You really need to see the differences in motion (click corrections on/off, or in GIF form). Just look at that uncorrected horizon near the top of frame. It's still not straight with corrections on.
Interesting release, even if I’m not the target audience. Curious to see if the other major players respond with something similar? Sony’s known for pairing a beautiful prime with a body—and honestly, it’s been a long time since we’ve seen an update.
The more I see the reviews for this camera the less I'm seeing it as a competitor for the Q3. I think the biggest draw of this camera is the flexibility to crop in to get exactly the shot you want in post (or in-camera if you're using JPG). And to really be a "proof of concept" that medium format can be compact and relatively affordable and accessible to normal people.
The Q3 I think is really all about that lens (and yes it's 60 MP so you can also crop in quite a bit as well), and about the simplicity and experience of using a Leica camera.
But still withholding judgment since the camera isn't even really out yet. I'm ready to see it in the hands of some really capable photographers and not just youtuber reviewers.
It's interesting the path Fuji takes. RX1Rii and Q2/Q3 are my favorite cameras. I just have a thing for fixed full frame cameras. They share the common thread of pairing a great sensor with a legendary lens. The Sonnar and Summilux are just amazing lenses. If Sony and Leica made their respective lenses into a FE mount or M mount prime, they would be very popular.
Fuji takes a different route. They are form and function over IQ. I have the X100VI. I would say IQ is underwhelming if you had the RX or Q, but form is amazing. Obviously, Fuji is selling like hot cakes, so maybe most people are ok with lesser IQ as long the camera is really fun to use. If the 23mm f2 on the X100 is a XF mount lens, how many people would be excited about it?
gordec wrote:
Fuji takes a different route. They are form and function over IQ. I have the X100VI. I would say IQ is underwhelming if you had the RX or Q, but form is amazing. Obviously, Fuji is selling like hot cakes, so maybe most people are ok with lesser IQ as long the camera is really fun to use. If the 23mm f2 on the X100 is a XF mount lens, how many people would be excited about it?
I mean... Fuji would argue that the X100V is high image quality paired with elegant design. Maybe (certainly up for debate) the image quality is not as high as a similar lens from Leica or Zeiss, but I don't think Fuji is making the case that the X100VI has to sacrifice image quality for enjoyment of use.
mdude85 wrote:
I mean... Fuji would argue that the X100V is high image quality paired with elegant design. Maybe (certainly up for debate) the image quality is not as high as a similar lens from Leica or Zeiss, but I don't think Fuji is making the case that the X100VI has to sacrifice image quality for enjoyment of use.
IQ is subjective. I'm just saying for X100 system, people rave about the system. You don't hear people say OMG the 23mm F2 is so good I wish it's available for the XF mount. For the RX and Q, people rave about the lens itself. I think that's where the difference is in philosophy.
gordec wrote:
It's interesting the path Fuji takes. RX1Rii and Q2/Q3 are my favorite cameras. I just have a thing for fixed full frame cameras. They share the common thread of pairing a great sensor with a legendary lens. The Sonnar and Summilux are just amazing lenses. If Sony and Leica made their respective lenses into a FE mount or M mount prime, they would be very popular.
As I said in an another topic that 35 f2 Sonnar is not special to me. If you check DPReview’s studio comparison that lens seems really soft to me, Q3 is far superior, and nowhere to highest resolving interchangeable lenses like 35gm, 35 apo.
RoamingScott wrote:
Not many I suspect, given how thoroughly better the 23 Fujicon is.
Is it? Genuine question.
I had the X100F and the X100V, and noticed how much better the lens in the V was, even without pixel peeping. It was almost as good as the GRIII. I know there are Youtube pixel peeping videos out there praising the V's lens.
I just assumed the original X100 lens (kept in the X100F) was pretty old (2010) and the V (2020) incorporated (to some degree) things learned and already largely incorporated in the XF23mm F2.0 (2016). So I just assumed the new X100V/VI lens was about as good as the 23 'cron, while the old one far lagged behind?
mdude85 wrote:
The more I see the reviews for this camera the less I'm seeing it as a competitor for the Q3. I think the biggest draw of this camera is the flexibility to crop in to get exactly the shot you want in post (or in-camera if you're using JPG). And to really be a "proof of concept" that medium format can be compact and relatively affordable and accessible to normal people.
I preordered the camera. It's because I want to explore aspect ratio cropping in the field. I have masking tape on some of my camera LCDs from when I was trying 1x1 shooting, 16:9, even 4:3. This makes it easier.
I've always liked the X100V+WCL, because of the variety of framing options -- OVF/EVF, LCD, tilting LCD. Kinda sad there's no OVF here, but it is what it is. Never quite happy though with the OVF/EVF of the X100V as the OVF didn't have 28mm framelines.
The medium format thing is more of a pain in the ass for me than anything else. I know the image quality improvement is there -- my father got himself an X2D 100c as a self retirement gift, and I've done side by side comparisons and see the difference. Some people care, I don't. I hate the 200 megabyte RAW files.
I am really looking forward to doing a lot more in camera. I find working in the digital darkroom in post less and less attractive, esp. as I’m finding I enjoy shooting film more now. Working more with SOOC film simulation recipes, aspect ratios, crops, is so much more interesting to me now. Even two card slots -- I used to think it was unnecessary for anyone but those whose livelihoods depended on it, but here, I'll have one save those annoying 200 megabyte RAWs for archive purposes, and the other save reasonable jpgs (prob the smallest 3000x2000 ish as you can always edit the RAW for when you need to print big) for actual use.
I'm probably in the minority. I don't pixel peep. I'm happy with my M10-P, GRIII, X100V (other than viewfinder issues).
Q3 or M11 never appealed to me. It's strange I'm getting the GFX100RF after thinking my dad is getting so much more camera than he’ll ever use with his X2D and what a waste that is for him (but I’m happy for him, and totally supported him getting it, don’t get me wrong).
I wish the GFX100RF were a 40 or 50 megapixel full frame, 24mm F2.8 camera to be honest. That's all I really want. Decent cropping to 35mm-ish APS-C and 50mm-ish Micro Four Thirds is good enough for me. I'm a natural 28mm shooter, but for inside, intimate family group shots, 24mm is best.
But what can we do. This is what Fuji is giving us, and I'm happy enough to try it out. Hopefully Fuji gives us a WCL for this.
This is money better spent than selling the M10-P and getting a M11, or buying and gifting a XCD38mm F2.5 and borrowing my dad's system from time to time.
I shoot 35 with my 20-35, 35-70 and 32-64 so if it plays well there at those apertures then that's one check(I think the 35 on the 35-70 should be the floor). But it has close focus capability so that's a good on its behalf. I'd probably be more in on a f/2.8 but I think the f/4 works(depending on other decisions... ). Seems to have a large amount of software correct distortion though so I'll need more on across the frame resolution. I like what they've done but I can wait to verify more information about how this camera might work for me.
I had the X100F and the X100V, and noticed how much better the lens in the V was, even without pixel peeping. It was almost as good as the GRIII. I know there are Youtube pixel peeping videos out there praising the V's lens.
I just assumed the original X100 lens (kept in the X100F) was pretty old (2010) and the V (2020) incorporated (to some degree) things learned and already largely incorporated in the XF23mm F2.0 (2016). So I just assumed the new X100V/VI lens was about as good as the 23 'cron, while the old one far lagged behind?...Show more →
The cron is better across the frame, has significantly better AF, and is weather resistant without a filter.
There is a 23/2 muffin/pancake/tiny guy supposedly coming this year...that might finally be the answer to what people want in this space.
Geoff D F wrote:
I'm looking forward to the 23mm f2 muffin/pancake. Even better would be a 27mm f2 muffin/pancake as well.
The current 27mm f2.8 is great except for the f2.8. I'd happily trade a size and price increase for an f2 version.
The prospect of a very small 23mm f/2 lens is attractive, but so far there’s no solid indication of what the aperture of this lens would be, if it turns out to be more than a rumor. From what I can tell, the f/2 part of it is more of a hope than a likely rumor.
I’d bet on it being f/2.8 if turns out to be a real product. (The fact that Fujifilm does do a 18mm f/2 “pancake-ish” lens does muddy the waters a bit…
That would be fine with me. I use the f/2.8 27mm pancake as my primary street/travel lens, and there aren’t many situations where it can’t do the job even in low light, such as the urban night illumination in which i often photograph.
