Fujifilm GFX100RF - fixed lens RF style medium format camera!

[Freakscene]

Did anyone see this coming??

Pretty sure I saw this being shot:

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not sure I understand the obsession with IBIS for a leaf shutter camera with the equivalent of a 28mm FoV lens in FF terms. Image stabilization is primarily a tool to extend hand-holding ability for lower light situations with modest telephoto lenses, as far as I remember companies explaining it.

G

 

[trix4ever]

I'm not sure I understand the obsession with IBIS for a leaf shutter camera with the equivalent of a 28mm FoV lens in FF terms. Image stabilization is primarily a tool to extend hand-holding ability for lower light situations with modest telephoto lenses, as far as I remember companies explaining it.

G

I agree with you, but when Fuji brought out the first GFX100 their marketing guff was full of crap about how their wonderful ibis system was the only thing making 100mp handheld possible.
It was bullshit then and still is. Just up your shutter speed a bit, not exactly a problem the way these cameras deal with raising the iso.

 

[olakiril]

Personally I have no obsession with IBIS. I do enjoy it though, as it allows maximising image quality at less than optimal light levels AND using subject motion creatively. Not to mention the ability to take handheld 100MP images with S9 but with a 100MP camera you don't need it 🙂 .

What I don't like much is when companies just spread misinformation in order to sell their products. And while I really like Fuji cameras and have had quite a lot of them over the years (more than any other company), I despise the way they promote them. Fuji has done it quite a bit over the years:
1. You don't need IBIS with leaf shutter - They are independent so you do
2. You don't need IBIS with a 35mm lens - Fuji said that a GFX100II with a 30mm has a 6.5 stops improvement.
3. XF mount is not compatible with IBIS - It is
4. X-Trans sensors are better than Bayer for color - The opposite is true
5. APSC sensors do not have a big quality difference to FF ones - FF has a bigger difference to APSC than their MF to FF.
6. You can't fit IBIS into an X100 sized camera - They did it
7. Their film simulations cannot be implemented with cameras with older processors - It is just changing the values in 3DLUTs so computationally it is the same.

All that being said, the GFX100RF is an interesting camera, with a very good sensor that can perform quite well even under low light conditions. And once I can find it used at a decent price I might pick one up.

 

[sojournerphoto]

Another review is here:



I don't think I could justify this with 28mm equivalent lens at f4 and no IBIS. I would prefer a 35 or 50mm equivalent. I think getting the GF 50mm pancake for my GFX100S would be a much better proposition for me personally. They can be had for about £600 used. The pre-order price for this is £4699.

Agree, the GFx with 50 is pretty light and easy to carry, plus the lens works very well

 

[Archiver]

What I don't like much is when companies just spread misinformation in order to sell their products. And while I really like Fuji cameras and have had quite a lot of them over the years (more than any other company), I despise the way they promote them. Fuji has done it quite a bit over the years:
1. You don't need IBIS with leaf shutter - They are independent so you do
2. You don't need IBIS with a 35mm lens - Fuji said that a GFX100II with a 30mm has a 6.5 stops improvement.
3. XF mount is not compatible with IBIS - It is
4. X-Trans sensors are better than Bayer for color - The opposite is true
5. APSC sensors do not have a big quality difference to FF ones - FF has a bigger difference to APSC than their MF to FF.
6. You can't fit IBIS into an X100 sized camera - They did it
7. Their film simulations cannot be implemented with cameras with older processors - It is just changing the values in 3DLUTs so computationally it is the same.

I've never liked the X-Trans files I've processed over the years. Every time Fuji releases a new camera with x-trans, I download some sample raw files and run them through Lightroom and one or two other processors to see if this is finally the x-trans camera I'm going to buy. Nope, never found one. It's telling that their medium format cameras all use straight CMOS and not x-trans variants.

 

[splitimageview]

Lightroom has never excelled at Xtrans, which is Fuji’s technical strategy for APS-C. Larger sensors have no need for alternatives which is why they use Bayer. CMOS is something entirely different. 🙂

 

[35photo]

I've never liked the X-Trans files I've processed over the years. Every time Fuji releases a new camera with x-trans, I download some sample raw files and run them through Lightroom and one or two other processors to see if this is finally the x-trans camera I'm going to buy. Nope, never found one. It's telling that their medium format cameras all use straight CMOS and not x-trans variants.

Thank god! X-trans is a total marketing SCAM tying it to the Film Sims they came out with! Had nothing to do with the profiles at all. I had an X-Pro2 loved the camera hated the sensor. The first X100 had a Bayer sensor then switched to X-Trans people brought the sensor hype. Although Lightroom has gotten better with processing X-trans but you have to jump though hoops... Its silly.

 

[sojournerphoto]

Thank god! X-trans is a total marketing SCAM tying it to the Film Sims they came out with! Had nothing to do with the profiles at all. I had an X-Pro2 loved the camera hated the sensor. The first X100 had a Bayer sensor then switched to X-Trans people brought the sensor hype. Although Lightroom has gotten better with processing X-trans but you have to jump though hoops... Its silly.

Completely agree. Actually, get rid of Bayer too and just stick with monochrome sensors🙂 Now they do have beautiful output.





I am, partially, joking. The last about the output of the mono sensors I’ve used is true.

 

[agentlossing]

Thank god! X-trans is a total marketing SCAM tying it to the Film Sims they came out with! Had nothing to do with the profiles at all. I had an X-Pro2 loved the camera hated the sensor. The first X100 had a Bayer sensor then switched to X-Trans people brought the sensor hype. Although Lightroom has gotten better with processing X-trans but you have to jump though hoops... Its silly.

There was a period where X-Trans sensors had good and somewhat unique output. Mostly in the 16mp era. When you think about it, pixel size, and data per pixel (& how it's processed/compressed) have a definite interplay with the color filter array. I think Fuji has held onto X-Trans for too long, but it had a legitimate period.

 

[Godfrey]

I bought a Fuji camera (forget which one) once which had been highly praised due to the X-Trans sensor. I tested it for two days, and sent it back. Didn't like the way it rendered at all.

G

 

[dolina]

GFX100RF Design Philosophy with Fujifilm's Justin Stailey | The PetaPixel Podcast

 

[hub]

I saw this coming because all the rumors talked about it ;-)

102 Megapixels sensor in 4:3 give enough pixels for the 65:24 crop. It's less than the price of a used Fujifilm TX-1 / Hasselblad X-Pan. Still pricey.

 

[Out to Lunch]

The best YT review of this camera so far:

 

[JohnWolf]

A few months ago I decided to go all in on fixed lens compact cameras….

That’s a bold move. I sometimes think of doing the same with my GR III, but I’m pretty sure I’d miss the VF and framelines experience. The new Fuji might fill that need nicely.

Let’s hope it’s not another Fuji camera that no one is able to get their hands on.

 

[sojournerphoto]

That’s a bold move. I sometimes think of doing the same with my GR III, but I’m pretty sure I’d miss the VF and framelines experience. The new Fuji might fill that need nicely.

Let’s hope it’s not another Fuji camera that no one is able to get their hands on.

I picked up a used optical viewfinder for the GRiii - that remains pocketable

 

[35photo]

I downloaded some sample RAW files on dpreview.. Look very good! 100 mpix files open with no issue on my M1 Mac... My 50R is serving me just fine thank you and will continue to for years to come🙂

 

[shawn]

I saw this coming because all the rumors talked about it ;-)

102 Megapixels sensor in 4:3 give enough pixels for the 65:24 crop. It's less than the price of a used Fujifilm TX-1 / Hasselblad X-Pan. Still pricey.

A number of cameras offer panoramic ratios now. I use it on my S1R pretty regularly. With the 24mm it is almost exactly the same FOV as the xPan with the 45mm. About 26 megapixels in that mode or nearly 100 (with full color at every pixel) in high resolution mode but that has to be cropped later and needs a tripod. The S1R II doesn't need a tripod for that mode but I don't know if it will shoot directly in high resolution with 65:24.

Sigma has 21:9 (2.33 instead of 2.7) and the fp L has almost 39 megapixels in that crop.

 

[AntonioC]

I played with one in the Fujifilm House of Photography in Covent Garden, was not impressed at all by the user experience. Not particularly fast in operation, didn’t transmit any “premium” feeling while using it. In particular, the aspect ratio dial was very stiff to rotate, not something to be done quickly with a thumb when needed.
I’ve taken a few shots on an sd card, will have a look at them.
At the moment, it’s a meh…

 

[Archiver]

A number of cameras offer panoramic ratios now. I use it on my S1R pretty regularly. With the 24mm it is almost exactly the same FOV as the xPan with the 45mm. About 26 megapixels in that mode or nearly 100 (with full color at every pixel) in high resolution mode but that has to be cropped later and needs a tripod. The S1R II doesn't need a tripod for that mode but I don't know if it will shoot directly in high resolution with 65:24.

Sigma has 21:9 (2.33 instead of 2.7) and the fp L has almost 39 megapixels in that crop.

X-Pan mode is so cool. The Panasonic S5 and S1 have it, and the Leica SL2-S (and presumably the SL2) has a 3:1 mode which is close to x-pan.