More resolution was the last thing I was asking for with this system. I want base iso 64 and an AF system that doesn't get distracted by stuff in the background.
JadedWriter wrote:
More resolution was the last thing I was asking for with this system. I want base iso 64 and an AF system that doesn't get distracted by stuff in the background.
No rumors on ISO or AF as yet. Fuji has played with moving the base ISO on the X system though. Wouldn't be surprised to see it change and they are always trying to improve the AF.
you can load up 300-500 gfx 100 files on the air and edit, develop? how long does it take to do a one of these ai edits? also to process and create jpgs? i am looking to switch my win laptop. thx
msadat wrote:
you can load up 300-500 gfx 100 files on the air and edit, develop? how long does it take to do a one of these ai edits? also to process and create jpgs? i am looking to switch my win laptop. thx
I didn't say all that. I tend to only use my air on the road so will do a few and check them out. I'll import the rest when I get home on macbook pro. Not often bringing 300-500 at a time but sometimes. Just pointing out editing 100mp files doesn't stress a reasonable modern computer out.
I would downgrade in a heartbeat to 50mp for a better camera than gfx100s2. I would prefer improvements to autofocus/evf/performance/computing features/simplified menu/"no video" over increase in resolution.
JadedWriter wrote:
More resolution was the last thing I was asking for with this system. I want base iso 64 and an AF system that doesn't get distracted by stuff in the background.
Agreed, although I suspect Fuji and Hasselblad have to take what's available from Sony and don't get much if any say in sensor development. I hope the new sensor (whatever it is) has a much faster readout speed, to support AF and for shooting in electronic shutter mode.
It's now the start of 2026 and we're overdue for an AF firmware upgrade for the 100(s) II bodies which at least fixes the stupid stuff. Randomly jumping from a tracked face in the foreground, in the zone focus square, to somebody 50 plus metres behind them, would be a nice one to do away with.
You're not going to get a faster readout speed if they keep upping the resolution. If this is all dictated by Sony then that company is starting to lose the plot in my opinion. _Refraction wrote:
Agreed, although I suspect Fuji and Hasselblad have to take what's available from Sony and don't get much if any say in sensor development. I hope the new sensor (whatever it is) has a much faster readout speed, to support AF and for shooting in electronic shutter mode.
It's now the start of 2026 and we're overdue for an AF firmware upgrade for the 100(s) II bodies which at least fixes the stupid stuff. Randomly jumping from a tracked face in the foreground, in the zone focus square, to somebody 50 plus metres behind them, would be a nice one to do away with. ...Show more →
Every time a camera with significantly higher resolution is announced people complain they don’t need it, that it will require more computing power, will waste disk space. Just waiting for the guy claiming lenses won’t be up to the task..
And then the product gets released and people buy it because it’s the highest resolution camera available.
Funny how that works..
I personally do not need 180mp, but I also don’t need 100mp and I think the GFX system is hardly worth the extra weight and bulk over full frame anyway. But that’s just me and I’m clearly not the target audience 😅
fjablo wrote:
Every time a camera with significantly higher resolution is announced people complain they don’t need it, that it will require more computing power, will waste disk space. Just waiting for the guy claiming lenses won’t be up to the task..
And then the product gets released and people buy it because it’s the highest resolution camera available.
Funny how that works..
I personally do not need 180mp, but I also don’t need 100mp and I think the GFX system is hardly worth the extra weight and bulk over full frame anyway. But that’s just me and I’m clearly not the target audience 😅...Show more →
Not many cameras left with an aperture ring, and convenient exposure dials, and 3/4 frame format, and good EVF. How many cameras have that?, check notes,... only GFX, everything else is a compromise. It is a perfect camera for me Olympus was a reasonable compromise, but I cannot bring myself to thought of using OM Systems, and I like the ergonomics and UI of new bodies less than em1.3.
I can't imagine that everyone using the 100mp sensor is forced to go with whatever Sony develops. I would imagine that the group designing and building sensor chips is run separate from their camera division as has its own growth goals. Sony does the same with other technologies and selling parts/chips to other competing companies is pretty normal for them. You would think a new sensor, regardless of resolution would include other upgrades, probably to AF, like the 50 to 100 change. With such a large increase in resolution/file size, it may lead them to develop better methods to take photos at reduced resolution.
fjablo wrote:
Every time a camera with significantly higher resolution is announced people complain they don’t need it, that it will require more computing power, will waste disk space. Just waiting for the guy claiming lenses won’t be up to the task..
And then the product gets released and people buy it because it’s the highest resolution camera available.
Funny how that works..
I personally do not need 180mp, but I also don’t need 100mp and I think the GFX system is hardly worth the extra weight and bulk over full frame anyway. But that’s just me and I’m clearly not the target audience 😅...Show more →
I’m usually on the bandwagon for “why not use a higher density sensor.” And I still am, as long as the traditional sort of development takes place — the new, higher resolution sensor typically comes in a camera whose inflation adjusted price is roughly that same as that of the lower resolution camera it replaces, and resolution aside its performance is otherwise roughly the same or better. So, why not?
then there’s the “my computer and storage can’t handle it” notion. But we all upgrade computers and storage every few years, and typically the newer, increased storage comes at a price that is that same or lower than the inflation adjusted price of the old storage.
Honestly, we are getting to a point of diminishing returns, so upgrading to get 180MP is probably not a very effective strategy for most people, but for those who are at a point where an old camera needs replacing… “why not?”
If they release a GFX180, I suggest Fujifilm should also develop a relatively lightweight GF250mm lens with a digital 3x zoom ring on the lens.
At the long end (equivalent to full-frame 600mm) this hypothetical camera system would record a 20MP image - sufficient for many purposes.
Thus, this lens would be a digital zoom acting like a full-frame 200-600 mm lens, with the advantage of offering the superb optical quality of a prime medium-format lens.
It would make sense for this prime - digital zoom - lens to be as fast as a relatively lightweight 250mm lens can possibly be, e.g. F2.8.
Naturally, the AF should be useable for the typical cases like birds or animals. This can be a challenge, but not an impossible task.
