p.9 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
From us who have used film, this is basically like a Mamiya 6/7 in a way with the f/4 lens and size. Obviously medium format film is bigger but those run about $2-3K for a 30 year old model versus $4.9K new for this.
p.9 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
nhlducks35 wrote:
From us who have used film, this is basically like a Mamiya 6/7 in a way with the f/4 lens and size. Obviously medium format film is bigger but those run about $2-3K for a 30 year old model versus $4.9K new for this.
And Fuji film sims are cheaper than 120
If you approach this as a 617/xpan/mamiya7 all in one, it's killer. Bummer none of those had IBIS, huh?
p.9 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
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
Haha, yeah I’d be up for that.
Fuji might have done better marketing this as an X100 Pro…but that would have missed the tie-in to their legacy with film cameras and what it can do at it’s native 4:3 format.
p.9 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
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.
I agree with you and I hope the lens is better than decent. The DPReview samples were not compelling. So far it looks like it might be sharp but otherwise not extraordinary when it comes to its rendering.
p.9 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I still have a feeling that most people rubbing their hands with angst about IBIS have very little experience with GFX.
I tried to normalize FOV between my X100 and GFX here as much as possible. I used the 32-64 at 44.5 (best I could do without good markings) and F4. I used the X100v at f2.2. X100v has a mist filter which is why it's so much bloomier, but the point remains.
IBIS turned off on the GFX, no OIS on the lens. Obviously no IBIS on the V. Both shot JPEG with the same recipe/settings.
Pay attention to the zoom pic that has all the exposure info. There is less noise at GFX ISO 3200 than ISO 640 on the X100v. The shutter speed is more than twice as fast on the GFX. I shot the GFX with one hand. In the real world, if you use the RF with a 1/125 min shutter speed and let ISO climb, you're still going to get better results than the X100, and not by an insignificant margin.
p.9 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I had three generations of X100 and find it a bit confusing as to why someone would compare these cameras to the RF. Comparing low light results with the A7CR and pick your lens..Sony 40mm f/2.8 G .. a good bit smaller and cheaper package, the X2D and one of the pancake lenses…more costly and more capable and the obvious competitor .. one of the Leica Q3 cameras. Low light is the weak selling point of this camera. There are better tools.
p.9 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
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.
If you are worried about the IQ of the 102 MP sensor, don't be. There is no better IQ in the world (P1 not included). I've been shooting that sensor for 6 years on four different GFX bodies, so fear not. And don't worry about the quality of that new lens. It is going to be extremely good, especially at that size and weight for MF. I don't care if there is digital correction to make it really good at that size and weight. So be it. So, IQ is a great strength - not weakness and you aren't going to be sacrificing any GFX IQ compared to the GFX MILCs and any GF lens.
Now as far as stabilization and controls go, we will be talking about that until the cows come home.
p.9 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
gdanmitchell wrote:
Odd. I guess they didn't have that chart when they put IBIS in the X100vi? ;-)
The chart seems about right to me. X100vi would be closer to the yellow zone due to its longer effective focal length and smaller pixel pitch. IBIS would still be useful on the GFX100RF…it’s just not as critical as many are making it out to be.
p.9 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chiron wrote:
If one were offered either the GFX100RF or the GFX100S II, what are all the reasons for which one might choose the RF? Size, weight, body-form? Anything else? Cool-factor, maybe?
If you owned a GFX100S II, would you trade it for an RF?
If you owned a GFX100RF, would you trade it for a GFX100S II?
p.9 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Eric (I think it was you who said it - I'm editing because the quote thing got screwed up),
I disagree that the crop dial is the whole point of the camera. That is a huge stretch. That crop dial is not the whole point of the cameras. The whole point of the camera is to have a "small" GFX camera with a fixed lens that is along the lines of the Q series or even like the x100 series. It is a stand-alone and very beautiful, attractive, fun little package with the same incredible IQ as the GFX MILC line and a joy to carry and shoot. That is the point of the camera - not the ability to pick a jpeg in-camera crop size with a dial.
You may think it is a convenient feature for you, but I bet money 75% of GFX shooters will never use that dial. Most GFX shooters shoot raw and crop to whatever they want in post on a big monitor where they can better see what ius going on. They may even crop it differently for different output several times in several different ways depending on how the jpeg will be used. I have produced jpegs with 3 or 4 different crops, size, res and radically different edits (like B&W and color) from the same raw file many times. Have we forgotten why we shoot raw?
I also bet even the guys that like to have the EVF display the crop they prefer in order to help with framing will set up a programable dial to quickly change between the two or three crops they prefer vs that dedicated dial of too many crop choices.
You can call it an aspect ratio all you want. But it really is just an in-camera crop for a jpeg output and can be better done in post if you shoot raw which by far the most of us do (95%?).
p.9 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Johnmj1 wrote:
I've pre-ordered one, but should I have buyer's remorse, due to lack of ibis?
You should figure that out on your own and not rely on someone else. look at your metadata .. figure out what speeds and ISO you’ve been shooting at. Determine what your low light requirement is for this camera. Nobody carries one camera for everything. Lastly, remember with 100 megapixels it takes a much faster shutter speed without stabilization than with full frame. For many, this is not an issue and this looks like a great camera. Nobody can tell you what it is for you. You need to figure that out. I can say that with my camera, same sensor, I can pretty much shoot at iso 1600 all day with great results. ISO 3200 looks good with good software, but you will not find me intentionally, turning off my image stabilization and intentionally shooting at higher ISO. Of course, the one exception is when I shoot from tripod… which is not the usual case for me.
p.9 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
bwcolor wrote:
I had three generations of X100 and find it a bit confusing as to why someone would compare these cameras to the RF.
Beyond the price, they are similar in size, form factor, controls, and overall use cases. I'm confused as to how anyone sees the RF as anything but an X100+
p.9 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
hsiunghsiung wrote:
Do you feel like the gfx100rf is much more compact than the gfx100ii without evf? Or are they similar in size, but just that the gfx100ii has a bigger grip and a little fatter? Or does the gfx100ii feel much bulkier
GFX100RF feels more compact - very good grip and feels very natural.
You should not overthink this I believe they are different type of cameras.
p.9 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Beyond the price, they are similar in size, form factor, controls, and overall use cases. I'm confused as to how anyone sees the RF as anything but an X100+
I’m really quite surprised that they’re the same size. I guess everyone has their own definition of same. My point is they’re much more capable small cameras than the X 100 these days. I should say that I might be discounting certain qualities that other people value such as film simulation. I never shoot JPG and if I want film simulation, I shoot film. My favorite camera is still a rangefinder. I always found the hybrid view finder of the X 100 to be quite attractive. I’m not discounting the X100 and I have to say that when the Japanese were going all computer, Fuji supported photographers and kept things to shutter speed and aperture. I think this new camera follows in that tradition and keeps things simple and basic, but with added features, Fuji is really a very good company and isn’t afraid to try new things.
I’ll add one other downside to this camera that is shared with other medium format cameras. If you’re moving from a full frame camera with great auto focus, this is still a work in progress with medium format. I think everyone knows this and it’s not specific to Fuji. I haven’t had an issue with this, but I don’t rely on fast accurate auto focus as much as I did in years past.
p.9 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
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.9 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I said similar, not same.
bwcolor wrote:
I’m really quite surprised that they’re the same size. I guess everyone has their own definition of same. My point is they’re much more capable small cameras than the X 100 these days. I should say that I might be discounting certain qualities that other people value such as film simulation. I never shoot JPG and if I want film simulation, I shoot film. My favorite camera is still a rangefinder. I always found the hybrid view finder of the X 100 to be quite attractive. I’m not discounting the X100 and I have to say that when the Japanese were going all computer, Fuji supported photographers and kept things to shutter speed and aperture. I think this new camera follows in that tradition and keeps things simple and basic, but with added features, Fuji is really a very good company and isn’t afraid to try new things.
I’ll add one other downside to this camera that is shared with other medium format cameras. If you’re moving from a full frame camera with great auto focus, this is still a work in progress with medium format. I think everyone knows this and it’s not specific to Fuji. I haven’t had an issue with this, but I don’t rely on fast accurate auto focus as much as I did in years past....Show more →
p.9 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Johnmj1 wrote:
I've pre-ordered one, but should I have buyer's remorse, due to lack of ibis?
It's up to you - I got it for 10 days and I do not miss IBIS one bit. And I got more shaky hands than steady ones.
Crank up the Isos. It's 2025, it's more than usable.
It's a camera that I feel you need to have it in your hands for a few mins before you can grasp it. It's a great product if you take it for what it is and what it intends to be.
