Pre-Production GFX100

Greg7579 wrote:

OMG i hope your hand is very small. That lens is huge. I'm getting it anyway. Do you love it?

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Well I don’t have long hands but it is bigger than the 100-200 in weight and size (which I’ve temporarily had the 100-200) which are negatives but I can see this lens being better with the GFX 100. Especially with the AF functions on the front of the lens, you could cradle it while focusing and looking through the EVF with the  tilt adapter. I also liked the 100-200 but it’s hard to decide between them all. Hopefully when I get more time with it in the next couple months, especially with the 100, I’m sure I will like it more.

Which lenses do you currently have and which do you like the most so far?

Thanks for the write up.  It's good to know the VF tilt adapter works without issues.  They seem to have done a really great job with IBIS.  Great report!

Macro guy wrote:

Thanks for the write up. It's good to know the VF tilt adapter works without issues. They seem to have done a really great job with IBIS. Great report!

Are you gonna buy one ?

Here's a shot where I finally got my sh!t together, and captured a decent image of the model - 16 bit RAW file. Files show as approx 208MB on the SSD card. Buy bigger cards!

63mm f/2.8 at 1/100

This is the sort of image I'd typically work on for publication, so I went ahead and processed this as I normally would.

The shot is imported into ACR and I apply the Mastin Labs Portra film profile, and adjusted WB and exposure to suit.

I had to reduce magenta on this AWB image - Maybe a pattern here?

Loading into ACR takes longer than a 50MP file, and it takes ACR longer to render an image to work on. Not a crazy difference, but noticeable.

I then open the file in Photoshop. Photoshop seems to cope fine with a single open file. It shows as a 517.17MB 16 bit image.

I'm using a MacBook Pro - 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 - 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 - Intel Iris Pro 1536 MB - 1TB SSD

When I open the file it gets my fans spinning for a few seconds. When I zoom into the image it takes a second to render the full detail.

Scrolling, editing, spot removal, adjustments all appear to work as with the 50MB files.

I find the image a little cool, so load NIK ColorFX Pro to apply a Skylight Filter.

Now this is much slower than before - as the PS file is ported to NIK, and rendered, it takes a while, and the fans are definitely ramping up.

I apply the filter, and tweak it - the export back to PS - this again takes noticeably longer than with a 50MB file.

Next I drop the image into Portrait Pro for retouching. Takes longer than the 50MB file again, loads ok, and the AI software finds the facial features really well. I have noticed that Portrait pro likes more pixels to work with, and makes better decisions with bigger files. This appears to pan out for the 100MB files.

I apply my standard starting profile, map the skin area on the face carefully, and clean the areas and the lips and eye makeup. I can then see how my standard skin smoothing looks.

It looks good - skin is cleaner, bags under the eyes are less, crow's feet are reduced. I do some manual touchup on blemishes and stubborn crow's feet. This appears to all work the same as with the 50MB files.

Brighten the iris a touch, clean up the whites of the eyes, and make the pupils fractionally bigger.

I didn't apply any facial geometry tweaks to this shot.

Finally add back in a hint of magenta to the skin tone only, and export back to PS.

This again takes quite a while - this would definitely impact workflow for medium to large scale image retouching.

Back in PS, everything looks good - final zoom in and spot removal before saving the PS file and then a full res JPEG.

Observations:

Bigger files = slower workflow (duh!)

For portraits the level of detail is going to require retouching, depending on your required output standards. You can mitigate this with makeup, lighting etc, but you will have to have a workflow to deal with it.

All my current apps worked ok - rendering the final image from Portrait Pro to PS caused horizontal lines to temporarily appear across the image, but these were not there in the final PS file.

Final IQ looks excellent - a typical US print magazine page requires 3,300 pixels on the long side for a full bleed image - this file is 11,421 pixels on the long side.

Note - ACR is not importing the images as native 4:3 which is odd - Each RAW file renders in ACR as 3:2 cropped, even though it's a RAW only file, not a RAW + JPEG with in camera crop. Import size is 7,768 x 11,421 pixels. Maybe someone left the camera in 3:2 and I failed to notice (quite likely).

Too early to tell if AWB is better/different, although I did have to adjust Magenta down as with 50MP files.

None of my RNI film profiles showed up in ACR when working on this file - so it didn't appear that this file was recognized as a Fuji file they could be applied to. Another issue that would hopefully be fixed with an ACR update.

Uploading to the cloud took longer, but I was able to use the full res JPEG file from Flickr and insert it into this post with no issues.

IBIS gets you 5 stops with the 63mm lens ONLY

Maybe 3 with the 110mm - YMMV

Does 16 bits matter over 14bits for real usage?

I do not think I can tell much difference between 12 and 14 bits files unless 12bits has been pushed to the core (underexposed), but under normal conditions, it is not easy to tell the difference.

If you're in marketing it does!

Practically, I doubt it.

Not done an A/B test, but the science would say not.

Chris Dodkin wrote:

If you're in marketing it does!

Practically, I doubt it.

Not done an A/B test, but the science would say not.

The size of those 16 bits files are huge.   That s quite impractical unless one owns the state-of-the-art computer!

I built mine in 2014 and it still runs like a champ while being overclocked and with some good rams.  The Fuji files from the GFX50R are relatively fast to process but I doubt my machine will do well from the GFX100 files.

Cheers,

Max

-- hide signature --

Your time is limited, so don't waste it arguing about camera features - go out and capture memories - Oh, and size does matter - shoot MF

Wow that’s insane Chris, and just one file import does that to the fans? I wonder what multiple would be like? Very nice images and report. The camera seems insane!!

moimoi wrote:

Macro guy wrote:

Thanks for the write up. It's good to know the VF tilt adapter works without issues. They seem to have done a really great job with IBIS. Great report!

Are you gonna buy one ?

I don't know yet.  10k is not a trivial amount, so I'll take my time considering it.  First, the camera has to come out, once it comes out, all the bugs need to be shaken out, then, they're going to have various discounts, christmas specials, etc.  I'll bide my time and see how things go.

pepsijunior wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

OMG i hope your hand is very small. That lens is huge. I'm getting it anyway. Do you love it?

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Well I don’t have long hands but it is bigger than the 100-200 in weight and size (which I’ve temporarily had the 100-200) which are negatives but I can see this lens being better with the GFX 100. Especially with the AF functions on the front of the lens, you could cradle it while focusing and looking through the EVF with the tilt adapter. I also liked the 100-200 but it’s hard to decide between them all. Hopefully when I get more time with it in the next couple months, especially with the 100, I’m sure I will like it more.

Which lenses do you currently have and which do you like the most so far?

Well, when I bought the 50r in early January I ordered the 100-200, 23, 45 and 32-64 with it.  I use the 23 the most while I'm travel shooting and love it.  The 32-64 is sort of my base lens, and I have the 100-200 with me for that always needed reach and compression.  I have used the 45 very little because the 32-64 has it covered on the apertures I shoot, which is usually around F8.  But the 45 is so awesome and small.  Sometimes I put it on the 50r and just go out with the 50r around my neck and the 45 mounted and nothing else.  Kind of like having a big FujiX100F.

But I want that 250.  I love shooting at 200 FF equivalent and it has OIS.  I am for sure getting it.  I just made up my mind.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

You are not helping!!!!  I explained to my wife how this camera in my hands would save the world, but so far she is unconvinced.  I may have to consider parting with other gear to make this happen.  I have no need for the camera...but I have no need for spending obscene  amounts of money on stereo gear either.

Interesting.  I use the Mastin presets for shots on my 50r.  Great for landscape work.  Thanks for detailing the workflow.

The Davinator wrote:

You are not helping!!!! I explained to my wife how this camera in my hands would save the world, but so far she is unconvinced. I may have to consider parting with other gear to make this happen. I have no need for the camera...but I have no need for spending obscene amounts of money on stereo gear either.

Dav,

That is where I am exactly.  I have zero need for the 100.  But I want it.  In fact, it makes no sense for me on the road except that it has IBIS and is really no bigger than the big pro DSLR gear I used to play with.  And … the files are huge and burdensome for a laptop studio on the road.  And posting those full-size JPEGs for the 100 from the road is not going to be easy.

In other words, it is crazy and Teresa gets furious at me when I start talking about it.  But I know she will let me do it if I keep pressing.  But it is nuts Man....  Crazy.  Makes zero sense.

Oh, and when I was 21 years old and a broke, impoverished 2LT in the Army with no money and lots of debt, and I made 11,000 dollars a year (this was 1979), I went out and bought 9 grand worth of speakers, amp, tuner, high-end turntable, etc....  I was an audiophile, or thought I was.  But hey … the music was great back then and do you know how good Steely Dan sounded on that high end equipment?

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Greg7579 wrote:

The Davinator wrote:

You are not helping!!!! I explained to my wife how this camera in my hands would save the world, but so far she is unconvinced. I may have to consider parting with other gear to make this happen. I have no need for the camera...but I have no need for spending obscene amounts of money on stereo gear either.

Dav,

That is where I am exactly. I have zero need for the 100. But I want it. In fact, it makes no sense for me on the road except that it has IBIS and is really no bigger than the big pro DSLR gear I used to play with. And … the files are huge and burdensome for a laptop studio on the road. And posting those full-size JPEGs for the 100 from the road is not going to be easy.

In other words, it is crazy and Teresa gets furious at me when I start talking about it. But I know she will let me do it if I keep pressing. But it is nuts Man.... Crazy. Makes zero sense.

Oh, and when I was 21 years old and a broke, impoverished 2LT in the Army with no money and lots of debt, and I made 11,000 dollars a year (this was 1979), I went out and bought 9 grand worth of speakers, amp, tuner, high-end turntable, etc.... I was an audiophile, or thought I was. But hey … the music was great back then and do you know how good Steely Dan sounded on that high end equipment?

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Ah...Steely Dan Aja....magic.  I still have a 45rpm double LP of that album.  Yes, I am thinking of narrowing down gear.  Making my F5 bodies my sole 35, Fuji X-Pro1 for street, and the 100 for landscape and shots of my cat....because an iPhone is not good enough.  Here he is...enthralled by the Toronto Raptors beating the USA in the NBA finals.  He can barely control his enthusiasm.

My wife gave me such a look as I headed out to see the camera yesterday - I can see a vacation in Palm Springs in her future if I ever pull the trigger

Would look even more enthralled at 100MP resolution I'm thinking

Greg7579 wrote:

pepsijunior wrote:

Greg7579 wrote:

OMG i hope your hand is very small. That lens is huge. I'm getting it anyway. Do you love it?

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Well I don’t have long hands but it is bigger than the 100-200 in weight and size (which I’ve temporarily had the 100-200) which are negatives but I can see this lens being better with the GFX 100. Especially with the AF functions on the front of the lens, you could cradle it while focusing and looking through the EVF with the tilt adapter. I also liked the 100-200 but it’s hard to decide between them all. Hopefully when I get more time with it in the next couple months, especially with the 100, I’m sure I will like it more.

Which lenses do you currently have and which do you like the most so far?

Well, when I bought the 50r in early January I ordered the 100-200, 23, 45 and 32-64 with it. I use the 23 the most while I'm travel shooting and love it. The 32-64 is sort of my base lens, and I have the 100-200 with me for that always needed reach and compression. I have used the 45 very little because the 32-64 has it covered on the apertures I shoot, which is usually around F8. But the 45 is so awesome and small. Sometimes I put it on the 50r and just go out with the 50r around my neck and the 45 mounted and nothing else. Kind of like having a big FujiX100F.

ive heard great things about the 23. When I got the R in December with the 45, that’s all I had for a while. I knew I wanted the 110, which was next but always wanted the 250. So I got those two after being on sale and just got the 32-64. Hopefully that’s it for a while. As I’ve expanded the GFX system, I’m looking to get away from other systems as it just makes the quality of the others just seem redundant (spoils again.) The pop is insane and worth it. But it’s such an old sensor and FF is so close right, it just can’t make any sense. Well I know I’m having a much better time shooting with the R over my ex D850 or any FF dslr for that matter.

Thats one thing I did like about the 45 (x100F) and just think about it with the 50 pancake!

But I want that 250. I love shooting at 200 FF equivalent and it has OIS. I am for sure getting it. I just made up my mind.

its the reason why it’s intrigued me for so long and it can be used with a teleconverter? I haven’t used them much but I guess it’s an option.

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums