GFX100

[BAB]

Fuji is taking the camera, lenses and firmware to a new industry watermark not only are they spreading rumors but fulfilling them is short order. Noise in shadows is not as big of an issue as real comparisons of lens rendering IQ between manufacturers is. Releasing cameras with Sony sensors that are not able to fully reach the capabilities of the sensor because the manufacturers crippled the firmware by not allowing the full potential of the sensor to come to market by shorting resources and funds to their software developers is what gets me. There is no free lunch but the GFX is as close to free lunch as anything we’ve seen, soon it will sell for 8500.00 with rebates you must admit that’s just shy of incredible could you imagine how that affects its competitors marketing strategies.
First time buyers easy sell.
Invested system owners with older equipment to switch over moderate sell.
Invested system owners with newer equipment to switch over harder sell.
Fan boys impossible sell
35 mm sensor users still thinking that if one day they need a big print their camera can do it impossible sell.
Photographers wanting very light systems impossible sell.
Sports and Wildlife photographers a maybe sell.

[faberryman]

Let's not forget the Phase One sensor is also larger than the GFX sensor.

The GFX100 sensor is a 33x44 section of the 54x40 sensor in the IQ4150, hence fewer megapixels.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

The GFX100 sensor is a 33x44 section of the 54x40 sensor in the IQ4150, hence fewer megapixels.

The sensors are presumably based on the IMX411 (150 Mpx) and the IMX461 (100 Mpx) sensors by Sony:
https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products_en/IS/sensor2/img/products/IMX411ALR_AQR_Flyer.pdf
https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products_en/IS/sensor2/img/products/IMX461ALR_AQR_Flyer.pdf

They have the same size photosites 3.76 x 3.76 micron.
So diffraction will start to become visible at the pixel level with apertures of f/4.0 and narrower.

The sensor can have 16-bit A/D readout.

Cheers,
Bart

[vjbelle]

by that logic - Fuji only adds a little over 50mp vs FF cameras 

I don't think you got the jist of my post.  I was 'specifically' commenting to Steve that the only difference between the 4150 and the GFX 100 sensor wise is the added 50mp that the 4150 has due to its larger surface area..... they are the same sensor.  The fact that the GFX 100 has sensor shifting capabilities puts this camera/sensor combination into a league of its own.  Pictorial pixel shift is something that Fuji more than likely can implement if there were enough interest.  The only thing missing for me are lenses below 72mm that can be shifted on my Actus.  There is only one in the works that I know of..... anything else is an on camera development by Fuji.

Victor

[Eric Brody]

I'm a long way from an expert but have been taught that one needed to quadruple the resolution to see a "noticeable" visible change. I suspect it will be hard to tell the difference between 50 and 100MP without working at it. Pixel peepers will be overjoyed, the rest of us not so much, especially for $10k. I suspect there's a longer distance between $5k and $10k than between 50 and 100MP, at least in my wallet. I rented the GFX50 and loved it but ended up with a puny Sony A7RIII which at $3k when I bought it, checks almost all my personal boxes, lots of lenses from quite wide, to quite long, with lots of interesting variation between both in zooms and primes from multiple manufacturers. I really like Sony's eye focus as well as their pixel shift features. I'm a one system person now, having multiple systems in the film era just made me crazy. I had 35mm for action, medium format for when I wouldn't/couldn't carry the 4x5 and the 4x5 for "serious" work. I hope the GFX100 is a success because I genuinely like Fuji's business philosophy. Time will tell.

[eronald]

I'm a long way from an expert but have been taught that one needed to quadruple the resolution to see a "noticeable" visible change. I suspect it will be hard to tell the difference between 50 and 100MP without working at it. Pixel peepers will be overjoyed, the rest of us not so much, especially for $10k. I suspect there's a longer distance between $5k and $10k than between 50 and 100MP, at least in my wallet. I rented the GFX50 and loved it but ended up with a puny Sony A7RIII which at $3k when I bought it, checks almost all my personal boxes, lots of lenses from quite wide, to quite long, with lots of interesting variation between both in zooms and primes from multiple manufacturers. I really like Sony's eye focus as well as their pixel shift features. I'm a one system person now, having multiple systems in the film era just made me crazy. I had 35mm for action, medium format for when I wouldn't/couldn't carry the 4x5 and the 4x5 for "serious" work. I hope the GFX100 is a success because I genuinely like Fuji's business philosophy. Time will tell.

If you double the resolution you can afford to throw away half the frame. Compose right and your double spread is also a full page

But you are so right, the Sony A7R3 as you say can probably do anything anyone can require commercially, even pretty decent video. Every serious photographer I know seems to have one. At some point the perfect understudy finds herself hired to be the diva.

Edmund

Edmund

[BernardLanguillier]

To me the GFX100 is more a usable Hasselblad/P1 rather than a higher res FF. I fully understand that those photographers who had little interest in the MF bodies aren’t excited by the GFX100.

Yes, sensor is only 70% larger than 35mm, but you get some really exciting lenses. Pretty much Otus level across the board with usable AF, a super sweet look and weather sealing.

It seems like a perfect match for my Z7 and its very high quality compact lenses. What becomes at odd in the middle are more very bulky 35mm lenses for which I might as well use the Fuji when space isn’t an issue.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Ray]

Let's not forget the Phase One sensor is also larger than the GFX sensor. After all, we know a 24mpix APS-C sensor does not produce the same results as a 24mpix full frame sensor. The number of pixels is only one attribute of a sensor.

Very true. And let's not forget that the GFX100 is not only larger than the 35mm format but also has at least double the number of pixels. Therefore, the GFX100 is a bigger jump in resolution, compared with the latest 35mm formats, than the much more expensive 150mp Phase One compared with the GFX100.

However, the cost of the body is only one factor. If one doesn't already have lenses that fit the body, then the total cost will escalate.

[Bo_Dez]

It will replace my 35mm and Phase One systems. The only other camera that will remain in my bag is the Leica M.

It's unfortunate for Phase One and Hasselblad and will be sad to them slide into obscurity unless they can somehow pull a rabbit of out of their hats—but I don't like their chances now.

I was a Phase One customer for almost 20 years. Hasselblad for even longer. Can't image the possibility of this ever happening 20 years ago!

[eronald]

Bo,

 I suggest you wait a bit before selling the old gear.

 It's time to see how this camera actually behaves in practice rather than on paper.

 Even Leica had some camera design surprises which only showed up in user hands.

Edmund

It will replace my 35mm and Phase One systems. The only other camera that will remain in my bag is the Leica M.

It's unfortunate for Phase One and Hasselblad and will be sad to them slide into obscurity unless they can somehow pull a rabbit of out of their hats—but I don't like their chances now.

I was a Phase One customer for almost 20 years. Hasselblad for even longer. Can't image the possibility of this ever happening 20 years ago!

[BernardLanguillier]

I suggest you wait a bit before selling the old gear.

It's time to see how this camera actually behaves in practice rather than on paper.

Even Leica had some camera design surprises which only showed up in user hands.

It is almost certain that the GFX100 will have some issues at launch.

With the amount of technological innovation Fuji is delivering, I don’t see how it could be problem free.

Yet, Fuji has built such an amazing brand image that many expect perfection. Which is the thing we should be amazed at really.

Cheers,
Bernard

[hubell]

It is almost certain that the GFX100 will have some issues at launch.

With the amount of technological innovation Fuji is delivering, I don’t see how it could be problem free.

Yet, Fuji has built such an amazing brand image that many expect perfection. Which is the thing we should be amazed at really.

Cheers,
Bernard

Technological innovation??? I don't see any. I don't consider the porting of existing technologies that are prevalent in most higher end mirrorless cameras today to be "innovative." Hasselblad and Phase have neither the financial nor R&D resources to build a mirrorless medium format camera body with IBIS. Canon, Nikon and Sony do, but have no apparent interest. This does not make what Fuji did "innovative." Everything in the GFX 100S other than 100MP (kudos to Sony's sensor division) is available in FF cameras that cost 1/5 of the GFX 100S, and I expect that things like overall AF performance, Eye AF, and Continuous AF tracking work better in certain FF cameras. Just because a camera has something like Eye AF as a feature does NOT mean that it is well implemented. Some camera manufacturers have done it well, some have not.
The only real innovation that I have seen recently is the Multi-Shot Hi-Res Mode in the Panasonic S1R. That, to me, is impressive. I am sure that Fuji will add a multi-shot capability to the GFX 100S at some point. The question is, will it be just another "me too" feature that does not work all that well in real world applications.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bo,

 I suggest you wait a bit before selling the old gear.

 It's time to see how this camera actually behaves in practice rather than on paper.
[...]

I agree, and it is also an open question of how well the IBIS will perform with that much more payload. Also how well it keeps performing over time is an open question. It will certainly have to work harder with the increase in mass.

And, will the DR be good enough? With the smaller photosites, usually, the Saturation level also gets lower. And will Fujifilm offer a 16-bit readout/Raw mode, that the sensor natively seems to offer?

IMHO, it's way too soon to take drastic measures, but it does look interesting.

Cheers,
Bart

[BernardLanguillier]

Technological innovation??? I don't see any. I don't consider the porting of existing technologies that are prevalent in most higher end mirrorless cameras today to be "innovative." Hasselblad and Phase have neither the financial nor R&D resources to build a mirrorless medium format camera body with IBIS. Canon, Nikon and Sony do, but have no apparent interest. This does not make what Fuji did "innovative." Everything in the GFX 100S other than 100MP (kudos to Sony's sensor division) is available in FF cameras that cost 1/5 of the GFX 100S, and I expect that things like overall AF performance, Eye AF, and Continuous AF tracking work better in certain FF cameras. Just because a camera has something like Eye AF as a feature does NOT mean that it is well implemented. Some camera manufacturers have done it well, some have not.
The only real innovation that I have seen recently is the Multi-Shot Hi-Res Mode in the Panasonic S1R. That, to me, is impressive. I am sure that Fuji will add a multi-shot capability to the GFX 100S at some point. The question is, will it be just another "me too" feature that does not work all that well in real world applications.

I had IBIS and on sensor AF in mind when I wrote this, since they both have never been done on sensors larger than 35mm.

But I know, in movies you just press the “copy/enlarge” key and such innovation takes a few minutes at worse...

I should have expected the reaction from the usual Sony gang. Claiming any form superiority from a different brand provokes a form of allergic reaction doesn’t it?

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

And, will the DR be good enough? With the smaller photosites, usually, the Saturation level also gets lower. And will Fujifilm offer a 16-bit readout/Raw mode, that the sensor natively seems to offer?

The official answer from Fuji is yes on the question. 16 bits raw, but only in single shot mode.

First feedback indicates that lossless compressed file size is larger so there seems to be some information in those 2 bits.

Cheers,
Bernard

[hcubell]

I had IBIS and on sensor AF in mind when I wrote this, since they both have never been done on sensors larger than 35mm.

But I know, in movies you just press the “copy/enlarge” key and such innovation takes a few minutes at worse...

I should have expected the reaction from the usual Sony gang. Claiming any form superiority from a different brand provokes a form of allergic reaction doesn’t it?

Cheers,
Bernard

It's clear that your idea of "technological innovation" and mine are strikingly different. I cited an example of what I consider true technological innovation, which is from Panasonic, not Sony. This is about computational photography, the real next frontier in photography.
BTW, coming from you of all people, as the ultimate card carrying member of the "Nikon gang," your dismissive comment about the "Sony gang" is comical. [G]

[BernardLanguillier]

It's clear that your idea of "technological innovation" and mine are strikingly different. I cited an example of what I consider true technological innovation, which is from Panasonic, not Sony. This is about computational photography, the real next frontier in photography.
BTW, coming from you of all people, as the ultimate card carrying member of the "Nikon gang," your dismissive comment about the "Sony gang" is comical. [G]

Oops, please allow to take the Sony Gang back. I am really sorry I misread your avatar name on the small screen of my phone.

Have several manufacturers not done multi-shot on 35mm (Pentax, Sony), smaller (Olympus) or larger sensors (I know you know Hasselblad well since we both use the band) years before Pana? The implementation of Pana seems a bit better in terms of movement mgt, but how is this more innovation than a first ever MF IBIS?

Cheers,
Bernard

P.s.: the Sony gang members I was alurig to don’t just have a positive bias for Sony (similar to the one I have for Nikon), they are actively and unfairly critical of anything that doesn’t carry a Sony logo. I am definitely not like that. The only camera brand I have limited respect for is Canon and I believe that many realize now how right I was 5 years ago...

[eronald]

I had IBIS and on sensor AF in mind when I wrote this, since they both have never been done on sensors larger than 35mm.

But I know, in movies you just press the “copy/enlarge” key and such innovation takes a few minutes at worse...

I should have expected the reaction from the usual Sony gang. Claiming any form superiority from a different brand provokes a form of allergic reaction doesn’t it?

Cheers,
Bernard

At the moment, Sony is supplying most of the innovation for all mirrorless ILC, prepackaged in the form of those sensors.

There's no point in yelling about them, they don't necessarily make the best integrators but they're now the heart of the industry.

As for the GFX 100, it's in reality a hi-resolution GFX-50 upgrade, in two years it will be selling at $6K, and used ones will be trading at $4K, and every studio will have one as Phase and Hassy are giving up on the midrange commercial market. We will see how they price the modular version which will sell to tethered shooters, they've already started showing around the core module mockups, which have an integrated lens mount, so far it's not an exposed-sensor back.

Edmund

[BernardLanguillier]

I don’t see anybody yelling at Sony and most definitely not me. I totally agree about their innovation.

My only point was that Fuji is also an innovator.

The technological gap btwn the GFX50 and the GFX100 is factually larger than the one seen between any 2 successive iterations in any other brand line up these past years as far as I can remember, whatever the sensor size (including mobile phones). It is definitely not just a doubling of resolution, although that in itself only happened once or twice these past 20 years. I agree that many of these technologies are ports from smaller formats, but if it were that easy why have P1 and Hasselblad not done it?

Compare the a7rIII to the a7r with the same eyes you use to call the GFX100 just a resolution increase over the GFX50 and the two Sony’s will look pretty much identical with very little progress in 7 years. We know that is far from being the case.

And yes, it will obviously decrease in value. The GFX100 hasn’t magically turned cameras into a good investment for those who don’t take pictures with theirs.

Cheers,
Bernard

[hogloff]

It's clear that your idea of "technological innovation" and mine are strikingly different. I cited an example of what I consider true technological innovation, which is from Panasonic, not Sony. This is about computational photography, the real next frontier in photography.
BTW, coming from you of all people, as the ultimate card carrying member of the "Nikon gang," your dismissive comment about the "Sony gang" is comical. [G]

Actually I would have been disappointed if Bernard did not play this card!! Anytime he is challenged, the card emerges.