p.83 #1 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
tuomkok wrote:
If one wants a small camera and do not necessarily want MF Fuji, and 35mm FOV is not a problem, the latest version of Sony RX1 might be worth considering.
I was interested in Rx1riii, but the size difference compared A7CR not worth it for me with all limitations, and not impressed by Sonnar 35 f2. Also my problem with X100 series there are bunch of options close in size, without fixed lens limitations. Q3s are the same, but the foolish AF-C at this price point is the most deal breaker. GFX100RF at the same time is unmatched, all MF option is at double volume and almost double weight. A7CR is the only competitor as high resolution compact, but good luck to find a corner to corner sharp high resolution wide angle pancake lens.
p.83 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
After two days initial impression . Hate Menus, Hate Shutter button . Love Love Camera, files Beautiful to edit , Focus much better then 100s I had a while back. Build Quality wonderful , Made in Japan. Keeping it!
p.83 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Agree. After one time hassle to set up the camera and fine tune over a month of setting to my preference. This becomes one of my favorite cameras to use.
They did it right without make it over the top on luxury side. A wonderful tool.
It is a shame now it is almost 15% more than initial price which is a good buy IMO. macwest wrote:
After two days initial impression . Hate Menus, Hate Shutter button . Love Love Camera, files Beautiful to edit , Focus much better then 100s I hade while back. Build Quality wonderful , Made in Japan. Keeping it!
p.83 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
I was interested in Rx1riii, but the size difference compared A7CR not worth it for me with all limitations, and not impressed by Sonnar 35 f2. Also my problem with X100 series there are bunch of options close in size, without fixed lens limitations. Q3s are the same, but the foolish AF-C at this price point is the most deal breaker. GFX100RF at the same time is unmatched, all MF option is at double volume and almost double weight. A7CR is the only competitor as high resolution compact, but good luck to find a corner to corner sharp high resolution wide angle pancake lens....Show more →
Corner to corner WA lens for the a7cR that's sharp across? Sigma 24f3.5 and/or Sony 24f2.8. Small and very sharp. And inexpensive.
p.83 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
Corner to corner WA lens for the a7cR that's sharp across? Sigma 24f3.5 and/or Sony 24f2.8. Small and very sharp. And inexpensive.
20 1.8G is the lens sharp across the frame, also 24 GM and Sigma 24 f2 is quite good, but nor the 3.5 variant, nor 24 2.8g are good on edges at 60MP. They barely hit 40 lpmm at edges, Sigma center also not that good with 58lpmm. According Lenstip reviews.
p.83 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Gordon Laing rates both highly - and I can tell you from experience with the Sigma that it returns sharp images across. Unless you view your images at 300%, that is.
p.83 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
20 1.8G is the lens sharp across the frame, also 24 GM and Sigma 24 f2 is quite good, but nor the 3.5 variant, nor 24 2.8g are good on edges at 60MP. They barely hit 40 lpmm at edges, Sigma center also not that good with 58lpmm. According Lenstip reviews.
20G is sharp but somehow very very meh compared to 24GM which is both technically and aesthetically very good. 24 GM is also smallest and cheapest of the GM primes.
Personally I kind of liked the very small 24G. One just has to accept the compromises made. Stopped down G it is sharp enough, although distortions are awful - fortunately lens profile covers 99% of the problem.
The elephant in the room is that Sony does not make a decent 28mm prime.
Another elephant is the miserable A7cr EVF. With better viewfinder I would recommend Loxia 25 as a an excellent MF alternative. I still miss the Loxia sunstars.
p.83 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I'd always like 28 1.8G in size of 20 1.8G. I almost has the conspiracy theory Leica pays Sony not to develop such 28mm lens, killing almost the whole demand for Q3.
24GM is one of the lenses I'd like to try, but the 28mm is the widest all purpose focal length for me, the cropping problem exists no more with GFX100RF.
p.83 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Yeah I normally shoot in log (clog2 and slog3), but even after my usual color grades, it seems chalky. Idk if it’s because of how much the algorithm pixel bins the image from the sensor or if its the smaller bitrate or idk, but i just can’t seem to get it to look as good as other log files. I think denoising helped a little (maybe the algorithm introduces small grain noise even in good lighting? Idk)
mranger211 wrote:
My guess is that the "chalky" look is because you are shooting in Flog. Flog is a gamma curve/profile that records a large dynamic range. The washed out look protects highlights and shadows, but you have to convert it to an output profile before watching the video. You have to change the video settings to record video to one of the film simulations if you want to watch straight out of the camera.
p.83 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I stuck with the gfx100rf mainly because of the compact size, 28mm focal length, and 100mp for crops and rendering. I do think it’s kinda niche as there are probably other combinations just as good and compact.
If the gfx100rf was any bigger, I think I would have gone for a gfx100ii (removed viewfinder for compactness) and some prime to get better video quality (4k60p) and ibis. Compactness is important to me, otherwise I wouldn’t take out my camera much.
I also like to shoot with much context, so the wider the better for me usually. Hence I prefer 28mm over 35mm from other fixed cameras.
I tried out q3 which was a nice camera, but the lens stuck out enough that it didn’t fit in my bags well. Also the raw file wasn’t as malleable for editing to me in terms of dynamic range. Beautiful camera and can take beautiful photos with its lens though.id say the sensor felt more limiting.
I have the old rx1rii which I still love from the 35mm sonnar rendering at times. Plus editing the raw files was a joy with its dynamic range. I think thats what made my q3 experience more disappointing when it comes to editing. My only gripe is that the battery life drains fast and when not in use too. I have to take out the battery to make sure I can use it next time. The compact size and feel is great hence I was almost tempted by the rx1riii if not for the price as I got the rx1rii used for a decent price years ago.
The A7cR was one of the cameras that I’ve always wanted to get (but never did) as it has 4k60 (1.2x crop or so) and the high ~61mp sensor (apparently same pixel size as gfx100rf). Sony has a few nice compact prime lenses too so it can be just as compact or even smaller.
So far, the landscape rendering (like trees) and how detailed the photos are from the gfx100rf are keeping me from selling and trying other things out like the A7cR.
p.83 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
hsiunghsiung wrote:
I stuck with the gfx100rf mainly because of the compact size, 28mm focal length, and 100mp for crops and rendering. I do think it’s kinda niche as there are probably other combinations just as good and compact.
If the gfx100rf was any bigger, I think I would have gone for a gfx100ii (removed viewfinder for compactness) and some prime to get better video quality (4k60p) and ibis. Compactness is important to me, otherwise I wouldn’t take out my camera much.
I also like to shoot with much context, so the wider the better for me usually. Hence I prefer 28mm over 35mm from other fixed cameras.
I tried out q3 which was a nice camera, but the lens stuck out enough that it didn’t fit in my bags well. Also the raw file wasn’t as malleable for editing to me in terms of dynamic range. Beautiful camera and can take beautiful photos with its lens though.id say the sensor felt more limiting.
I have the old rx1rii which I still love from the 35mm sonnar rendering at times. Plus editing the raw files was a joy with its dynamic range. I think thats what made my q3 experience more disappointing when it comes to editing. My only gripe is that the battery life drains fast and when not in use too. I have to take out the battery to make sure I can use it next time. The compact size and feel is great hence I was almost tempted by the rx1riii if not for the price as I got the rx1rii used for a decent price years ago.
The A7cR was one of the cameras that I’ve always wanted to get (but never did) as it has 4k60 (1.2x crop or so) and the high ~61mp sensor (apparently same pixel size as gfx100rf). Sony has a few nice compact prime lenses too so it can be just as compact or even smaller.
So far, the landscape rendering (like trees) and how detailed the photos are from the gfx100rf are keeping me from selling and trying other things out like the A7cR....Show more →
I just bough again Sony 40G to slightly challenge my recent 28mm eqv shooting habits. My most used lenses with A7rV are 24-70GMII and 35GM, but especially the zoom makes the camera quite heavy and large.
Croppability is one of the key aspects of GFX100RF. However I find that RF starts to loose its point when cropping too much past 35mm eqv. It is not about the pixels, it is more about rendering. In fact, when in the mood for 35mm I really enjoy using the good old X100V. Its slightly narrower for makes me think the composition more carefully.
Despite November light (and vibes) the much debated lack of IBIS has not been a huge problem for me. I just bought one of the small Godox flashes to be used with my Fujis. Flash is maybe more useful when summer comes, but I have a few ideas how to use it in winter - we will have snow any day now
p.83 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I have GFX100RF and bought last month A7CR because still have Voigtlander 21 3.5, 65 APO, and 35GM, and grey market price was too attractive. I considered A7CII but feared to regret some point I didn't went for high resolution for 65APO and 35GM, also love that included grip for using those bigger lenses. I thought about 40 2.5, but I bought Viltrox air 50 f2 instead. Viltrox is cheap, and 40 2.5 doesn't have enough different look than 35 f4 of 100RF. 50 F2 has significant distinct look, and I use it in lower light, or faster pace shooting my kids when I want to keep lightweight.
I wanted to sell 35GM for 50 1.2GM, but not so sure about this, even if 50 1.2GM is a better complement for GFX100RF as a casual shallow DOF solution. I invested too mutch into this hobby, kind of insane amount, but I feel almost every day the urge for shooting.
p.83 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
I have GFX100RF and bought last month A7CR because still have Voigtlander 21 3.5, 65 APO, and 35GM, and grey market price was too attractive. I considered A7CII but feared to regret some point I didn't went for high resolution for 65APO and 35GM, also love that included grip for using those bigger lenses. I thought about 40 2.5, but I bought Viltrox air 50 f2 instead. Viltrox is cheap, and 40 2.5 doesn't have enough different look than 35 f4 of 100RF. 50 F2 has significant distinct look, and I use it in lower light, or faster pace shooting my kids when I want to keep lightweight.
I wanted to sell 35GM for 50 1.2GM, but not so sure about this, even if 50 1.2GM is a better complement for GFX100RF as a casual shallow DOF solution. I invested too mutch into this hobby, kind of insane amount, but I feel almost every day the urge for shooting....Show more →
It is the shooting experience A7Cr/II is simply not as nice camera to use as A7rV, and GFX100RF is even nicer. Regarding Image quality I really like the output from Sony 33mp sensor. A7rV is also ok, but then again I think Fuji files are clearly the best. The difference between A7rV and 100RF is more than resolution and sensor size would imply - maybe it is 14 vs. 16 bit.
Now that I have shot more with Fuji, I start to see the difference between Sony and Fuji colors. Even though similar finial results can be usually achieved, Fuji colors are often better starting point. However, I have been wondering how X100V files look color and contrast wise as good or better than 100RF files. I really like my X100V, although I use it mainly just as a family camera! I shot raw with C1.
One thing is sure, if you want shallow dof, 100RF is not the way to go. Even when some background blur can be achieved, it just not look that good. A tightly framed f/4 portrait might be an exception, but usually I plan my 100RF images so that thin dof is not needed. Just embrace the sharpness
p.83 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I enjoy shooting with small lens cameras lot more than professional grade sizes, also prefer thinner, lighter camera bodies, GFX100RF just a perfect camera for me. Of course I can handle shallower DOF option, but not compromising optical quality or adding significant size. I think it's a masterpiece how they designed this optical system in this size for 100MP resolution, and excellent optical performance, there are no alternatives.
I think there is a space for an opposite direction camera. About same size but 40-50mm f1.4 FF equivalent AF lens. Of course this kind of lens can provide high resolution only stopped down at center, has low contrast wide open and visible CA, but it's more like a high DR environmental portrait camera.
If Fuji want to copy Leica Q with GFX100RF, I'd build this kind of 43mm camera, instead of high corrected APO like in Q3 43. GFX100RF is the documentary high resolution version, and the fast lens version (50-55mm f1.8) is the artist camera, where you compromise optical performance for character and size, but have the DR of MF and cropping ability from high resolution sensor.
p.83 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
During Thanksgiving week.
?s=eyJpIjo1NDk1MjUwMDk3NCwiZSI6MTc2NDM3NDI3NywicyI6ImQyNmMwNjdhZDFkZTIwNTcyOTVlOGE1ZDgzMDViZTdiMDI5OWE0Y2IiLCJ2IjoxfQ">GFXRF by ZHNL, on Flickr ?s=eyJpIjo1NDk1MjQ0MDgxOCwiZSI6MTc2NDM3NDIxNywicyI6ImMyOTI2ZWJjZTliODExMzVjZDE3ZDE1Mzk0YTFhMjM4ZTI0M2I4YzMiLCJ2IjoxfQ">GFXRF2 by ZHNL, on Flickr
p.83 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
tuomkok wrote:
What do you think?
One of the reasons I was not excited about the RF is fixed at one focal length. After watching the video in my mind it opened additional doors of possibilities. Although one can expect a loss of IQ it does give a photographer options. I saw one of the comments another person was buying the teleconverter hoping that would give similar results. Be interesting to see the results of that combo. If I owned the RF I would definitely buy the wide angle converter.
Makes one wonder if Fuji might develop adapters for the RF.
p.83 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
It's almost impossible to determine anything about IQ from YouTube videos thanks to their heavy handed compression. Seeing two RAW files side by side would be illuminating.
Viltrox is about to drop their adapters for the X100VI, so I suppose they might tackle the RF next.
Again, these lenses are produced for apsc and covers MF sensor. Hopefully one of the Chinese manufacturers will design RF conversion lenses.
Similarly, Ricoh GT-2 x1.5 teleconverter with cut/shaved rear or Neewer/Freewell 1.5x converters that are 49mm rear are usable with GFX100RF for portraits with MF coverage... However sharpness is not good enough for landscapes unless cropped...
I was working with Yukosteel for a shorter adapter to work with 49mm threads similar to shown in below link:
p.83 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I have plans to get a used GFX100RF on Thursday and am looking forward to checking it out. My experience with medium format digital is limited. My friend let me borrow his 50R for a week but the autofocus was absolutely atrocious. I'm assuming the MF AF has come a long way since them.
