bwcolor
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion Thread | |
Greg7579 wrote:
JadedWriter wrote:
1.7 on a medium format camera is plenty of shallow depth of field though. Also you cannot cram a 55 1.7 into a camera this size without making it huge.
Lukacs wrote:
I like the camera aesthetic, design, also the RF style built, EVF, tilting screen, huge sensor. But this camera purpose is not for me. I like 35mm sensor format for low DOF with high resolution and sharpness. On high resolution I mean resolving 24MP at wide open with high quality lenses f1.2-f2.0. It seems MF for manufacturers is about only extreme resolution, not DOF control. Fastest MF lenses are f1.7, they don't want to fight with 35mm for shallower DOF. (Also a Fuji 55 1.7 is a nice option)
This camera is for resolution (will see how the lens performs corner to corner), you have 28mm eqv. 100MP for wall size prints. Of course there is the crop ability, but I'd never consider a 28-65 f3.2-f7,4 lens on 35mm ever. I'd go either Q3 (43), RX1RII, X100VI or a bunch of ILC option. Leica Q and RX1 has a good DOF ability, X100VI is an affordable solution.
Maybe there are photographers want a 100MP street camera, or a digital zoom street camera, but I'd grab a small FF ILC with a 35 or 50f2 lens or an X100VI instead (Q3s are way out of my budget).
I think an IBIS is a good thing, but also in my opinion consumers get too addicted, or just see a technical checklist, and the same applies on Sigma BF. This is a 35mm fixed lens camera (28mm on FF), who buy Sigma BF also quite unlikely to use longer than 50-65mm. It's truly so essential to have an IBIS on a 28mm camera? I shoot over 1/100s most time because people have a bad habit like moving (especially my kids), and for high resolution landscape or art we use a tripod anyway.
Jaded, I think there is a lot of what you said about MF that is incorrect (or at least incorrectly stated), but I think I know what you mean.
It all boils down to what you like, can afford, want, appreciate or maybe even "need," although need is a word that we don't use much when talking about GFX. It is more want. But I will say that it becomes need when you see the IQ because once you see it you want to keep it, so it sort of becomes a need.
Stabilization? I won't repeat myself, but I don't agree with your take on that at all. But if you think you don't need it, your options will be limited because it is hard to buy a camera without stab in 2025. The fact that this new GFX Q4 left off stab is so baffling to me that my head is still spinning and my disappointment at therefore not buying this camera is at peak angst level right now, almost to the point that I am traumatized and might seek counseling for my sorrow at this catastrophic Fuji mistake.
Dear Fuji CEO - are you listening to me? Why why why why? 🤯👎🏻
You certainly don’t think that your opinion wasn’t fully investigated prior to the design being frozen. My experience, with my use shows me that I could go f/4.0 vs my XCDv lenses of f/2.5, but I would choose a full frame stabilized system over a non-stabilized 100Mpix. There must have been real engineering/marketing negatives (size/cost) to adding IBIS. What FF shooters should recognize is that 100MPix is way more resolution than you will need most of the time and the real plus here is the one camera and crop.. in this case crop in the viewfinder. No more dust on the sensor and likely fairly good weather sealing. Lots to love here, but don’t expect to use the 1/focal length to approximate lowest hand holdable shutter speed.
|
