p.11 #2 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
ElvisD wrote:
From the same article at FujiRumors:
"One more tidbit about IBIS discussed in the video:
"Implementing IBIS would have made the camera bigger, but not that much. The numbers I heard in the video were 3mm thicker, but also a bit larger and higher."
"Apparently the increase in body size would still be acceptable for Fujifilm. The problem would have been the lens, as in order to cover the entire sensor plus the area in which the sensor can move due to IBIS, the lens would have become significantly bigger. And since compactness was paramount for Fujifilm when developing the GFX100RF, they decided not to go with IBIS. The body size increase would have still been acceptable, but not the lens size."
I do not know if that statement is conjecture by the guys who made the video - 75 minutes and in German - or if it was verified by Fuji engineers....Show more →
So, they decided to skip IBIS because it would make the camera bigger, and then put out some chart to show why no one needs IBIS in a camera like this instead? How much bigger did the X100VI get over the X100V again?
p.11 #3 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RWNPhoto wrote:
So, they decided to skip IBIS because it would make the camera bigger, and then put out some chart to show why no one needs IBIS in a camera like this instead? How much bigger did the X100VI get over the X100V again?
I think that IBIS in the x100vi and the GFX100RF are not the same problem. The larger sensor in the RF probably makes it more difficult to implement while still keeping the camera and the lens small. Sony had to redesign their IBIS to get it to fit in the A7Cxx series cameras, and their lenses were already IBIS-ready for the other bodies.
p.11 #4 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Nielk Mike wrote:
Yeah, but that ain't telling me much about lens quality, does it?
You should be able to use the search function in Flickr and come up with some samples using this sensor in various cameras at differing ISOs. Lens quality should become obvious long before the camera ships. I’m wrong.. not so simple to use the search function in this way.
p.11 #5 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
deadwolfbones wrote:
As usual, actual photographers are making images with this and forum warriors are debating specs and ignoring those with real-world experience that doesn't align with their preconceptions. Nothing new under the sun.
The sensor has been out for a good while and many people have a good bit of experience with using it. These people are actual photographers. Fuji over the years tends to make very good cameras so I doubt that this is going to be a bad camera. I think the only real question people have is with regards to use in low light. Well the sensor performs well as the ISO increases. It’s nothing like the sensor in the Leica M11 Monochrom. For that camera you can legitimately say just keep increasing the ISO. so the solution is really simple for those that shoot a lot of low light and are worried about this issue. All they need to do is wait … more information will be on its way.
p.11 #6 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Lukacs wrote:
Well, the BF and now this camera gives me a headache, also I was always like the Q3 and 43 but they have quite high price tag.
The thing is I want a smaller, simpler setup than my A7RV and 20-35-50GM. It's a workhorse but quite big for my needs, especially the lenses.
I like the BF for simplicity and perfect combination with the small F2 DN primes. I can accept the resolution loss because of different focal length options. But I have a fear giving up my Sony for BF's limitations, even I'd carry the Sigma 90% of time.
And then here comes the RF. I was not interested because of the F4 lens. But the moment came out I was thinking, it handles lot of my needs, I'd get that huge resolution with cropping ability, and I can mostly finance it from my gear, and get an A7III and keep the 50 1.2GM or a cheaper lens for low DOF shots. And also carry the RF in 90% time and enjoy shooting with this small and simple tool. Advantage over BF the EVF (even I barely using it), tilt screen, leaf shutter and resolution. Disadvantage is the double price and because one focal length I definitely need a low DOF option.
I'm happy for the 1 month delivery window, definitely wait reviews. AF tracking speed is most crucial because my kids (Q3 is disqualified because this), and for the RF that 35 f4 optical performance....Show more →
For your application, why not an A7CR with its AI AF and 7 stops of IBIS used with a smallish Sony 25-50 f2.8 G lens or the small and light Sony 40mm f2.5 G lens?
688 grams for the Sony body and 40mm/2.5 G
915 grams for the Sony body and zoom lens
735 grams for the GFX100RF with a 35mm/4.0
772 grams for the Leica Q3 43
743 for the Leica Q3
p.11 #8 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chiron wrote:
I think that IBIS in the x100vi and the GFX100RF are not the same problem. The larger sensor in the RF probably makes it more difficult to implement while still keeping the camera and the lens small. Sony had to redesign their IBIS to get it to fit in the A7Cxx series cameras, and their lenses were already IBIS-ready for the other bodies.
Doesn't seem that much of a deal, since they have IBIS in the 100SII
p.11 #9 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RWNPhoto wrote:
Doesn't seem that much of a deal, since they have IBIS in the 100SII
Yes, but 100SII is a larger body, so they had the room to do it. A prime selling point of the RF is that it is relatively small for a medium format camera.
p.11 #10 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
Why would one consider a 40mm ff prime, or a 28mm full frame equivalent prime fixed lens camera instead? Those are as different as they come.
p.11 #11 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Greg7579 wrote:
Eric (I think it was you who said it - I'm editing because the quote thing got screwed up),
I disagree that the crop dial is the whole point of the camera. That is a huge stretch. That crop dial is not the whole point of the cameras. The whole point of the camera is to have a "small" GFX camera with a fixed lens that is along the lines of the Q series or even like the x100 series. It is a stand-alone and very beautiful, attractive, fun little package with the same incredible IQ as the GFX MILC line and a joy to carry and shoot. That is the point of the camera - not the ability to pick a jpeg in-camera crop size with a dial.
You may think it is a convenient feature for you, but I bet money 75% of GFX shooters will never use that dial. Most GFX shooters shoot raw and crop to whatever they want in post on a big monitor where they can better see what ius going on. They may even crop it differently for different output several times in several different ways depending on how the jpeg will be used. I have produced jpegs with 3 or 4 different crops, size, res and radically different edits (like B&W and color) from the same raw file many times. Have we forgotten why we shoot raw?
I also bet even the guys that like to have the EVF display the crop they prefer in order to help with framing will set up a programable dial to quickly change between the two or three crops they prefer vs that dedicated dial of too many crop choices.
You can call it an aspect ratio all you want. But it really is just an in-camera crop for a jpeg output and can be better done in post if you shoot raw which by far the most of us do (95%?). ...Show more →
Well, I can see where you are coming from. If you look at the camera as primarily a small version of your high IQ 100mp GFX then it makes sense why you see the aspect ratio dial as superfluous.
However, if you come to it like me, I will use the dial to make the camera behave like one of several cameras Fuji has made in the past. It will behave differently based on the aspect ratio I select, and my interaction with it and the scene I will photograph will be different depending on the dial setting. I’m elevating the photographic experience as more important than a post workflow and, while I have no preconceived notions on the output being a “GFX output,’ it will be excellent image quality better than any of the film predecessors. The bonus: the RAW file will have the whole frame and I can crop to whatever aspect ratio I want just as in your workflow should I choose to do so.
This is why the part of the Prague summit event that most resonated with me was the story when Josef Koudelka said using the 6x17 format rekindled his photography: “Many photographers stopped to photograph. But I did not stop to photograph, because I started to use panoramic camera.”
I have a feeling that approaching the camera the way I described is likely to yield much satisfaction. Approaching it as you suggest likely will lead to disappointment (and it appears you already are disappointed!)
P.S. Take a look at the Fuji product page for the GFX100RF. As you scroll down, you will see they refer to it as a rangefinder, then a small camera, then the aspect ratio. They don’t get to the fixed lens design or 100mp sensor until nearly the end. What is Fuji saying is the point of this camera?
p.11 #12 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RWNPhoto wrote:
So, they decided to skip IBIS because it would make the camera bigger, and then put out some chart to show why no one needs IBIS in a camera like this instead? How much bigger did the X100VI get over the X100V again?
It's as if you didn't even read the third sentence of the quote I provided.
It said that the slight increase in body size would have been accceptable, but that the implementation of IBIS would have forced them to use a significantly larger lens, which was not acceptable.
So, per the video, camera size was not the reason. And, my comment made no reference to Fuji's chart.
I cannot evaluate the validity of the claim that they made; I just thought that it was relevant to the discussion.
p.11 #13 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
Erich6_ wrote:
Well, I can see where you are coming from. If you look at the camera as primarily a small version of your high IQ 100mp GFX then it makes sense why you see the aspect ratio dial as superfluous.
However, if you come to it like me, I will use the dial to make the camera behave like one of several cameras Fuji has made in the past. It will behave differently based on the aspect ratio I select, and my interaction with it and the scene I will photograph will be different depending on the dial setting. I’m elevating the photographic experience as more important than a post workflow and, while I have no preconceived notions on the output being a “GFX output,’ it will be excellent image quality better than any of the film predecessors. The bonus: the RAW file will have the whole frame and I can crop to whatever aspect ratio I want just as in your workflow should I choose to do so.
This is why the part of the Prague summit event that most resonated with me was the story when Josef Koudelka said using the 6x17 format rekindled his photography: “Many photographers stopped to photograph. But I did not stop to photograph, because I started to use panoramic camera.”
I have a feeling that approaching the camera the way I described is likely to yield much satisfaction. Approaching it as you suggest likely will lead to disappointment (and it appears you already are disappointed!)
P.S. Take a look at the Fuji product page for the GFX100RF. As you scroll down, you will see they refer to it as a rangefinder, then a small camera, then the aspect ratio. They don’t get to the fixed lens design or 100mp sensor until nearly the end. What is Fuji saying is the point of this camera? ...Show more →
Literally the first sentence on Fujis website for the 100RF is:
“Large format photography has never been so portable. The compact, lightweight design of GFX100RF means its detail-rich 102-megapixel resolution can always be close at hand.”
Not sure where you get the idea they don’t get to the sensor “until nearly the end”.
That said, I somewhat agree that the aspect ratio dial likely was a central part of the design for Fujis engineers. However, it doesn’t seem to have much of a practical advantage over simply configuring a button to the aspect ratio menu on a normal GFX. It seems a bit far fetched that people will now All of a sudden constantly change ratios. Maybe you do, but many won’t, even with the wheel.
p.11 #14 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RomanMF wrote:
Neat camera. The lens speed, or lack thereof, is more of an issue for me than the lack of IBIS. I'm sure I'll end up with one of these one day, until then, I'm sticking with my GSW690III! I hope they sell a ton of these, so they keep the line going. I'm a little sad about the death of the GFXR line though. This basically confirms we'll never get a proper GFX50R successor.
EDIT: Every time I think Jonas has peaked with a sample image gallery for a new camera he delivers another all-timer. My goodness those images are killer....Show more →
I kinda think the 100RF means the opposite – that it's possible we'll get an GFX100R but with the dual SS/ISO dial from the 100RF. I always hated that the 50R never had a physical ISO dial.
Man, I loved the 670 and 690 Fuji cameras. Believe it or not, I used to shoot weddings on a pair of these (vIII), supplemented with a Nikon AF film body for the non-manual focus stuff. Just stunning sharpness, so much better than the Pentax 67 gear I had before that. Crazy that we can get something similar today in 100mp and 1/3 the size.
p.11 #16 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
A half hour discussion with Justin Stailey on the design philosophy of the RF, so you nerds can stop arguing about which part of a webpage to read first.
1) The X100 was the main design influence (duh) "It's an X100 on steroids", weird, where did I hear this before
2) People want a 50Rii badly, and Fuji wanted to surprise and impress those people with something even smaller with more physical controls
3) Size is paramount as the first step for all compact Fuji cameras, extra features like IBIS will come later after developing appropriately small tech
4) Target market is photography enthusiasts, not pros (subtext: Leicatypes)
5) Justin is a man of culture who prefers 35mm to 28mm, and 28mm was picked because it's more in the "sweet spot" in terms of handholding without IBIS
6) The resolution of the camera is not meant to have every image taken at 102mp...it's to provide the creative freedom to play with aspects and crops in the field and know you're getting a good quality photo regardless
7) Fuji cameras are made by image makers for image makers, they are always trying to balance "market standards" and unique features to bring joy and engagement to image making
Chris went on to mention that the digital teleconverter rocker is WAY too easy to hit without knowing and if you aren't using frame lines to denote the crop and instead viewing the current zoom full screen, it's nearly impossible to tell what level of digital zoom you're at (similar to the X100 in that the status icon is tiny).
p.11 #17 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chiron wrote:
Yes, beautiful cameras like the RF can have a downside. I was in Buenos Aires and Santiago recently. In both cities I was cautioned about not openly holding a visible camera or iPhone in public, that there is a form of street crime that involves grabbing the phone or camera and running fast. In Valparaiso (near Santiago), a lovely older woman touched my arm as I was using my iPhone to photograph a mural and said to me in Spanish to be careful, that someone might steal my phone. I was told this repeatedly by various people. Certainly inhibits one's street photography. But all of these cities were very wonderful to visit and the people were very welcoming. And there were many beautiful scenes to record....Show more →
Noted. I'll be in BA towards the end of this year and I am thinking of hooking up with a model for some street shoot. Now I can't decide whether to bring an old gear of mine (Canon 5DS + 24-105/4 L IS) or just the X100VI. The latter was awesome to use in Las Vegas and the cropping power is more than good enough.
p.11 #18 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
chiron wrote
Yes, but 100SII is a larger body, so they had the room to do it. A prime selling point of the RF is that it is relatively small for a medium format camera.
but the height of the body portion between the 2 is the same. One has an EVF hump on top.
p.11 #19 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RoamingScott wrote:
A half hour discussion with Justin Stailey on the design philosophy of the RF, so you nerds can stop arguing about which part of a webpage to read first.
1) The X100 was the main design influence (duh) "It's an X100 on steroids", weird, where did I hear this before
2) People want a 50Rii badly, and Fuji wanted to surprise and impress those people with something even smaller with more physical controls
3) Size is paramount as the first step for all compact Fuji cameras, extra features like IBIS will come later after developing appropriately small tech
4) Target market is photography enthusiasts, not pros (subtext: Leicatypes)
5) Justin is a man of culture who prefers 35mm to 28mm, and 28mm was picked because it's more in the "sweet spot" in terms of handholding without IBIS
6) The resolution of the camera is not meant to have every image taken at 102mp...it's to provide the creative freedom to play with aspects and crops in the field and know you're getting a good quality photo regardless
7) Fuji cameras are made by image makers for image makers, they are always trying to balance "market standards" and unique features to bring joy and engagement to image making
Chris went on to mention that the digital teleconverter rocker is WAY too easy to hit without knowing and if you aren't using frame lines to denote the crop and instead viewing the current zoom full screen, it's nearly impossible to tell what level of digital zoom you're at (similar to the X100 in that the status icon is tiny)....Show more →
Yeah, and for the 1st one, they failed miserably.
For the 3rd, aren't you the one explaining why it doesn't need IBIS and reposting charts?
So, for the 5th point, your expert Justin is ignored, but even though they stuck with the "sweet spot", they will still add IBIS later...?
p.11 #20 · Fujifilm GFX100RF Discussion and Image Thread
RWNPhoto wrote:
Yeah, and for the 1st one, they failed miserably.
For the 3rd, aren't you the one explaining why it doesn't need IBIS and reposting charts?
So, for the 5th point, your expert Justin is ignored, but even though they stuck with the "sweet spot", they will still add IBIS later...?
I'm posting info I'm finding that might be interesting and helpful, instead of being a pissy pedant. I didn't claim to agree with Fuji's claims, though I do have some understanding of the basics of how this sensor works without IBIS at various speeds. If you don't like the camera, move ALONG. Consider contributing something the group might find of value!
