The FUJIFILM GFX100RF is an interesting take on medium format, combining a 102MP sensor with a compact, all-in-one design. It has a lightweight, rangefinder-style body with a built-in wide-angle prime lens, making it a practical option for travel and street photography. The idea seems to be a balance between high-resolution image quality and simplicity, offering a different approach for those who want medium format without the usual bulk.
The GFX100RF uses the same 102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm BSI CMOS sensor found in the GFX 100S II, delivering high resolution, 16-bit raw files, and 10-bit HEIFs. It has a base ISO of 80 for low noise, a wide dynamic range, and the flexibility to crop into nine different aspect ratios. Powered by FUJIFILM’s X Processor 5, it handles continuous shooting up to 6 fps, records 4K video, and features an Intelligent Hybrid AF system for fast and accurate focusing.
Are we overlooking the importance of picking the aspect ratio on the scene?
Is this what really distinguishes it from the Q3 (which I have no experience with)?
Having fooled around a little with a X2D 100c, I now understand why medium format, at least in the film days, did have the benefit of giving magazine / commercial editors the ability to crop the image they wanted in post. It's more than just the resolution, there is something about the square (or more square-like) format that lends itself to cropping.
And if you watch the Fujifilm Yukio Uchida promo video, he does focus on the importance of picking the aspect ratio and crop in-camera, on the field, as part of the creative process.
We can talk about resolution and detail all we want -- but I can't help but feel for me, since I don't care about that last word in absolute detail -- maybe this crop ability and choosing the aspect ratio in the field, is the unique functionality this portable camera gives you, at least from the perspective of a street photographer.
ETA: Besides thinking about and getting the aspect ratio right on the scene, I just think for me it means no more sacrifices at all regarding focal length. So no more need to screw on or off a WCL on the X100V. No more thinking about "do I really want to crop down to 50mm equivalent on my GRIII". No more swapping out a 50mm or 35mm on the Leica M10. It's all here on one camera. But does this really do that better than a M11 with a fast 28mm for me?
I think it's a great first step for what might be, in one or two more product cycles, a really compelling choice (I would want them to add IBIS at some point). The zoom lever is quite nice for really getting the most out of the large sensor. For landscapes and street work especially. If you're chasing bokeh, this won't be the camera for you.
The price is high in absolute terms, but it's still by far the most affordable new medium format digital camera out there right now. And if you priced out the items on their own (i.e., 100 MP medium format camera + medium wide lens) you can plainly see it's a good value for the price.
I welcome the new Fujifilm GFX100RF. While it won't provide much depth of field, it is a camera and lens combination that delivers high resolution/contrast, with hopefully great optical correction. This makes it ideal for applications where high resolution and contrast are beneficial, such as street photography, architecture, and landscapes, especially in situations where lighting isn't an issue.
You might wonder if even more compact full-frame or even an APS-C camera with a high-quality lens could also deliver great resolution and contrast. Yes, they certainly can, but they won't match the ultimate image quality of the Fuji medium format, especially for those seeking the ultimate resolution and contrast available in a fix-lens camera. (Sony considered this idea but never released it to the market)
However, the depth of field limitation is a significant factor, especially because it is a fixed-lens camera. The ability to crop and simulate different focal lengths is useful, but the more you crop, the less the depth of field equivalency becomes. Essentially, it is a niche camera designed for a specific use: capturing ultra-high-resolution 28mm images with a depth of field equivalent to around f/3.2 when shot wide open (in 35mm terms). For example, using a 2x crop mode, you get the equivalent of a 56mm lens, but with a depth of field closer to f/6.4 (35mm equivalent). A 56mm f/6.4 lens does not sound too exciting, so, while the GFX100RF excels in its unique strengths, it is tailored for specific needs. That said, it remains highly useful for street photography and landscapes.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I welcome the new Fujifilm GFX100RF. While it won't provide much depth of field, it is a camera and lens combination that delivers high resolution/contrast, with hopefully great optical correction. This makes it ideal for applications where high resolution and contrast are beneficial, such as street photography, architecture, and landscapes, especially in situations where lighting isn't an issue.
You might wonder if even more compact full-frame or even an APS-C camera with a high-quality lens could also deliver great resolution and contrast. Yes, they certainly can, but they won't match the ultimate image quality of the Fuji medium format, especially for those seeking the ultimate resolution and contrast available in a fix-lens camera. (Sony considered this idea but never released it to the market)
However, the depth of field limitation is a significant factor, especially because it is a fixed-lens camera. The ability to crop and simulate different focal lengths is useful, but the more you crop, the less the depth of field equivalency becomes. Essentially, it is a niche camera designed for a specific use: capturing ultra-high-resolution 28mm images with a depth of field equivalent to around f/3.2 when shot wide open (in 35mm terms). For example, using a 2x crop mode, you get the equivalent of a 56mm lens, but with a depth of field closer to f/6.4 (35mm equivalent). A 56mm f/6.4 lens does not sound too exciting, so, while the GFX100RF excels in its unique strengths, it is tailored for specific needs. That said, it remains highly useful for street photography and landscapes....Show more →
All good points Fred. But given how well the GFX sensor handles higher ISO's I think some of the worries about low light might be a bit overstated(plus modern NR software). Regardless this is a camera that will require good technique so I think being familiar with a tripod and monopod to be a good thing if one is considering it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I welcome the new Fujifilm GFX100RF. While it won't provide much depth of field, it is a camera and lens combination that delivers high resolution/contrast, with hopefully great optical correction. This makes it ideal for applications where high resolution and contrast are beneficial, such as street photography, architecture, and landscapes, especially in situations where lighting isn't an issue.
You might wonder if even more compact full-frame or even an APS-C camera with a high-quality lens could also deliver great resolution and contrast. Yes, they certainly can, but they won't match the ultimate image quality of the Fuji medium format, especially for those seeking the ultimate resolution and contrast available in a fix-lens camera. (Sony considered this idea but never released it to the market)
However, the depth of field limitation is a significant factor, especially because it is a fixed-lens camera. The ability to crop and simulate different focal lengths is useful, but the more you crop, the less the depth of field equivalency becomes. Essentially, it is a niche camera designed for a specific use: capturing ultra-high-resolution 28mm images with a depth of field equivalent to around f/3.2 when shot wide open (in 35mm terms). For example, using a 2x crop mode, you get the equivalent of a 56mm lens, but with a depth of field closer to f/6.4 (35mm equivalent). A 56mm f/6.4 lens does not sound too exciting, so, while the GFX100RF excels in its unique strengths, it is tailored for specific needs....Show more →
Thanks for for your detailed response Fred. Definitely food for thought.
Not for me either, but I'm impressed Fuji pulled this off. Personally, I think this could be Fuji's best selling MF camera, that will only get better in future releases.
Fixed lens cameras aren't for everyone, but I think they have a certain appeal that pulls people in, especially when they are high quality products.
I'll be watching for production model optical tests over the next month but I have pre-ordered the 100RF black model at B&H. I'm really looking forward to the leaf shutter. I have the older 100S but I don't use it much. The 100S shutter, even using EFCS, sounds like a thrashing machine and the silent ES transit time is too slow for anything but static subjects.
I don't mind (too much) the absence of IS. I'll be using the 100RF for 90% daytime. I'll use an approximation of the Leica M's minimum 4X SS/FL formula with a floating ISO maxing @ 3200. For the other 10% of low light photos the leaf shutter will help with slower SSs and I will cope with technique and equipment.
If the 100RF works out as well as I hope then my trusty Leica Q2 will then be heading for a new home.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I welcome the new Fujifilm GFX100RF. While it won't provide much depth of field, it is a camera and lens combination that delivers high resolution/contrast, with hopefully great optical correction. This makes it ideal for applications where high resolution and contrast are beneficial, such as street photography, architecture, and landscapes, especially in situations where lighting isn't an issue.
You might wonder if even more compact full-frame or even an APS-C camera with a high-quality lens could also deliver great resolution and contrast. Yes, they certainly can, but they won't match the ultimate image quality of the Fuji medium format, especially for those seeking the ultimate resolution and contrast available in a fix-lens camera. (Sony considered this idea but never released it to the market)
However, the depth of field limitation is a significant factor, especially because it is a fixed-lens camera. The ability to crop and simulate different focal lengths is useful, but the more you crop, the less the depth of field equivalency becomes. Essentially, it is a niche camera designed for a specific use: capturing ultra-high-resolution 28mm images with a depth of field equivalent to around f/3.2 when shot wide open (in 35mm terms). For example, using a 2x crop mode, you get the equivalent of a 56mm lens, but with a depth of field closer to f/6.4 (35mm equivalent). A 56mm f/6.4 lens does not sound too exciting, so, while the GFX100RF excels in its unique strengths, it is tailored for specific needs. That said, it remains highly useful for street photography and landscapes....Show more →
This camera purpose is a high resolution and high resolving ability in a reasonable size. There is no current way to produce such small lens in an excellent balanced camera with shallow dof and good resolution, optical perfomance at same time. If you place same resolution capable f2 lens the size increase leading you to leave at home the camera. It’s a far better weight balanced camera than Q3 and RX1.
We want fast and sharp lenses from manufacturers, and small cameras. It's ended up even a normal fov 35, 50mm prime lens dwarves the size reduced cameras, the weight center is on front, uncomfortable to hold, and on a strap constantly flip toward the lens. This camera mass center inside the camera body, for comfortable shooting experience.
