p.10 #1 · 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 →
p.10 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
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. ...Show more →
Not worried about the sensor. It is the lens and AF I am worried about.
p.10 #7 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
I also ended up preordering the black one. Figured I could always add an alphagrvd skin to the body for some classic silver look while keeping the lens black (lower profile). Had I went with the silver and wanted to make it all black, the lens wouldnt have worked like that. Now I can't wait for it to come
p.10 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
3BIGMAMAS wrote:
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.
Yes, we can always crank up the ISO to gain handheld speed, but there is a price to be paid for that.
Now that said, I shoot handheld in churches all the time with GFX gear (with 8 or 9 stops of IBIS) at F4 at 1/15 sec with the GF 20-35, 23, 30, or in the old days, the 32-64 at F4 and GF 45 at F2.8. At F4, I crank the ISO to usually to about ISO 1200-1600 and I get some noise. However, with the new LR AI noise reduction feature that noise disappears in post (but cranks out a DNG file).
Yes, you can always bump ISO of course. But the price is reduced DR in post and some noise in the dark areas above 1200 if you view at full res on a 4K or 6K monitor.
But in the example above (handheld) at F4 and 1/15 second and higher ISO, you will get tripod-like stability. But at F4 you also lose DOF and I would greatly prefer using F8 or 11 for more DOF on a tripod with a 3 to 5 second exposure at base ISO. Then you have maximum DR in post to lift shadows and enough DOF at F8 or 11.
p.10 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
As usual, actual photographers are making images with this and forum warriors are debating specs and ignoring those with real-world experience that doesn't align with their preconceptions. Nothing new under the sun.
p.10 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Yes, we can always crank up the ISO to gain handheld speed, but there is a price to be paid for that.
Now that said, I shoot handheld in churches all the time with GFX gear (with 8 or 9 stops of IBIS) at F4 at 1/15 sec with the GF 20-35, 23, 30, or in the old days, the 32-64 at F4 and GF 45 at F2.8. At F4, I crank the ISO to usually to about ISO 1200-1600 and I get some noise. However, with the new LR AI noise reduction feature that noise disappears in post (but cranks out a DNG file).
Yes, you can always bump ISO of course. But the price is reduced DR in post and some noise in the dark areas above 1200 if you view at full res on a 4K or 6K monitor.
But in the example above (handheld) at F4 and 1/15 second and higher ISO, you will get tripod-like stability. But at F4 you also lose DOF and I would greatly prefer using F8 or 11 for more DOF on a tripod with a 3 to 5 second exposure at base ISO. Then you have maximum DR in post to lift shadows and enough DOF at F8 or 11. ...Show more →
I am sorry but I seem to fail at understanding what is the issue. If you do care about the best "DR" or the less noise possible or else I really do think that using a very light tripod such as a Manfrotto Be Free would do the trick and would give you the "best" outcome possible from the sensor.
I feel that what you are asking for is just not really there yet in terms of technology. Maybe in the future... But is it really a priority? Don't think so.
p.10 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyRus wrote:
Only thing that annoys me about the dial-
There should be an XPAN crop mode not a scale for it. Fuji created one of the damn XPAN cameras- Use the name!
RustyRus you're likely either too young or didn't own a Hasselblad (like I did) back then. But when Fujifilm made the XPan they also made their own branded and well known model called the TX-1. So your suggestion of using the badge-engineered XPan name, rather than the proper 65:24 format designation, doesn't sound good does it.
p.10 #12 · 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+
Yes it is exactly what it is. When I got my X100V years ago it quickly turned out to be my favorite camera as I could carry it with me at all times, at ease. I took images with it of daily life/relatives that I would have not done otherwise.
I always thought "What if they do a GFX version of it" and here it is. I mean, it's not exactly a 100% replica but it's really close.
Again; if you take it for what it is, a high end fixed lens middle format camera in the same vein as the x100, you'll be happy.
But it's nothing else.
p.10 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Well, the BF and now this camera gives me a headache, also I was always like the Q3 and 43 but they have quite high price tag.
The thing is I want a smaller, simpler setup than my A7RV and 20-35-50GM. It's a workhorse but quite big for my needs, especially the lenses.
I like the BF for simplicity and perfect combination with the small F2 DN primes. I can accept the resolution loss because of different focal length options. But I have a fear giving up my Sony for BF's limitations, even I'd carry the Sigma 90% of time.
And then here comes the RF. I was not interested because of the F4 lens. But the moment came out I was thinking, it handles lot of my needs, I'd get that huge resolution with cropping ability, and I can mostly finance it from my gear, and get an A7III and keep the 50 1.2GM or a cheaper lens for low DOF shots. And also carry the RF in 90% time and enjoy shooting with this small and simple tool. Advantage over BF the EVF (even I barely using it), tilt screen, leaf shutter and resolution. Disadvantage is the double price and because one focal length I definitely need a low DOF option.
I'm happy for the 1 month delivery window, definitely wait reviews. AF tracking speed is most crucial because my kids (Q3 is disqualified because this), and for the RF that 35 f4 optical performance.
p.10 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
3BIGMAMAS wrote:
Yes it is exactly what it is. When I got my X100V years ago it quickly turned out to be my favorite camera as I could carry it with me at all times, at ease. I took images with it of daily life/relatives that I would have not done otherwise.
I always thought "What if they do a GFX version of it" and here it is. I mean, it's not exactly a 100% replica but it's really close.
Again; if you take it for what it is, a high end fixed lens middle format camera in the same vein as the x100, you'll be happy.
But it's nothing else. ...Show more →
It's completely obvious that that's what it is, but people on the internet gonna be people on the internet
You can look at the image comparison I did earlier in this thread to understand how in almost any use case you'll get better looking results from the RF than the V, the closest X100 to compare it to due to lack of IBIS.
p.10 #15 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
goodbokeh wrote:
RustyRus you're likely either too young or didn't own a Hasselblad (like I did) back then. But when Fujifilm made the XPan they also made their own branded and well known model called the TX-1. So your suggestion of using the badge-engineered XPan name, rather than the proper 65:24 format designation, doesn't sound good does it.
Everyone calls it that
Fuji should embrace it and put it on the dial. Sounds like you disagree and thats ok- But seeing XPAN on the dial of a camera I am going to buy instead of 65:24 sounds pretty damn good to me-
Even the link you sent me to calls it the XPAN. in the title.
p.10 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
The Smallrig half case looks nice and well thought out. Curious how well the bottom flap will stay closed, looks like magnets instead of a button/latch. Interesting 4/15 shipping date if you wanna read the tea leaves.
p.10 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
3BIGMAMAS wrote:
I am sorry but I seem to fail at understanding what is the issue. If you do care about the best "DR" or the less noise possible or else I really do think that using a very light tripod such as a Manfrotto Be Free would do the trick and would give you the "best" outcome possible from the sensor.
I feel that what you are asking for is just not really there yet in terms of technology. Maybe in the future... But is it really a priority? Don't think so.
I'm not sure what you are talking about. The technology exists for IBIS and OIS on this camera but Fuji close not to use it because of size issues on this fixed lens cameras. Tripod? I have four RRS tripods with several RRS heads of all types, plus a RRS monopod that I use a lot. But when traveling, one is not allowed to bring tripods in churches and palaces and museums and hiking with one is not always an option. Walking for miles in the streets with a tripod is also cumbersome (but I do it sometimes).
As far as using tripods go, I always travel with one and always have on in the car. I use a tripod or monopod whenever I can. When I can't, I want IBIS or OIS. Pretty simple for me really. Maybe I misunderstand you.
p.10 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RustyRus wrote:
You sound fun at Parties!!!
65:24 is XPAN-
Everyone calls it that
Fuji should embrace it and put it on the dial. Sounds like you disagree and thats ok- But seeing XPAN on the dial of a camera I am going to buy instead of 65:24 sounds pretty damn good to me-
Even the link you sent me to calls it the XPAN. in the title.
I agree that everyone uses the term "Xpan" as I do. But Xpan is a trademark owned by Hassle bad.
p.10 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Whether you want this camera or not, you really have to hand it to Fuji for continuing to push more affordable digital medium format into the hands of everyday people compared to Hasselblad and phase one prices. It’s also pretty incredible that they were able to fit a medium format sensor into a body that small. I don’t want or need 100 megapixel files though. I am hoping we will see a 50RX sometime soon and around the $3000 price range. I will definitely be renting one of these to play around with though.
