GFX 100RF - Why I want one

[jhunna]

This is what I have wanted for years... A flat, high resolution, Full Frame (or better) camera. I am new to Medium format so I don't know what a 35mm f4 lens looks like in results, but if I can capture gorgeous, indoor portraits with this setup I will have a hard time saying no to this.

Somethings I hope it has:

1. Quick Accurate autofocus.

2. Video with in camera digital zoom. 8k60p would be ideal, but 4k60p gets me what I want. I would like an hour of video time, but 30 minutes would be all I would need.

3. Decent battery life.

4. Full compliment of ports including usb-c, HDMI, mic and head phone jacks on the LEFT side of the body and not under the grip.

5. CF-B cards with an internal storage option.

6. A decent flash either built in or as a small accessory. (If not the Godox im20 will do).

7. Long battery life (All day pictures, and no more than 3 battery changes for all day video)

8. Being able to do post processing in camera, ie RAW > JPEG/HEIF.

9. Price $2500 or less

10. Durable and weather proof. Would like to take it to a beach and use it in the rain without concern.

But ultimately, this is a camera I can carry everyday, and get professional results. It is wide enough to get the scene, and has enough real estate to crop in to tell better stories. Let's get it right Fuji.

 

[cathal gantly]

9. Price $2500 or less

If it was that price, they couldn't make them fast enough! We don't know anything certain about the camera yet, but we certainly know it won't be anywhere near that price. Expect double that, or more...

 

[jhunna]

9. Price $2500 or less

If it was that price, they couldn't make them fast enough! We don't know anything certain about the camera yet, but we certainly know it won't be anywhere near that price. Expect double that, or more...

. Yeah I figured as much. I picked that number because I could trade in my equipment and get $2500. I think it needs to be around $3900 or so....

 

[unceunce]

9. Price $2500 or less

If it was that price, they couldn't make them fast enough! We don't know anything certain about the camera yet, but we certainly know it won't be anywhere near that price. Expect double that, or more...

. Yeah I figured as much. I picked that number because I could trade in my equipment and get $2500. I think it needs to be around $3900 or so....

I believe the price is rumored to be 5K...

 

[spilla]

This is what I have wanted for years... A flat, high resolution, Full Frame (or better) camera. I am new to Medium format so I don't know what a 35mm f4 lens looks like in results, but if I can capture gorgeous, indoor portraits with this setup I will have a hard time saying no to this.

Somethings I hope it has:

1. Quick Accurate autofocus.

I expect it'll be on part w/ GFX100s mark2, which is good

2. Video with in camera digital zoom. 8k60p would be ideal, but 4k60p gets me what I want. I would like an hour of video time, but 30 minutes would be all I would need.

No idea

3. Decent battery life.

Expected, has been good in GFX series

4. Full compliment of ports including usb-c, HDMI, mic and head phone jacks on the LEFT side of the body and not under the grip.

My guess is probably not

5. CF-B cards with an internal storage option.

No way

6. A decent flash either built in or as a small accessory. (If not the Godox im20 will do).

7. Long battery life (All day pictures, and no more than 3 battery changes for all day video)

As above

8. Being able to do post processing in camera, ie RAW > JPEG/HEIF.

More than typical Fuji in-camer processing?

9. Price $2500 or less

Rumor is around $5000

10. Durable and weather proof. Would like to take it to a beach and use it in the rain without concern.

I expect it will be, given the rest of the GFX series is

But ultimately, this is a camera I can carry everyday, and get professional results. It is wide enough to get the scene, and has enough real estate to crop in to tell better stories. Let's get it right Fuji.

 

[jhunna]

This is what I have wanted for years... A flat, high resolution, Full Frame (or better) camera. I am new to Medium format so I don't know what a 35mm f4 lens looks like in results, but if I can capture gorgeous, indoor portraits with this setup I will have a hard time saying no to this.

Somethings I hope it has:

1. Quick Accurate autofocus.

I expect it'll be on part w/ GFX100s mark2, which is good

2. Video with in camera digital zoom. 8k60p would be ideal, but 4k60p gets me what I want. I would like an hour of video time, but 30 minutes would be all I would need.

No idea

3. Decent battery life.

Expected, has been good in GFX series

4. Full compliment of ports including usb-c, HDMI, mic and head phone jacks on the LEFT side of the body and not under the grip.

My guess is probably not

That would be a shame. More ports means more options for production.

5. CF-B cards with an internal storage option.

No way

Why not? At least one CF-B card seems reasonable you would want something fast enough to support those large files.

6. A decent flash either built in or as a small accessory. (If not the Godox im20 will do).

7. Long battery life (All day pictures, and no more than 3 battery changes for all day video)

As above

Oooof wrote it twice.

8. Being able to do post processing in camera, ie RAW > JPEG/HEIF.

More than typical Fuji in-camer processing?

I am coming from Sony and Panasonic, so at least as good as Panasonic, and definitely way better than Sony's non existant in camera RAW processing.

9. Price $2500 or less

Rumor is around $5000

Does that sound reasonable? I am looking at the $1400 price for the x100vi, and the $5000 price for the 100Sii and the $6000 price for the Leica Q3 series.

10. Durable and weather proof. Would like to take it to a beach and use it in the rain without concern.

I expect it will be, given the rest of the GFX series is

Excellent!

Thanks for your inline responses. This is what I was hoping to get as other than testing out the x100v a few years ago, I don't have any experience with fuji cameras. I would have kept the x100v IF it didn't overheat in 4k video. I would have loved for this to have an f2.8 lens in the front, but the leaf shutter should help with that when I need to use flash.

But ultimately, this is a camera I can carry everyday, and get professional results. It is wide enough to get the scene, and has enough real estate to crop in to tell better stories. Let's get it right Fuji.

 

[spilla]

Thanks for your inline responses. This is what I was hoping to get as other than testing out the x100v a few years ago, I don't have any experience with fuji cameras. I would have kept the x100v IF it didn't overheat in 4k video. I would have loved for this to have an f2.8 lens in the front, but the leaf shutter should help with that when I need to use flash.

But ultimately, this is a camera I can carry everyday, and get professional results. It is wide enough to get the scene, and has enough real estate to crop in to tell better stories. Let's get it right Fuji.

No problem, I think we'll learn a lot more about the camera in the coming weeks, follow along at https://www.fujirumors.com/

 

[xtm]

1. I don't have $5K

2. See reason # 1

 

[Sensei Rob]

$5k is a bit steep and a 35mm f4 (equivalent to 28mm f3.2) isn't exactly my ideal lens choice.

However, as someone who is a multiple system owner who wants to try out digital medium format, it's great. It lets me keep my FF cameras for their versatility and allows me to have digital medium format in certain situations.

I'll definitely try it out, but it'll need to wow me to get me to buy.

The way things are, I'm thinking of a Hasselblad X2D in around 3.5 years. Of course, this GFX 100 RF won't be that, but it might just save me some money.

 

[Ap0ll0n]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

--
Apollon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/apollonas/

 

[jhunna]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

I don't understand the market of MF yet, as I really just started paying attention. I know FF, apsc, and m43 markets pretty well.

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

Good point.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

Anything less than 60 MP is not on my radar as I have an A7CR, and that really gives me everything I want except 8k60p and global shutter (and it isn't flat). So the real draw of a GFX100RF is that it is flat, and has 100MP, and is an even larger sensor. As of today, I am willing to spend $4k on it, when it comes out, Fuji may be able to get another $1k out of me....

 

[Rodenmg]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

 

[Ap0ll0n]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

I’m a little different. I would gladly pay more for a fixed lens camera with a lens that is 2 1/2 stops faster with IS. 2 1/2 stops is HUGE!

Well, from a noise standpoint more like 1.5 stops and with a shallower DOF, i.e. not that much of an advantage on landscape or cityscape scenes imho but of course different priorities and values make the biggest difference.

--
Apollon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/apollonas/

 

[Orsonneke1]

At first I was hesitating because of lack of IBIS.But with wide angle it might be OK.

For me all will be determined by the quality of the lens.

If it has huge barrel distortion because of the pan cake design , …

 

[Rodenmg]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

I’m a little different. I would gladly pay more for a fixed lens camera with a lens that is 2 1/2 stops faster with IS. 2 1/2 stops is HUGE!

Well, from a noise standpoint more like 1.5 stops and with a shallower DOF, i.e. not that much of an advantage on landscape or cityscape scenes imho but of course different priorities and values make the biggest difference.

 

[Ap0ll0n]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

I’m a little different. I would gladly pay more for a fixed lens camera with a lens that is 2 1/2 stops faster with IS. 2 1/2 stops is HUGE!

Well, from a noise standpoint more like 1.5 stops and with a shallower DOF, i.e. not that much of an advantage on landscape or cityscape scenes imho but of course different priorities and values make the biggest difference.

When it comes to actual exposure, not apparent DOF, f4 is f4 and f1.7 is 2 1/2 stops faster. That could mean the difference in shooting at iso 100 or iso 600. Or 2 1/2 stops in shutter speed.

If we are basing this conversation on the same noise observed in the screen (or print), and for the same sized object, I stand by that this is not a 2.5x noise difference (or rather multiplier) but 1.5x. Or put another way, if both lenses shoot at f/4 (as in, set the aperture of each lens at f/4, not f/4 "equivalent" or anything else), Leica will need an ISO twice as large to match the noise observed by the Fuji photo.

 

[Rodenmg]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

I’m a little different. I would gladly pay more for a fixed lens camera with a lens that is 2 1/2 stops faster with IS. 2 1/2 stops is HUGE!

Well, from a noise standpoint more like 1.5 stops and with a shallower DOF, i.e. not that much of an advantage on landscape or cityscape scenes imho but of course different priorities and values make the biggest difference.

When it comes to actual exposure, not apparent DOF, f4 is f4 and f1.7 is 2 1/2 stops faster. That could mean the difference in shooting at iso 100 or iso 600. Or 2 1/2 stops in shutter speed.

If we are basing this conversation on the same noise observed in the screen (or print), and for the same sized object, I stand by that this is not a 2.5x noise difference (or rather multiplier) but 1.5x. Or put another way, if both lenses shoot at f/4 (as in, set the aperture of each lens at f/4, not f/4 "equivalent" or anything else), Leica will need an ISO twice as large to match the noise observed by the Fuji photo.

 

[Ap0ll0n]

Why should a Leica Q3 cost $6K while a MF Fuji costs $5K? I know the Leica lens is faster but the Fuji lens is smaller. I would pay at least 20% for the Fuji instead of the other way round (based on what we know and have seen).

Compared to other Fuji MF bodies, I also think the price is fair. The Fuji X100 VI costs more than the Fuji X-T5 for example.

For folks looking for one lens solution that can be cropped to cover more focal lengths, I think the price is very fair. For folks looking to add to their existing MF arsenal, it's pricey but not in an unfair way. Plus there are options, like that and a used 50S ii at $1800K for example.

I’m a little different. I would gladly pay more for a fixed lens camera with a lens that is 2 1/2 stops faster with IS. 2 1/2 stops is HUGE!

Well, from a noise standpoint more like 1.5 stops and with a shallower DOF, i.e. not that much of an advantage on landscape or cityscape scenes imho but of course different priorities and values make the biggest difference.

When it comes to actual exposure, not apparent DOF, f4 is f4 and f1.7 is 2 1/2 stops faster. That could mean the difference in shooting at iso 100 or iso 600. Or 2 1/2 stops in shutter speed.

If we are basing this conversation on the same noise observed in the screen (or print), and for the same sized object, I stand by that this is not a 2.5x noise difference (or rather multiplier) but 1.5x. Or put another way, if both lenses shoot at f/4 (as in, set the aperture of each lens at f/4, not f/4 "equivalent" or anything else), Leica will need an ISO twice as large to match the noise observed by the Fuji photo.

You know as well as I do there’s a lot more to making good photos than just image noise. I’m thinking in low light senecios that are very common in travel photography, interiors, or even walks in the dark forest. Having a max aperture of f4 and no IS is going to produce a heck of a lot of “non-keeper”. Much more than if you can shoot at f1.7 with IS.

This is not even a close comparison unless you’ve either got a lot of light or a tripod.

I won't argue against any of this, absolutely For me, the ability to crop to produce a panoramic photo that is detailed enough on my 42in monitor, or the extra dynamic range and tonality in the cases where ISO can remain low, are more important than lower noise. Not to mention lens size of course, but that's just aesthetics as neither camera is going to be pocketable, not inside normal pockets at least, and Leica is the smaller camera (bar the lens).

--
Apollon
http://www.flickr.com/photos/apollonas/

 

[Noddemix]

$5k is a bit steep and a 35mm f4 (equivalent to 28mm f3.2) isn't exactly my ideal lens choice.

However, as someone who is a multiple system owner who wants to try out digital medium format, it's great. It lets me keep my FF cameras for their versatility and allows me to have digital medium format in certain situations.

I'll definitely try it out, but it'll need to wow me to get me to buy.

The way things are, I'm thinking of a Hasselblad X2D in around 3.5 years. Of course, this GFX 100 RF won't be that, but it might just save me some money.

If you want to try out DMF and this does end up retailing at $5k, there are less expensive and more versatile ways to do it. A 100S and lens of your choice would likely run cheaper.

 

[jhunna]

$5k is a bit steep and a 35mm f4 (equivalent to 28mm f3.2) isn't exactly my ideal lens choice.

[SNIP]

If you want to try out DMF and this does end up retailing at $5k, there are less expensive and more versatile ways to do it. A 100S and lens of your choice would likely run cheaper.

I the only thing that makes the RF appealing is that it is flat, and portable and has the leaf shutter.