Doppler9000
Well-known member
GFXers.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Who is the GFX for?
- Thread starter Doppler9000
- Start date
mristuccia
Well-known member
Easy-peasy.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
Those unhappy with the IQ of their Canon (or 35mm more broadly) kit and not willing to spend more than four figures. It’s a classic 35mm upgrade path to go for GFX to achieve higher IQ.
It’s the trade off between FPS / AF and RES / DR.
Was surprised to see Canon drop the ball so massively with the R1. Would have expected some more IQ related improvements - eg RES / DR; instead they delivered even more FPS / AF.
It’s the trade off between FPS / AF and RES / DR.
Was surprised to see Canon drop the ball so massively with the R1. Would have expected some more IQ related improvements - eg RES / DR; instead they delivered even more FPS / AF.
tenmangu81
Well-known member
As far as I read, the Canon R1 is mostly devoted to sport photography, where you need fast AF and work but not necessarily high resolution (you send your jpeg images right to the editorial board just once they've been shot).
Photon42
Well-known member
Don't jump to conclusions too early
Doppler9000
Well-known member
Indeed.Don't jump to conclusions too early
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
Yes, but it was widely believed that they launch sth with 30 or more. It looks like Canon stubbornly still develops their own sensors while the rest of the industry moved to Sony as this is far more efficient. As a result Canon is lagging. Sony has shown that you can do 50 megapixels at ultra high frame rates without real loss of other features. They just can't do what sony can do. High res and high fps with own AF tech.
24 is dissappointing. I had 20ish end of the 2000s with the 1ds MK III ...
Nikon will crush them with the Z9 successor which hopefully has RedRaw and Red colour science.
It’s for the photographer who wants to use one of the best (shift) wide angles in existences, the Fuji 30 ts - it’s crazy good, even wide open, full shift - I don’t dare to make an AB shootout with my Rodenstock 32HR, I would like to be in the dream that it outperforms the Fuji - but it’s a dream….
We often wish that Schneider or Rodenstock mame new LF lenses again, but after I have used the Fuji ts 30 and 110mm extensive the last half year it could be interesting if Fuji took up the LF lens line again
The GFX 100II is in my view just a tool that in short it works really well!
But the UI is a disaster and the camera itself is ”soul less” in my hands - but if you use the custom settings, there is six of them it covers my ground quit well, with very little engagement with the hopeless UI - so it’s the complete opposite to the Hassleblad X, where I get inspired just picking the camera up, and the UI is a joy to use imo.
But, you can not use the Fuji 30ts, a cable release and a tiltable view finder on the X2D, so I have learned to live with the GFX as the professional workhorse it is, at least for an architectural photographer, that get’s the job done very well together with good samples of the Canon ts lenses and exceptional well in combination with Fuji’s own.
The tiltable viewfinder is nothing less than fantastic when you as I, prefer the perspective that a lower viewpoint provides, my normal viewpoint is often around 1m-1,4m and when you is almost 2m your self, it removes a lot of fatigue in the end of a 12-16 hour shot day, as some Scandinavian summer days are.
We often wish that Schneider or Rodenstock mame new LF lenses again, but after I have used the Fuji ts 30 and 110mm extensive the last half year it could be interesting if Fuji took up the LF lens line again
The GFX 100II is in my view just a tool that in short it works really well!
But the UI is a disaster and the camera itself is ”soul less” in my hands - but if you use the custom settings, there is six of them it covers my ground quit well, with very little engagement with the hopeless UI - so it’s the complete opposite to the Hassleblad X, where I get inspired just picking the camera up, and the UI is a joy to use imo.
But, you can not use the Fuji 30ts, a cable release and a tiltable view finder on the X2D, so I have learned to live with the GFX as the professional workhorse it is, at least for an architectural photographer, that get’s the job done very well together with good samples of the Canon ts lenses and exceptional well in combination with Fuji’s own.
The tiltable viewfinder is nothing less than fantastic when you as I, prefer the perspective that a lower viewpoint provides, my normal viewpoint is often around 1m-1,4m and when you is almost 2m your self, it removes a lot of fatigue in the end of a 12-16 hour shot day, as some Scandinavian summer days are.
Last edited:
rdeloe
Well-known member
It's for people who need a robust and relatively inexpensive medium format camera to attach to the back of an Arca-Swiss F-Universalis, Cambo Actus G, or other similar system.
I've found it to be a dependable tool that can be customized to do what I need; I ignore the features I don't need.
I've found it to be a dependable tool that can be customized to do what I need; I ignore the features I don't need.
glennedens
Active member
The GFX system has a far wider choice of lenses, in general faster operation, better auto focus system, a larger team to develop cameras and firmware (although not as big as you might expect), multiple bodies at multiple price points (GF50s II, GFX100sII and GFX100II), a focal plane shutter (which for many applications such as adapting lenses or technical camera use is critical), same sensor as X2D/CFV100 with a different top stack (CFA array, cover glass, IR blocker, etc.) and different off-chip circuitry & processing (demosiac, color matrix, etc.) all combine to create a refined DSLR-like experience camera with excellent image quality. Service is way faster but from my experience reliability is about the same as its peers. Medium format cameras are niche small volume compared to smart phones, 4/3, APS-C and 35mm FF so development pace is slower than Canikony and the entire enthusiast/professional photography market is swamped by industrial imaging. And if absolute image quality with price being no object we are lucky to have PhaseOne and the upcoming rebirth of the Leica S.
You can acquire a full Fuji GFX/GF lens kit for about 1/2 of an X2D (with very different lens options). So it is for the same general medium format target buyer as the "other" thread For n vendors to thrive there must be m critical buying factors where roughly n = m (including experience, price, functionally, completeness of offer, choice, perceived value, features, specifications, support, service, meaning, brand perception, loyalty and mapping to an individual's value system (from tools to object of desire). I doubt this helps much since it is such a personal decision. Early on a lot of Fuji's success was Fuji APS-c users moving up, that changed with the GFX100 addressing "professionals". YMMV
Bonnie Johnson, Bill Moggridge and myself wrote a "I've been told landmark" paper pre-web after a decade of research into consumer and commercial buying patterns and for consumers it boils down to how you want to spend your time and how you want to spend your money, for commercial it boils down to ROI, we even had a nice 2x2 illustration that I still see in decks from all the major global marketing and management consulting firms
You can acquire a full Fuji GFX/GF lens kit for about 1/2 of an X2D (with very different lens options). So it is for the same general medium format target buyer as the "other" thread
For n vendors to thrive there must be m critical buying factors where roughly n = m (including experience, price, functionally, completeness of offer, choice, perceived value, features, specifications, support, service, meaning, brand perception, loyalty and mapping to an individual's value system (from tools to object of desire). I doubt this helps much since it is such a personal decision. Early on a lot of Fuji's success was Fuji APS-c users moving up, that changed with the GFX100 addressing "professionals". YMMV Bonnie Johnson, Bill Moggridge and myself wrote a "I've been told landmark" paper pre-web after a decade of research into consumer and commercial buying patterns and for consumers it boils down to how you want to spend your time and how you want to spend your money, for commercial it boils down to ROI, we even had a nice 2x2 illustration that I still see in decks from all the major global marketing and management consulting firms
Last edited:
Godfrey
Well-known member
A GFX is a lovely camera for those who want a GFX, just like the X2D is a lovely camera for those who want an X2D.
It's up to each person considering a camera to decide which camera suits their budget, desires, and needs best.
Neither of these two cameras suits my desires particularly well; without that, budget and needs are irrelevant ... which is why I don't own either.
G
It's up to each person considering a camera to decide which camera suits their budget, desires, and needs best.
Neither of these two cameras suits my desires particularly well; without that, budget and needs are irrelevant ... which is why I don't own either.
G
If only Fuji would update their UI....I don't have a GFX but I use the Fuji X-system and it's dreadful.It’s for the photographer who wants to use one of the best (shift) wide angles in existences, the Fuji 30 ts - it’s crazy good, even wide open, full shift - I don’t dare to make an AB shootout with my Rodenstock 32HR, I would like to be in the dream that it outperforms the Fuji - but it’s a dream….
We often wish that Schneider or Rodenstock mame new LF lenses again, but after I have used the Fuji ts 30 and 110mm extensive the last half year it could be interesting if Fuji took up the LF lens line again
The GFX 100II is in my view just a tool that in short it works really well!
But the UI is a disaster and the camera itself is ”soul less” in my hands - but if you use the custom settings, there is six of them it covers my ground quit well, with very little engagement with the hopeless UI - so it’s the complete opposite to the Hassleblad X, where I get inspired just picking the camera up, and the UI is a joy to use imo.
But, you can not use the Fuji 30ts, a cable release and a tiltable view finder on the X2D, so I have learned to live with the GFX as the professional workhorse it is, at least for an architectural photographer, that get’s the job done very well together with good samples of the Canon ts lenses and exceptional well in combination with Fuji’s own.
The tiltable viewfinder is nothing less than fantastic when you as I, prefer the perspective that a lower viewpoint provides, my normal viewpoint is often around 1m-1,4m and when you is almost 2m your self, it removes a lot of fatigue in the end of a 12-16 hour shot day, as some Scandinavian summer days are.
If only one could use the Fuji GF lenses on the Hassy X too. I wish Hassy would come out with a GF-mount 907x body for use with the CFV-100c for the GF-TS and longer lenses.
Fuji has always had a good "bang for the buck" quotient in my mind re: GFX system (and their APS-C X-system) compared to others. You get a lot for your $$ and it's been closing the gap between MF and FF35 in terms of performance and lens selection, at least for my needs.
The UI ….. the menu setup looks like a BIOS from an old Windows PC. Now with the 100MP GFX line the 100-200mm is imho in need for an update (sharpness wise, also f/5.6 is a joke, right?). Something decent to complete the 20-35mm and 45-100mm f/4 line, making a ‘holy trinity’ so to speak. If only Fuji came out with an 100-250mm f/4 (ref. to a 70/80-200 f/2.8 in small format). Now that would be great.
Cheers,
JaapD.
Cheers,
JaapD.
Last edited:
Doppler9000
Well-known member
I don’t believe so - just the result of a set of trade-offs.
rdeloe
Well-known member
Indeed. I don't have the GF 100-200, but if I needed a tele zoom, I'd be very happy with that one because it's smaller and lighter than an f/4 100-250mm would be and that matters a lot to me. As long as it's strong at f/5.6, I wouldn't need faster.
My Mamiya N 210mm f/8 L would seem ridiculously slow to most people, but it's ideal for me because it's as good as it's going to get at f/8, and it's tiny.
I fully understand your Mamiya N 210mm being ideal for you. Supposedly because it’s bringing lots of image quality to the table. With my mentioned GF 100-200 I don’t see this. One could just as well use a Sony A7Rv with a 70-200 GMII, which imho should not be the case with the Fuji GFX product line.
Cheers,
JaapD
Doppler9000
Well-known member
What do you see, specifically, as the shortfalls of the 100-200mm?
There are lots of users who are very happy with it - maybe you have a poor copy?
Why don’t you post some images for feedback.