p.8 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
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. 😁...Show more →
There's a size limit here, and the pay-for-play is only partly for the photo uploads, it's for access to sell gear in the buy and sell forum. If you wanna show full size image options, I'd go pro Flickr or some other service and link to it here. Then people can click through and zoom in on whatever site you host them on.
GF 50 is definitely smaller, but the MFD is atrocious and aperture is not much wider. To me, the RF now completely replaces the GF 50 plus would keep me from having to switch lenses. For me, I'd rather put that $1K toward the RF.
p.8 #2 · 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.
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.8 #3 · 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 →
It’s not only sexiness ratio but the usability / compactness. Traveling, I value compactness over just about anything else…yes even the dear ibis.
p.8 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
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
Scott - I get it completely if you are talking about me. I guess you don't agree with me that the dial was a waste of a physical control and misused in my opinion. But hey - I like old school labeled and specific manual dials, buttons and levers for which Fuji is famous. Just not that one. But this is a camera equipment discussion forum so differences of opinion pop up, and they get repeated when new responses repeat it again. Plus, my repetition violations will improve when I get more used to this hard to track flow of fully exposed responses that are 35 pages long.
I would love some a single-page threaded view that show only the title of each post and name of the responder in indented lines that show the entire response flow. Then click on the line for the post. Posts you already clicked would be not highlighted or a different color or font. I can look at that overview threaded page and say to myself, I already responded 4 times on this thread to 4 people and click on what I said (as an example) or any new response not already read.
p.8 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Scott - I get it completely if you are talking about me. I guess you don't agree with me that the dial was a waste of a physical control and misused in my opinion. But hey - I like old school labeled and specific manual dials, buttons and levers for which Fuji is famous. Just not that one. But this is a camera equipment discussion forum so differences of opinion pop up, and they get repeated when new responses repeat it again. Plus, my repetition violations will improve when I get more used to this hard to track flow of fully exposed responses that are 35 pages long.
I would love some a single-page threaded view that show only the title of each post and name of the responder in indented lines that show the entire response flow. Then click on the line for the post. Posts you already clicked would be not highlighted or a different color or font. I can look at that overview threaded page and say to myself, I already responded 4 times on this thread to 4 people and click on what I said (as an example) or any new response not already read.
p.8 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
highdesertmesa wrote:
There's a size limit here, and the pay-for-play is only partly for the photo uploads, it's for access to sell gear in the buy and sell forum. If you wanna show full size image options, I'd go pro Flickr or some other service and link to it here. Then people can click through and zoom in on whatever site you host them on.
GF 50 is definitely smaller, but the MFD is atrocious and aperture is not much wider. To me, the RF now completely replaces the GF 50 plus would keep me from having to switch lenses. For me, I'd rather put that $1K toward the RF....Show more →
Yes, me too. I abandoned the 50r and that pancake 50 some time ago. I just thought it would be lot smaller than the picture of the 100II and the 30 and be an interesting comparison shot. Plus, the 50r with GF 50 had no stabilization. I get why Fuji did it. I don't like it, but I get it.
But I walk into too many churches and museums off the street and early morning and late evening not to have OIS on my little Q3 or GFX Q4, and IBIS or OIS also helps when shooting in daylight (for example) at F8 or 11 and base ISO, which is a fact that seems to get by some posters here (especially with MF GFX where the need is magnified).
p.8 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
AndrewNYC wrote:
It's being compared to a camera (Q2/3) that has really, really poor performance hidden by software. So that's an interesting aspect to this question.
Poor performance? The Q2 / Q3? Seriously? Did you mean that? That is an outrageous and hugely false claim if you did.
p.8 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
So now that I've had 24 hours to think on it, this is where I'm at.
+ Far more capable than my X100V
+ Has Reala Ace which neither my X100V or 100S have, a sim one of my favorite custom recipe needs
+ Could use crop modes all the way 80mm and have file resolution similar to my X100V files
+ 35mm wide enough for landscape applications (though I wish it was a bit wider)
+ 1/4000 shutter is higher than expected
+ Still small/discrete enough to get into places the 100S can't
+ All the physical controls I opined about for the last year
+ Great EVF/rear screen/battery life
+ Dual SD
+ Better AF than my X100V (and maybe the 100S)
+ Aspect ratio dial solves a big problem I have with the 100S and the newer C setting logic where aspect ratio settings don't flow from Cx to Cy
+ New transparent mode while in different aspect ratios is a killer feature and a first for Fuji, matching Hasselblad functionality which has been best in class
- Can't mount my GF55 on it
- No "medium format" look ability
- No IBIS will rear its head in lower light handheld shooting on occasion for my uses
- No portrait tilt screen, which I'd miss from the 100S
~ The price - not good or bad, it's much cheaper than the Q and gives me way more of what I want from a fixed lens camera, along with the Fuji sims I enjoy
As it stands, I enjoy my X100V a lot as my "tiny" camera...there isn't much I find myself wanting from it short of the ability to shoot X-Pan. I'd have probably kept the VI if it supported 65:24. While I sometimes enjoy using the 100S, I largely don't. I don't like the way the buttons feel, I hate the texture of the leatherette...and the lenses...they are simply too big for the amount of IQ improvement they provide over my FF lenses. They are far less versatile with uselessly long MFDs as well. That said, the 32-64 is killer for landscapes.
I don't feel like I would ultimately miss the 100S as a camera much if I had the RF in my bag. The EVF is middling, the manual focus experience is bad compared to my other cameras (not that the RF would be better, as MF on the X100 line is the worst experience I've ever had). I would certainly miss the GF55 the most, and the 110 would easily be replaced by the Z 85/1.2.
So now the question is...is the GF55 good enough to justify staying in the MILC GFX system? I have reached the conclusion that if you're serious about GFX MILC, the GFX 100ii is the camera...the Sii didn't iterate enough and shares many of the same build issues of the S at nearly twice the price of a used S. And I'm not getting the 100ii soon, if ever.
I don't think there are 2 people on FM that "get" what Fuji is doing here as well as James and I...so if I don't buy it, I'm a little bit of a hypocrite, no?
p.8 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Good post Scott. Nice rundown and I agree with so much of it. And I don't want you to think I don't like physical dials because I'm a big fan - just not a crop dial. 😁
But believe me, that dial would not stop me from getting this little beauty (if it had OIS).
p.8 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Poor performance? The Q2 / Q3? Seriously? Did you mean that? That is an outrageous and hugely false claim if you did.
Do you know the inherent distortion numbers on this 28MM? Not a false claim at all. I forget the number, but high teens percent. Much worse than most other modern 28mm lenses.
p.8 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
AndrewNYC wrote:
It's being compared to a camera (Q2/3) that has really, really poor performance hidden by software. So that's an interesting aspect to this question.
I preordered and then decided the A7CR better fit my needs, but this is so over the top…. Every lens that mazimizes performance and minimize size, weight and cost will rely upon firmware correction.
p.8 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
So now that I've had 24 hours to think on it, this is where I'm at.
+ Far more capable than my X100V
+ Has Reala Ace which neither my X100V or 100S have, a sim one of my favorite custom recipe needs
+ Could use crop modes all the way 80mm and have file resolution similar to my X100V files
+ 35mm wide enough for landscape applications (though I wish it was a bit wider)
+ 1/4000 shutter is higher than expected
+ Still small/discrete enough to get into places the 100S can't
+ All the physical controls I opined about for the last year
+ Great EVF/rear screen/battery life
+ Dual SD
+ Better AF than my X100V (and maybe the 100S)
+ Aspect ratio dial solves a big problem I have with the 100S and the newer C setting logic where aspect ratio settings don't flow from Cx to Cy
+ New transparent mode while in different aspect ratios is a killer feature and a first for Fuji, matching Hasselblad functionality which has been best in class
- Can't mount my GF55 on it
- No "medium format" look ability
- No IBIS will rear its head in lower light handheld shooting on occasion for my uses
- No portrait tilt screen, which I'd miss from the 100S
~ The price - not good or bad, it's much cheaper than the Q and gives me way more of what I want from a fixed lens camera, along with the Fuji sims I enjoy
As it stands, I enjoy my X100V a lot as my "tiny" camera...there isn't much I find myself wanting from it short of the ability to shoot X-Pan. I'd have probably kept the VI if it supported 65:24. While I sometimes enjoy using the 100S, I largely don't. I don't like the way the buttons feel, I hate the texture of the leatherette...and the lenses...they are simply too big for the amount of IQ improvement they provide over my FF lenses. They are far less versatile with uselessly long MFDs as well. That said, the 32-64 is killer for landscapes.
I don't feel like I would ultimately miss the 100S as a camera much if I had the RF in my bag. The EVF is middling, the manual focus experience is bad compared to my other cameras (not that the RF would be better, as MF on the X100 line is the worst experience I've ever had). I would certainly miss the GF55 the most, and the 110 would easily be replaced by the Z 85/1.2.
So now the question is...is the GF55 good enough to justify staying in the MILC GFX system? I have reached the conclusion that if you're serious about GFX MILC, the GFX 100ii is the camera...the Sii didn't iterate enough and shares many of the same build issues of the S at nearly twice the price of a used S. And I'm not getting the 100ii soon, if ever.
I don't think there are 2 people on FM that "get" what Fuji is doing here as well as James and I...so if I don't buy it, I'm a little bit of a hypocrite, no? ...Show more →
Great summary which matches my thoughts 100%. I’ve preordered the GFX100RF and hope it will ship by end of next month.
I think the IBIS debate is misinformed. All you need to know is the pixel pitch is the same as the X-Pro3…which doesn’t have IBIS…and works GREAT. With this camera you get more field of view and all the crop options which is superb.
Fujifilm’s website has a nice rundown on why these formats are important. The format dial makes total sense and the whole point of the camera.
The only other point I will add is the effective resolution of the crop modes is not intended to compete with a MILC GFX, yet the quality will still be much better than anything you can get with film.
p.8 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
So far, what I see are "marketing" reviews that can't stop talking about the looks, the dials, the size, the weight - yet I have seen almost nothing on functional and image qualtiy aspects. The lens is often said to be "decent". Come on: Decent is not enough for a €5.500 camera! Seems that most reviewers were not allowed to check for image quality. Same for AF. Any tests or comparissons? Have not seen any. So lots of marketing hype, little real information.
p.8 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
The only other point I will add is the effective resolution of the crop modes is not intended to compete with a MILC GFX, yet the quality will still be much better than anything you can get with film.
This is a big rub. This is NOT a GFX MILC replacement. It's an X100 on supercharger steroids. If you approach it the same way, it becomes way more appealing as a package.
The 5 of us that buy one should meet up and shoot to prove it's a functional camera
. 🤪