p.1 #1 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Hello everyone, for my documentary photography projects, which include landscapes, interiors, environmental and close-up portraits, I acquired a GFX 50S II a little over two years ago. Initially, I also experimented with manual Minolta lenses, but I've now switched exclusively to working with the original Fujinon autofocus lenses. I have the 35-70, 45, 50, and 63, with which I'm very happy.
Overall, the GFX 50S II is a wonderful camera that simply takes beautiful 4:3 images. The image quality, resolution, dynamic range, etc., are absolutely sufficient for my work. The only thing that could be better, in my opinion, is the autofocus. On the 50S II it works superbly with stationary subjects, such as posed portraits, and is very precise—I'd say I have a near 100% success rate.
Only when things get more dynamic does focusing quickly become a matter of luck. Therefore, I'm considering upgrading to the GXF 100S or 100S II sooner or later. I'm still hesitant to take this step, as I'm convinced that the higher resolution won't improve my work—on the contrary, I'll then have to deal with files twice the size, which I might have to accept.
What do you think? In your experience - how reliable is the autofocus on the newer cameras? How good and reliable is the eye-AF with portraits? (I now only use single point AF) How big is the jump from the 50S II to the 100S II? How much stress does it reduce, and how does the hit rate increase when the scene becomes more dynamic?
I'm very happy to hear about your experiences - thank you so much!
(Please only share your experiences if you actually use or have used the cameras! Please don't share your opinions based on internet reviews—I've already seen or read them all. I don't want to switch to Canon/Nikon/Sony; I know they have better autofocus for sports and action photography.)
p.1 #2 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
The 100SII will auto focus faster, maybe twice as. It will not reliably track a fast moving person. Some will agree, some will disagree. But, it isn't leaps ahead. Try a Nikon Z8 or a similar Sony, and the auto focus and tracking are a lot better than either of these Fujis.
But, it tends to be mixed in to one, the auto focus and tracking. So, you have to note whether you are doing AF-S or AF-C, and why. AF-S isn't going to track much of anything well. If your 50SII isn't getting you reliable results of people walking, it might not be the camera.
The 100SII will help you, but you have noted a couple big drawbacks, or questions.
p.1 #3 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Although I have never used the GFX 50, I went from the GFX100s to the 100sII. The difference in AF was notable immediately. I use it for portraits and AF is always spot on. I also own a Nikon Z9 and unless I am shooting sports, the GF is the one I pick up for all my work and travels.
If subjects are not fast moving AFC can work quite well if they are not eratic.
Here are a couple of shots using AFC
p.1 #4 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
GFX is primarily a posed portrait/landscape system in my opinion. Also just like all things Fuji AF is lens dependent. Make sure what you use for action shots is LM badged. I would get a 100SII though. I have the 100S I would not use that for action. GF120323 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr GF120297 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
p.1 #5 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
RWNPhoto wrote:
But, it tends to be mixed in to one, the auto focus and tracking. So, you have to note whether you are doing AF-S or AF-C, and why. AF-S isn't going to track much of anything well. If your 50SII isn't getting you reliable results of people walking, it might not be the camera.
The 100SII will help you, but you have noted a couple big drawbacks, or questions.
I understand the uses of AF-S and AF-C, but in my experience, AF-C on the 50S Mark II isn't reliable. I also initially experimented with person/face/eye detection, but that didn't yield reliable results either. What really works well on this camera is AF-S and single-point AF with the smallest focus area. If you precisely position this area, for example, on the person's eye using the joystick, the results are consistently good. However, the person must remain still and not be moving.
A functioning AF-C with reliable person/face/eye detection would be a huge help in these situations.
p.1 #6 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Creative Edge wrote:
Although I have never used the GFX 50, I went from the GFX100s to the 100sII. The difference in AF was notable immediately. I use it for portraits and AF is always spot on. I also own a Nikon Z9 and unless I am shooting sports, the GF is the one I pick up for all my work and travels.
If subjects are not fast moving AFC can work quite well if they are not eratic.
Here are a couple of shots using AFC
The shots are quite impressive for a medium format camera – I don't think I could achieve that with my 50SII. And what you're describing sounds very much like my use case. Sports and action photography are extremely rare for me, if they happen at all. I realize that in such cases I'd be better off with a Canon/Nikon/Sony. Many of my shots are calmer or even static, but sometimes situations become more dynamic, and then my camera's autofocus can't keep up. It would be nice to be able to handle situations like those in the example images with my camera.
p.1 #7 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
JadedWriter wrote:
GFX is primarily a posed portrait/landscape system in my opinion. Also just like all things Fuji AF is lens dependent. Make sure what you use for action shots is LM badged. I would get a 100SII though. I have the 100S I would not use that for action.
Of my lenses, only the 50mm is an LM, but the 35-70mm also focuses quite quickly, smoothly, and quietly. I also really like the 45mm and the 63mm, even though they're on the slower side—certainly not ideal for sports and action photography. But even with these lenses, it would be nice to have reliable autofocus with person/face/eye detection.
p.1 #8 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Anything is faster than the 1.7 primes mabra wrote:
Of my lenses, only the 50mm is an LM, but the 35-70mm also focuses quite quickly, smoothly, and quietly. I also really like the 45mm and the 63mm, even though they're on the slower side—certainly not ideal for sports and action photography. But even with these lenses, it would be nice to have reliable autofocus with person/face/eye detection.
p.1 #9 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
I use the GFX100ii with the 32-90 OIS PZ and I trust it completely for AF. If you're just doing stills thought the X2D2 + 35-100E is also an excellent choice.
p.1 #10 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
ftllens wrote:
I use the GFX100ii with the 32-90 OIS PZ and I trust it completely for AF. If you're just doing stills thought the X2D2 + 35-100E is also an excellent choice.
Yes, I'm sure the 100II and the X2D2 are excellent cameras, but since my photo projects aren't commercial, I'll probably have to settle for the more budget-oriented models. And the 100SII seems like a good compromise, even though I'll probably have to save up for it.
p.1 #11 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
You need to consider the cost of missing a shot for your project. You can focus on moving subjects with gfx, but you cannot do it consistently. Sometimes you will get it, sometimes you will not. It never worked well for me. You will get much better percentage of in focus images with most modern ff cameras though.
p.1 #12 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
olegkin wrote:
You need to consider the cost of missing a shot for your project.
That's indeed a very important question I have to ask myself. In 95% of my shots, I get along very well with my slow but very precise 50SII, especially with stationary or still subjects. I've now completed two major projects with it, and yes, I had to adjust to the camera a bit, but I'm very happy with the results. Of course, there were photos I couldn't take that I might have liked to have taken if the camera had focused on the subject more quickly. How significant is this issue for my work?
To upgrade from the 50SII to the 100SII, I'd have to spend a lot of money. I can't get €2000 for my 50SII anymore, and I can get a nearly new 100SII for €4500, maybe a little less if I'm lucky. That's a lot of money for just a little bit more performance, when I'm actually perfectly happy with the 50SII. I'm finding it difficult to decide right now, so I'll probably postpone the decision for a while and continue working with the 50SII for the time being. It's such a fantastic camera in almost every respect that it's hard for me to part with it for such a small amount of money.
olegkin wrote:
You can focus on moving subjects with gfx, but you cannot do it consistently. Sometimes you will get it, sometimes you will not. It never worked well for me. You will get much better percentage of in focus images with most modern ff cameras though.
That's true, but it depends a lot on what you're photographing. If focusing were a constant problem for me and a very high priority in my work, it would certainly make sense to get something from the top-of-the-line Canon/Nikon/Sony and part ways with my GFX for this purpose. That's not the case for me; but of course, I'd be tempted to have the newer 100SII and be able to handle more challenging situations that I haven't been able to manage so far.
p.1 #13 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
mabra wrote:
That's indeed a very important question I have to ask myself. In 95% of my shots, I get along very well with my slow but very precise 50SII, especially with stationary or still subjects. I've now completed two major projects with it, and yes, I had to adjust to the camera a bit, but I'm very happy with the results. Of course, there were photos I couldn't take that I might have liked to have taken if the camera had focused on the subject more quickly. How significant is this issue for my work?
To upgrade from the 50SII to the 100SII, I'd have to spend a lot of money. I can't get €2000 for my 50SII anymore, and I can get a nearly new 100SII for €4500, maybe a little less if I'm lucky. That's a lot of money for just a little bit more performance, when I'm actually perfectly happy with the 50SII. I'm finding it difficult to decide right now, so I'll probably postpone the decision for a while and continue working with the 50SII for the time being. It's such a fantastic camera in almost every respect that it's hard for me to part with it for such a small amount of money.
That's true, but it depends a lot on what you're photographing. If focusing were a constant problem for me and a very high priority in my work, it would certainly make sense to get something from the top-of-the-line Canon/Nikon/Sony and part ways with my GFX for this purpose. That's not the case for me; but of course, I'd be tempted to have the newer 100SII and be able to handle more challenging situations that I haven't been able to manage so far. ...Show more →
I mostly photograph static models, and when there's movement I usually prefocus with the GFX100S II because af-c does not work for me consistenly. For example, I've photographed jumping dancers in a studio environment just fine with all the GFX cameras I've owned, using a single shot per attempt, prefocused. The old-school way. But for recitals, where things get chaotic, I reached for the Olympus OM-1 or Nikon Z8. It is all about the right tool for the job. I used to own the GFX50S II - it was a perfect camera sensor-wise. But its slowness was eating away at me. The GFX100S II mostly resolved issues that bothered me, but it did not improve af-c/face recognition enough to be usable, at least not with my lenses.
p.1 #14 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
olegkin wrote:
I mostly photograph static models, and when there's movement I usually prefocus with the GFX100S II because af-c does not work for me consistenly. For example, I've photographed jumping dancers in a studio environment just fine with all the GFX cameras I've owned, using a single shot per attempt, prefocused. The old-school way. But for recitals, where things get chaotic, I reached for the Olympus OM-1 or Nikon Z8. It is all about the right tool for the job. I used to own the GFX50S II - it was a perfect camera sensor-wise. But its slowness was eating away at me. The GFX100S II mostly resolved issues that bothered me, but it did not improve af-c/face recognition enough to be usable, at least not with my lenses....Show more →
Thanks for sharing your experiences, that's very interesting to hear. And yes, with the right technique (e.g., the old school way), you can manage some dynamic situations with the 50SII. Other situations, where things get chaotic, are a different story. Perhaps it's a good idea to simply have a second, small camera with you, so you can react spontaneously to chaotic situations.
p.1 #15 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
I’ve finally taken the plunge and acquired a beautiful, pre-owned 100SII. I really had to take a deep breath before doing so, though, since this new camera is—in many respects—quite similar to my good old 50SII. And that’s because I simply loved the 50SII so much — it is, without a doubt, the best camera I have ever worked with. It was perfect for my needs in so many ways.
And now, the AF on the 100SII—what a difference! Wow! The tracking and face detection are stunning—at least when you’ve spent years working with the 50SII in single-point AF mode. Sure, it’s certainly not on the level of an A1, Z9, or R5II—but then again, I don’t actually need that level of performance for my work. The new capabilities of the 100SII are definitely going to completely transform the way I work and enable me to capture images that I simply couldn't take before. Thanks for all your feedback!
p.1 #16 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
mabra wrote:
I’ve finally taken the plunge and acquired a beautiful, pre-owned 100SII. I really had to take a deep breath before doing so, though, since this new camera is—in many respects—quite similar to my good old 50SII. And that’s because I simply loved the 50SII so much — it is, without a doubt, the best camera I have ever worked with. It was perfect for my needs in so many ways.
And now, the AF on the 100SII—what a difference! Wow! The tracking and face detection are stunning—at least when you’ve spent years working with the 50SII in single-point AF mode. Sure, it’s certainly not on the level of an A1, Z9, or R5II—but then again, I don’t actually need that level of performance for my work. The new capabilities of the 100SII are definitely going to completely transform the way I work and enable me to capture images that I simply couldn't take before. Thanks for all your feedback!...Show more →
I am glad you like the 100SII. I added this camera 5 months ago and it still feels like an exteneded honeymoon.
Note one difference between the 50SII and 100SII: the dynamic range.
The 100SII has the dual-gain ISO from 500 that means the camera has about 1 stop better dynamic range vs. the 50SII.
Thus, you get less noise from ISO 500 to 12800 with the 100SII.
There is also a difference in favour of the 100SII at the base ISO.
Note that the dynamic range at ISO 320 and 400 on the 100SII is worse than it is at ISO 500.
For this reason, I have my settings saved to custom set 1 with the ISO limited from 80 to 250, then the custom set 2 has the ISO limited from 500 to 12800. I switch from 1 to 2 when the shutter speed (in aperture priority) becomes too slow for me to use reasonably confidently while holding the camera (1/2s in my hands).
Regarding the AF, my experience has been that the camera is quick at subject recognition, and it finds and goes for the eye confidently, without problems. The overall AF experience signifcantly depends on the lens attached. In my limited experience with three GF lenses, the AF performance was the best with the lens equipped with linear motor(s): 500mm F5.6. I really liked the performance of the camera with this lens, as I already commented extensively in the GF image thread, recently. The AF is good with the 20-35mm F4 lens, no problems. The 55mm F1.7 lens has the slowest AF that can be challenging to use when focussing at close distances, and the lens is making a bit too much noise when focusing.
Thus, I think that the AF performance of the 100SII can feel different with different lenses.
p.1 #17 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Coming from the Sony A7RIV, I bought the GFX100II more than a year ago. The AF-C / (eye) tracking ability was one of the things that pushed me to this switch; it's very good and I still like it a lot!
Not sure, but I guess the 100SII will be comparable here.
p.1 #18 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
ruthenium wrote:
Note that the dynamic range at ISO 320 and 400 on the 100SII is worse than it is at ISO 500.
I don't dispute this at all, and I often jump from 300 to 500 ISO if I'm thinking about it. But I also often shoot at 800 or more and see no ISO noise in the image. I do use PureRaw for truly high ISO's when needed.
I have the 20-35, 45-100, 50, 55, 110 and have previously had the 32-64 and 100-200. I will admit that the 55 is the slowest to AF but I still love that lens. The IQ and usable range of aperture won we over not to mention is just produces beautiful images to my eye. AF is its beauty flaw and I accept it.
p.1 #19 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Re: "But I also often shoot at 800 or more and see no ISO noise in the image" - I wouldn't hesitate to shoot at ISO12800 when there is no way around this. I use Photolab 9; indeed, this, and PureRaw, are efficient at denoising. I don't expect images at high ISO to match the quality of images at the base ISO, but the denoised files can be often be useable in practice.
Regarding "at 800 or more and see no ISO noise in the image", I believe you mean that the amount of noise is negligible or not significant. There must be some noise, for sure.
Our camera settings, e.g., my choice of using custom sets 1 and 2 with different ISO limits, reflect personal preferences. I don't mean to suggest that this is the only "correct" way of using the camera. This is just a reasonable option to me. My other custom sets, for example, are differentiated by the shutter speed: #3 is with minimum SS of 1/30 and full ISO range (80-12800), #4, 5, and 6 have minimum SS of 1/100, 1/500, and 1/2000, respectively, with the ISO from 500 to 12800. I am used to selecting one of the six custom sets depending on the SS I need and the amount of light available to me.
p.1 #20 · GFX Autofocus for Documentary and Portrait Photography Projekts
Thank you very much for the additional helpful tips and suggestions! I haven't given much thought to the subject of ISO and dynamic range until now, as the 50SII is already excellent in this regard, and I never felt the need for anything more. But of course, improvements are always welcome.
However, aside from the now wonderfully usable tracking and the superbly functioning eye and face detection, what truly delights me is that focus hunting has almost completely vanished with my GF45 and GF63 lenses. What a difference compared to the 50SII! I mean—I love both lenses, and they are truly excellent for my work, but the focus hunting on the 50SII was genuinely very annoying. And it was particularly pronounced with the GF63. Consequently, I preferred shooting with the GF50 and GF35-70—simply because the focusing experience was smoother. And now? It’s night and day compared to before! Both prime lenses feel almost like entirely different lenses. The improvement is greater than I dared to hope.
