would explode with joy if the lens was F2.8 and had OIS. Even if the camera (or just the lens) was 1/4th bigger.
But Fuji had their reasons, and those reasons have to do with size and sexiness.
Man.... If that camera was 2.8 and had OIS.... I would be jumping up and down for joy. Even if it were bigger.
p.7 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
olegkin wrote:
I wonder why Fujifilm made a wheel with preset frame ratios instead of making wheel unmarked and allowing photographers to choose their own set of ratios. Seems like an obvious idea.
Because marked dials are the hallmark of the analog experience. Otherwise just have unmarked top dials just like the Leica SL3.
The important lines in the chart are the black diagonal lines. In that chart you can see that in order to get sharp images with for example a 250mm lens, you need to shoot at about 250th of a second.
On the very top (over the red line) we have the telephoto lenses that need OIS.
The purple on the left is the range where you need a tripod.
The yellow part shows where IBIS works best.
On the right we see the range that does not need IBIS and can be shot handheld without IBIS and yet get sharp images, and they marked the 35mmF4 in that range.
So, looking at the chart, I’d say that if you shoot at 1/40th of a second or higher, then IBIS would be of little use anyway....Show more →
Now have them throw out a chart on why they DID put IBIS in to the X1000VI..............
p.7 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gordec wrote:
Fuji GFX 100mp sensor doesn't allow you to shoot smaller size DNGs like Q3 and M11's trisensor right? I don't want all my raws to be 100mp.
I would highly recommend that you shoot compressed lossless 14 bit raw. That will drop you from 200 MB to 100. That is what every GFX shooter I have ever talked to or met does (except for one friend who shoots 16 bit because he thinks it will benefit him someday and it won't).
It has been shown time and time again by every tester I know (ask Jim Kasson) that shooting 14 bit and compressed lossless raw is the same quality as 16 bit uncompressed raw and it results in half the file size.
If you can't handle 100 MP, then do one of three things:
1. Buy a new computer. You should anyway if yours is over 3 years old.
2. Buy three 4TB M.2 PCIe 4 SSDs (cheap now) - or 8TB like me. Storage is fast and cheap these days.
3. Don't shoot GFX.
p.7 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
From the same article at FujiRumors:
"One more tidbit about IBIS discussed in the video:
"Implementing IBIS would have made the camera bigger, but not that much. The numbers I heard in the video were 3mm thicker, but also a bit larger and higher."
"Apparently the increase in body size would still be acceptable for Fujifilm. The problem would have been the lens, as in order to cover the entire sensor plus the area in which the sensor can move due to IBIS, the lens would have become significantly bigger. And since compactness was paramount for Fujifilm when developing the GFX100RF, they decided not to go with IBIS. The body size increase would have still been acceptable, but not the lens size."
I do not know if that statement is conjecture by the guys who made the video - 75 minutes and in German - or if it was verified by Fuji engineers.
p.7 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
highdesertmesa wrote:
Because marked dials are the hallmark of the analog experience. Otherwise just have unmarked top dials just like the Leica SL3.
I predict that most GFX Q4 shooters will not use that wheel. It has too many ratios on it that are too spread out on the dial. Most people have their favorite two or three, which means that they will program a button to quickly switch between their favorite 2 or 3 ratios.
That fake crop dial button makes zero sense to me. What a waste of a dial. They should have made it programmable. I think Fuji outsexied themselves with this dial, and I love analog dials for EC, ISO, shutter speed, etc, but I also like PASM of the new GFX MILCs and can go back and forth.
p.7 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Well, like I said, I can't believe they put that wheel on at all ... or that silly lever. Of all the things to waste a physical control on, fake jpeg zoom is perhaps the worst way to waste an external control.
Have you ever met Fujifilm before? They're all about JPEG shooting (at least, relative to other brands). It makes perfect sense.
p.7 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I can't wait until we actually get this camera in our hands and just start taking and sharing photos. This bickering is exhausting.
So nothing really has surprised me watching all the usual YouTube videos on this. No one is commenting or can comment about IQ and distortion correction yet (unless I missed it), so I've not been super interested as I watched these videos. However – this shocked me a bit:
This is why dropping IBIS and moving to a fixed lens design makes a difference (ignoring the 5mm focal length difference, I realize). Wow. The bigger body and GF 30 have their place of course, but I can now see why I would still add the RF to my bag if I did own a regular GFX for times when I wanted to go super light and shoot landscapes, etc. And no way I'm walking into a restaurant or tourist shop with any big 35mm or 44x33 camera swinging from my shoulder lest I end up knocking stuff off the shelves.
Screenshot from Gordan Laing's video. Holy cow, look at the size difference here.
p.7 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
ElvisD wrote:
From the same article at FujiRumors:
"One more tidbit about IBIS discussed in the video:
"Implementing IBIS would have made the camera bigger, but not that much. The numbers I heard in the video were 3mm thicker, but also a bit larger and higher."
"Apparently the increase in body size would still be acceptable for Fujifilm. The problem would have been the lens, as in order to cover the entire sensor plus the area in which the sensor can move due to IBIS, the lens would have become significantly bigger. And since compactness was paramount for Fujifilm when developing the GFX100RF, they decided not to go with IBIS. The body size increase would have still been acceptable, but not the lens size."
I do not know if that statement is conjecture by the guys who made the video - 75 minutes and in German - or if it was verified by Fuji engineers....Show more →
Nice post.... In my opinion, IBIS was not an option for this fixed lens GFX Q4 (like the Leica Q series which went with OIS on the lens to keep it small). However, I guarantee you that Fuji agonized over this. They wanted an F2.8 lens that had OIS. But they decided it made the lens too big and clunky looking and it changed the sexiness ratio that will be so important for that camera.
But I can dream how ecstatic I would have been if the GFX Q4 had an F2.8 lens with OIS that would have been bigger - probably a good bit bigger.
p.7 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
I predict that most GFX Q4 shooters will not use that wheel. It has too many ratios on it that are too spread out on the dial. Most people have their favorite two or three, which means that they will program a button to quickly switch between their favorite 2 or 3 ratios.
That fake crop dial button makes zero sense to me. What a waste of a dial. They should have made it programmable. I think Fuji outsexied themselves with this dial, and I love analog dials for EC, ISO, shutter speed, etc, but I also like PASM of the new GFX MILCs and can go back and forth. ...Show more →
I understand some not "getting it", but for those of us that do, it's a welcome control exactly as implemented. The only way it could be cooler is if you could customer order your own dial with only the ratios you wanted and in the order you wanted, with a way in firmware of syncing it up.
p.7 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Nice post.... In my opinion, IBIS was not an option for this fixed lens GFX Q4 (like the Leica Q series which went with OIS on the lens to keep it small). However, I guarantee you that Fuji agonized over this. They wanted an F2.8 lens that had OIS. But they decided it made the lens too big and clunky looking and it changed the sexiness ratio that will be so important for that camera.
But I can dream how ecstatic I would have been if the GFX Q4 had an F2.8 lens with OIS that would have been bigger - probably a good bit bigger. ...Show more →
They also could have done 2.8 and OIS if they'd thrown the iPhone quality lens from the X100VI on it – or – used a lens with massive distortion correction like the Q28. Thankfully it looks like they didn't go that route.
p.7 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
highdesertmesa wrote:
I can't wait until we actually get this camera in our hands and just start taking and sharing photos. This bickering is exhausting.
It's about time to hit hide me on a few of these guys (beyond the obvious ones that have long since been hidden )
If you (not YOU) don't understand how the aspect dial is THE overriding ethos of this entire camera, can't help ya. Complaining endlessly about it means you don't get it.
The amount of PMs I get personally complaining about the repeat offenders would be a fun anonymous post
p.7 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
High Desert - Great picture! I want to take a picture of my old 50r and the GF 50 semi-pancake on it. That might get it a little closer to the look of the new GFX Q4! . 🤪
I need to post pictures from my upcoming trip but I gotta figure out how to do it. I think I have to pay Fred - not sure. I don't mind paying. What is it? 100 bucks a year to post shots? Can I post full size jpegs?
I wish DPR was a pay site, and that Mods had term limits! . ..... Hahahaha. 😁
p.7 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
I predict that most GFX Q4 shooters will not use that wheel. It has too many ratios on it that are too spread out on the dial. Most people have their favorite two or three, which means that they will program a button to quickly switch between their favorite 2 or 3 ratios.
That fake crop dial button makes zero sense to me. What a waste of a dial. They should have made it programmable. I think Fuji outsexied themselves with this dial, and I love analog dials for EC, ISO, shutter speed, etc, but I also like PASM of the new GFX MILCs and can go back and forth. ...Show more →
The crop dial theory is not about JPEG, it's about letting you compose for the later RAW crop in a WYSIWYG environment. It's literally why we use EVFs and have mostly moved away from OVFs. Doesn't Fujifilm put the crop markers in the RAW that are later read by Lightroom?
)