p.78 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyBug wrote:
I use the Q2 in crop mode for 35mm, and still have plenty of pixels to work with. Granted, there is a difference between a cropped, wider lens vs. a narrower lens ... but, the diff's aren't so much that I'd feel restricted from using the 35mm lens on the Fuji in crop mode.
Bearing in mind, that it ... IS ... a 35mm lens. Just that the sensor covers a broader amount of real estate, giving it an "eq" of 28mm, similar to that of a 28 fov on ff. But, if you central crop to the same size of a 24x36 FF, you are getting a REAL 35mm, not an "eq", because it is a real 35mm lens. The only diff is then the quanity of pixels, but the pixel density puts you similar to that of FF density, when you crop it to its native 35mm "eq" with a 35mm optic.
I probably could have said that better, but the bottom line is that it is a 35mm optic. Imo, you might want to "re-think" your position about it being a 28mm "eq" against your preference for a 35mm fov (FF). Think of it like a 35mm FF ... with a built-in 28mm WA expansion capability, when you choose a wider portion of the sensor. ...Show more →
I had the 100RF for weeks: I cannot shoot with it the same way I do with my X100.
Try shooting any people with a 28mm lens. Deformation is too much. Crop mode does not help at all here.
p.78 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
3BIGMAMAS wrote:
28mm does not make people look good. Try shooting anyone facing anywhere but the cam and you are busted
28mm nothing to do with people look. Subject distance matters, in terms of people (subject size also matters) you need at least 2-3m distance minimising distortion. That is the reason 28mm considered environmental portrait focal length, because you can't fill the frame with your subject without distortion.
Aug 18, 2025 at 02:08 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
3BIGMAMAS wrote:
I had the 100RF for weeks: I cannot shoot with it the same way I do with my X100.
Try shooting any people with a 28mm lens. Deformation is too much. Crop mode does not help at all here.
You do realize with your X100, that you are using a permanent crop mode (that is all the smaller sensor is: a permanent crop mode) and yes it does change the field of view, but the size of the part of the sensor you are using (i.e., crop mode) and focus distance has everything to do with whether you see deformation or not.
p.78 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I love all the mansplaining to someone that had both cameras in hand and knows the differences in how they can be used in the field.
Aug 18, 2025 at 06:59 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
I love all the mansplaining to someone that had both cameras in hand and knows the differences in how they can be used in the field.
I have always thought mansplaining is a dumb term. If someone is being sexist, then call it what it is. If someone is overexplaining then call it what it is. If some is overexplaining in a sexist way, then say that. Perhaps some of us were overexplaining, but I don't think anyone here was being sexist and that is what you are suggesting when you call the posts mansplaining. Not cool!
Aug 18, 2025 at 08:43 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
And let me add that I am not challenging at all what 3BigMamas says about preferring the X100 to the GFX100RF for people shots. That makes total sense to me. The GFX100RF has a lens with an 8.75mm opening at the entrance pupil, which is really quite small. The X100 has a lens with a larger entrance pupil of 11mm. The X100 actually lets more light in than the GFX100RF when both are shot wide open.
Personally, I would also prefer 35mm over 28mm if I can only have one focal length. Of course both cameras can be cropped, but the X100 has the smaller sensor so if we crop down to the same size covers a smaller range of fields of view, but they are good effective focal lengths for portraits. So my personal preference is in total agreement with 3BigMamas that the X100 would be my preferred camera for people shots.
Where the GFX100RF excels, IMO, is as a non-people lens that covers a wide effective focal length range with the big sensor allowing cropping to a wide range of fields of view. It looks to me like a great outdoor camera for architecture and landscapes and can do people shots in a pinch as long as you are fine with fairly deep depth of field. Indoors and at night without IBIS, the very modest entrance pupil would be limiting to me, but some people might work around that by adding flash.
It certainly isn't the camera for me, but I can also see why some people might really like it.
p.78 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I’ve had the x100vi a few times and now have the Gfx100rf. For both cameras, I think for people photos the aesthetic is very similar. Fuji tends towards a bit of a dull lower contrast rendition - there’s no 3d pop or sharp subject separation like with Leica or Zeiss lenses. The difference is that when you pixel peep on the gfx - you see a lot of detail at base iso that the x100vi lens can’t render.
For people photos, I think the Gfx100rf does a good job but you have to like the more flat rendering that some people describe as “filmic.” The x100vi I think gets a free pass because it’s so trendy that image quality doesn’t matter to most owners but I don’t think the quality from that lens is particularly good. If you like that super sharp 3d pop rendering in a small package, the q3 43mm is probably the best option.
As for distortion, with most of the photos these days done on a camera phone, I don’t think I or most people can tell there’s major distortion unless there are people at the edges of the frame.
p.78 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
tzhang4284 wrote:
I’ve had the x100vi a few times and now have the Gfx100rf. For both cameras, I think for people photos the aesthetic is very similar. Fuji tends towards a bit of a dull lower contrast rendition - there’s no 3d pop or sharp subject separation like with Leica or Zeiss lenses. The difference is that when you pixel peep on the gfx - you see a lot of detail at base iso that the x100vi lens can’t render.
For people photos, I think the Gfx100rf does a good job but you have to like the more flat rendering that some people describe as “filmic.” The x100vi I think gets a free pass because it’s so trendy that image quality doesn’t matter to most owners but I don’t think the quality from that lens is particularly good. If you like that super sharp 3d pop rendering in a small package, the q3 43mm is probably the best option.
As for distortion, with most of the photos these days done on a camera phone, I don’t think I or most people can tell there’s major distortion unless there are people at the edges of the frame....Show more →
I don’t think “flat” or “3D” is imparted by the lens in this case, it’s lighting and composition + subject distance choices. Lots of initial 100RF samples out there look like they were shot in mediocre light. The 100RF lens does take a contrast hit in backlighting, but then again so do a lot of well-regarded lenses.
p.78 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Steve Spencer wrote:
And let me add that I am not challenging at all what 3BigMamas says about preferring the X100 to the GFX100RF for people shots. That makes total sense to me. The GFX100RF has a lens with an 8.75mm opening at the entrance pupil, which is really quite small. The X100 has a lens with a larger entrance pupil of 11mm. The X100 actually lets more light in than the GFX100RF when both are shot wide open.
Personally, I would also prefer 35mm over 28mm if I can only have one focal length. Of course both cameras can be cropped, but the X100 has the smaller sensor so if we crop down to the same size covers a smaller range of fields of view, but they are good effective focal lengths for portraits. So my personal preference is in total agreement with 3BigMamas that the X100 would be my preferred camera for people shots.
Where the GFX100RF excels, IMO, is as a non-people lens that covers a wide effective focal length range with the big sensor allowing cropping to a wide range of fields of view. It looks to me like a great outdoor camera for architecture and landscapes and can do people shots in a pinch as long as you are fine with fairly deep depth of field. Indoors and at night without IBIS, the very modest entrance pupil would be limiting to me, but some people might work around that by adding flash.
It certainly isn't the camera for me, but I can also see why some people might really like it....Show more →
You have to consider the imaging area size, not just aperture. If you use 45mm digital crop mode, the DOF of the two cameras close to identical from same subject distance. It just not makes sense to me X100VI is better for people shots. X100VI only advantage beside the price is the IBIS if you intend to make street photography motion blur handheld.
p.78 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
tzhang4284 wrote:
Fuji tends towards a bit of a dull lower contrast rendition - there’s no 3d pop or sharp subject separation like with Leica or Zeiss lenses. The difference is that when you pixel peep on the gfx - you see a lot of detail at base iso that the x100vi lens can’t render.
This is nothing to do with the brand of the lens. DOF matters, in FF metrics GFX has an F4 lens, Zeiss and Leica are F2, this is mayor difference. You can "cheat" with GFX getting closer to subject instead of crop to 45mm, and you have the 28mm f3.2 eqv. but you have more distortion because the subject distance.
Aug 19, 2025 at 02:23 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.78 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
You have to consider the imaging area size, not just aperture. If you use 45mm digital crop mode, the DOF of the two cameras close to identical from same subject distance. It just not makes sense to me X100VI is better for people shots. X100VI only advantage beside the price is the IBIS if you intend to make street photography motion blur handheld.
Of course you have to consider the imaging area size, but let's look at these two cameras and look at what they are like when using the whole sensor of each. The GFX100RF has a FF equivalent focal length of about 28mm and a FF equivalent f/number of about 3.2. The X100V has a FF equivalent focal length of 35 with a FF equivalent f/number of 3.0. Those number take the sensor size into consideration. Now you tell me, what has shallower depth of field a 28 f/3.2 lens or a 35 f/3.0 lens? It is close but the 35 f/3.0 lens should have a bit shallower depth of field, from the same subject distance, and if you do the math you will find out that entrance pupil size is what determines depth of field at the same subject distance irrespective of the sensor with the sensor size just determining the effective focal length and f/number. If you know that then you don't even have to bother to convert to something like FF equivalent focal length and f/number and you will just know that the camera with larger entrance pupil has less depth of field at the same subject distance.
I do think it's telling that a new(er) Fujifilm camera is so readily available, and B&H has used models priced at sub-$5k. Some used pricing is based on future/expected price increases and desirability versus the realities of the market.
Is the camera too expensive for what it offers? Seems like almost a no-brainer at, say, $4-4.5k if this is the type of kit one desires...
p.78 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Newtype wrote:
Very nice. Thanks.
I do think it's telling that a new(er) Fujifilm camera is so readily available, and B&H has used models priced at sub-$5k. Some used pricing is based on future/expected price increases and desirability versus the realities of the market.
Is the camera too expensive for what it offers? Seems like almost a no-brainer at, say, $4-4.5k if this is the type of kit one desires...
Readily available can just mean every dealer got one copy in each color recently. Everyone was out of stock just a few days ago. Seen this happen before, and they start disappearing one by one. Also, it's a harder sell in the U.S. because of the recent and substantial price increases due to tariffs, so maybe they won't sell as fast now.
If you're wanting to get the most out of what little bokeh the 100RF has at f/4, make sure and keep the shutter speed set to 1/500 sec. or slower. In bright daylight, this will mean using the ND filter. Or you could use shutter speeds higher than 1/500 sec. if you switch to 14-bit ES (16-bit ES is too slow and will show warping).
If you're wanting to get the most out of what little bokeh the 100RF has at f/4, make sure and keep the shutter speed set to 1/500 sec. or slower. In bright daylight, this will mean using the ND filter. Or you could use shutter speeds higher than 1/500 sec. if you switch to 14-bit ES (16-bit ES is too slow and will show warping).
