There is nothing arbitrary about what I posted. If you can't read the context clues that's on you, however, the entire Fuji marketing campaign around this camera is around lifestyle, flexibility to create jpegs on the fly and portability of an MF sensor.
We get that. But those of us who are taking candid shots of the family are often doing a myriad of things while taking pictures, including eating.
I've done that, too, but I reached for one of my FF cameras for that. So I guess I was overbroad in the bolded text above. I should have said that, when I'm shooting MF, I don't try to make photographs while eating.
Slipping in a jacket pocket for travel, reportage even.
That could have been Fuji's intention, for those who wish to be serious with their photography, I say conscientious for myself, then they can.
This is one of the key traits that makes us happy about the RF. It is a viable solution where previously one would never think to bring an MF.
I don't see any advantage to MF in those situations, and I see disadvantages related to AF speed and flexibility.
You believe the Q3 and the 100RF are direct substitutes and that the 100S and the 100RF are entirely different.
I have not spoken about why you bought the camera. I am just pointing out that other people may have selected it based on different criteria than you.
I get that. And moving from 1/2.3, 1", m43, apsc, ff, and now MF I do see fewer and fewer gains, but I can take 30 bad, out of focus, less than perfect pictures, and if I get that one shot, it is all worth it.
They are not direct substitutes, they are both lifestyle cameras. I can't take 8k video with the RF, I can with the Q3.
Of course.There are intersections between all three cameras. There are places where the two GFX cameras intersect, resolution, for example, that don’t intersect with the Q3. There are places where only the Q3 and 100RF intersect, and places where only the Q3 and the 100S intersect.
Presumably you would agree that with regard to maximum aperture for example, the Q3 and the 100RF are “utterly different”, but that the Q3 and the 100S could both share f/1.7 lenses?
No. We are at the upper echelon of cameras. People in this segment of the market know why they are buying gear, and don't confuse things like overlapping specifications. By your logic, I should consider the Samsung s25 ultra's 200MP sensor and f1.7 something that merits consideration because two of the three options are comparable.
[SNIP something about fruit]
I compare those types of camera comparisons every time I decide what camera to use for a project, and one of my choices is even more constrained than the GFX 100RF: it's the Q2M.
You are at a different phase of the discussion, you are speaking to project, and we are speaking to purchase. (Granted purchase is connected to project, but I hope you see my point).
These days, I buy gear as required to execute projects. I own some gear that is far more specialized than the GFX 100RF (like the Rodenstock 105/5.6 HR Digaron macro, Cambo and Swebo tech cameras, spectrophotometers, Aputure and Westcott LED lighting panels...), and I think that's fine as long as the gear does the job that I have in mind in excellent fashion.
agreed.
I get that you don’t believe in iron laws but I was hoping you believed in logic, and could distinguish arbitrary, subjective weightings of objective criteria. “Lifestyle” camera is not an objective category that everyone agrees on. It is an arbitrary, subjective grouping of a set of attributes.They are not direct substitutes, they are both lifestyle cameras. I can't take 8k video with the RF, I can with the Q3.
Of course.There are intersections between all three cameras. There are places where the two GFX cameras intersect, resolution, for example, that don’t intersect with the Q3. There are places where only the Q3 and 100RF intersect, and places where only the Q3 and the 100S intersect.
Presumably you would agree that with regard to maximum aperture for example, the Q3 and the 100RF are “utterly different”, but that the Q3 and the 100S could both share f/1.7 lenses?
No. We are at the upper echelon of cameras. People in this segment of the market know why they are buying gear, and don't confuse things like overlapping specifications. By your logic, I should consider the Samsung s25 ultra's 200MP sensor and f1.7 something that merits consideration because two of the three options are comparable.
Going to be honest, I didn't think the idea of a lifestyle camera was that big of a reach, and think it is fairly obvious at this end of the market. Maybe that is arrogant, and if so I will own it. But I don't see the same consumer comparing ILC and High End, High MP, Single lens cameras, the constraints of the single lens camera are obvious.
[SNIP something about fruit]
And grow on trees, are sweet, often eaten for dessert….I agree on your last point as apples and oranges are roughly the same size, weight and cost
It’s an interesting blind spot.
Are you referring to the foolish consistency of only relying on logic?I get that you don’t believe in iron laws but I was hoping you believed in logic, and could distinguish arbitrary, subjective weightings of objective criteria. “Lifestyle” camera is not an objective category that everyone agrees on. It is an arbitrary, subjective grouping of a set of attributes.They are not direct substitutes, they are both lifestyle cameras. I can't take 8k video with the RF, I can with the Q3.
Of course.There are intersections between all three cameras. There are places where the two GFX cameras intersect, resolution, for example, that don’t intersect with the Q3. There are places where only the Q3 and 100RF intersect, and places where only the Q3 and the 100S intersect.
Presumably you would agree that with regard to maximum aperture for example, the Q3 and the 100RF are “utterly different”, but that the Q3 and the 100S could both share f/1.7 lenses?
No. We are at the upper echelon of cameras. People in this segment of the market know why they are buying gear, and don't confuse things like overlapping specifications. By your logic, I should consider the Samsung s25 ultra's 200MP sensor and f1.7 something that merits consideration because two of the three options are comparable.
Going to be honest, I didn't think the idea of a lifestyle camera was that big of a reach, and think it is fairly obvious at this end of the market. Maybe that is arrogant, and if so I will own it. But I don't see the same consumer comparing ILC and High End, High MP, Single lens cameras, the constraints of the single lens camera are obvious.
[SNIP something about fruit]
I will close on the wisdom of Ralph Waldo Emerson:
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”
However makes you feel safe, in your happy place as it were when you are photographing, that's important .... for you for every photographer.
