I owned the 32-64, 23, 50, 110, 120 macro, and 250. All resolve very well with the 100mp sensor.
The 110 and 250 have some magic to their render, and were the lenses I derived the most joy from using - but they are bulky and can wear on you as the shoot unfolds. The 120 has great micro-contrast, but transitions were sometimes a bit hard. The 23 is the most uniformly sharp ultra wide across the frame I’ve owned and has a good bit of vibrancy to it. The two other lenses in my GFX kit were kind of perfunctorily sharp, but not very dimensional for a medium format kit. I never owned one, but I’ve seen a lot of great draws from the 45/2.8 - widely admired by GFX owners for its pleasing render.
Despite the jaw dropping file resolution, nice color, and amazing DR; I sold my GFX kit because minimum focus distance of all GF lenses except the macro was too often too far for me. I was frequently wishing to settle in a bit closer. And the haptics just never connected for me - like having an incompatible dance partner. For landscape, I really needed a closer-focusing more dimensionally rendering 30mm. I rented the 30mm and it put me to sleep, and that’s my favorite focal length. Bland and flat. If Fuji had offered a better 30mm lens I’d probably still be a GFX owner. In hindsight I should have waited on that lens instead of becoming an early adopter. Oh well.
All-in-all I’d say the results were less exciting to me versus those drawn from my Mamiya 7. In terms of render not resolution. The resolution is outstanding. But to my eye, the GFX tends to draw more like a full frame system than a medium format one and the differences between my Nikon Z and Fuji GFX are less than anticipated.
