Fujifilm GFX 100 sample gallery with Raw conversions

@TNS - I'm not surprised, I love photos of mountains and Pentax cameras are awesome value for landscapes. Something like a K-70 is really cheap and it has pixel-shift too!

it's a commercial photography camera, designed to make $ for the shooter.

i've looked at the samples and they smoke my canon 5dsr and i am sold as soon as street price comes down a bit and i can source some decent lens choices. I don't see much talk about the in body stabilization, that's killer if it works.

the in camera body image stabilization might mean no more shooting with heavy kenlab gyros. For certain applications (handheld aerials, handheld landscapes) etc where the market is huge limited edition wall prints this gizmo is a money maker.

Depending on how much more positive cash the GFX100 can bring relative to your 5DSr, you may not wait for a price drop (of the GFX100) and buy it immediately. Let's imagine the GFX100 brings a lot more customers (customers say "Wow you have a GFX100, Ok, here is my contract"), would the additional customers pay back, over how many years? Net present value and pay back time should be calculated based on projected cash flows. There is no need to wait for a price drop.

The D810 has good IQ, but bad AF in low light... Get a Z7 :D

Pure mega pixel is a matter of enlargement and viewing distance, and even only up to a point as people can't tell the difference between a large print from a 8K (32Mp) file and large print from a 100Mp file. People get MF for the style of view I suppose. Also, again there isn't much difference between 50Mp and 70Mp, given that the Mp count is the linear resolution square, the actual improvement in resolution from 50Mp to 100Mp is about 30%, if that matter.

I always preferred 6x6 personally. I’ve seen some nice 4x3 shots, and still prefer it to 1x1.5...

Agree, almost all lenses are sharp at closer distances, nothing to see there, infinity focus is where lenses start to fall apart.

The pixel size of the GFX 100 is somwhat less than one half of the GFX 50, so pixel for pixel, it will be noisier and have less dynamic range. However, if you view both at a same resolution equal or lower than 50 megapixels, they will look pretty much the same, because the effective pixel size will be close. The advantage of the higher resolution is to widen the tradeoff between dynamic range and resolution.

I get that the pixel density is high. But I don’t remember seeing that much noise on my 24mp apsc images. In fact I definitely don’t. Clean to 3200 I think.

It’s the first thing I noticed in these images.

Fuji can do a lens leaf shutter in the future if the demand is there.
Who will make current leaf shutter lenses work on this body?

It’s driven by the end use of the pix. Whatever the client wants, that’s what we deliver.

Which is the weak spot of the camera?

You think, “if I needed 100MPx then this is a camera I should seriously look at.”

The answer is that this is for pros shooting advertising, but lots of amateurs will buy it too. If you want to print really really big, then this is perfect.

Unless you're definitely printing big, I wouldn't go near it, as the PC overheads are going to be noticeable in terms of develop preview time and storage space.

More mp allow easier retouching.

@h2k ever needed to print the size of a football pitch?

Jay Jay: at a standard dpi of 300, this camera prints just over 38” (around 1 meter) wide - considerably less than a 100 meter football pitch.

I for one don’t understand your challenge with high resolution. Are you personally harmed by the existence of such high resolutions?

@PLShutterbug i recently compared two relatively big prints (about 1.5 meter diagonal) one from a D850 and one from a 6D, i honesty couldn't see the difference and i have good eye sight. I'm not saying one doesn't need such resolution, just thinking about all the drawbacks such a high res camera has.

The “drawbacks” are ... big files. I have a Z7 and have found nothing but advantages over my D7100.

@PLShutterbug by comparing a FF to an APS-C you will obviously find many advantages, but high res sensors can also be a pain. Something i definitely noticed when switching from a 6D classic to a 5d4

Pixel pitch on my Z7 is almost identical to my D7100 but the Z7 has better shadow detail. And with almost double the resolution I can crop a LOT and still have better resolution in my final image, if I want. And the Z7 is about the same size and weight as the D7100. So again, lots of advantages vs. the single “disadvantage” of larger files.

You still haven’t answered my question about why you seem to dislike high res.

@PLShutterbug pixel pitch is only part of the equation. I have nothing against high megapixel cameras, but the first thing i noticed after "upgrading" was how sensitive the new camera was to handshake, i suddenly needed higher shutter speeds in order to get the same tack sharp photos and also some of my lenses looked mediocre on the demanding sensor, an example is the little nifty fifty. I now find soon reaches it's limits whereas before i was getting sharper results. Also things like fringing and chromatic aberration becomes more apparent

No, what you explained is equal to pushing 7 stops

Raising the shadows by +50 (in Lightroom) increases shadow exposure by half a stop or so (just done it). So +2 stops plus shadows +50 is a maximum of 3 stops in the shadows.

Shock, Horror, will anyone actually notice on an A0 print?

You can all say the same thing about other cameras that were hammered down for the exact same issue.... Its simple as that.

You can just deny, but this camera suffers from banding - Point!

This camera doesn't suffer from anything.

Wye Photography
Tnx for clarification. Im not a LR user.