DPReview TV: Fujifilm GF 45-100mm F4 OIS review

The files are certainly cleaner than a scanned 6x9 cm film medium format camera file. 6x9 was already half of large format.

True. But I doubt we’ll ever get a 6x9 cm medium format sensor in the digital age. A 6x4.5 cm sensor, however, has already successfully been done and (at least to me) represents enough of sensor size increase over full frame to be meaningful to image quality.

You are right, the 100mp IQ4 trichromatic Phase One would be my dream camera.

Yes, trying to include everything in an architectural photo may result in boring images.

"The GFX imho has never been aimed to be used in a professional environment."

like most of the high end gears, both pro and amateur will get it.

Nico - Everything can be used by professionals - I know professionals that have used Canon EOS M5 and Rebels, but that doesn't imply these cameras were aimed to be used by professionals in the first place.

The GFX50 series lack many professional features. Especially the 50R is a dumbed down version of what could be equal to a Canon D90. Except for its sensor the featurelist is pretty short. Not to say the sensor itself dates back to 2012.

Its Image Quality is good, but its sensor readout speed and the lack of phase detect AF make the camera near unsuitable for most professional jobs. I have seen so many people struggling with the AF performance of the 50 series that they were tired of still using their GFX because of its poor AF performance. Low light and slow lenses make it difficult to use. The constant AF hunting is a real pain.

The GFX100 is the only camera in the GFX series that could be considered 'Pro'. But it also comes with a 'pro' price tag at 10K dollars as well.

Jones Indiana,

Thanks for good "real world" input.

I have been eyeing the GFX50-system (not the GFX100 version, to expensive)
But I have never had the chance to use it in real life.

With your info, I do not need to try it. (both good logics regarding no wide lenses for landscape, as well as to much depth of field at F4 (f.2.8 ff)

Also didnt know about lack of Phase detect AF.

Seems like (for now) FF is the common sense for portraits and landscape.

Thank you.

@Jones Indiana: Well, it already well know that the GFX50s and GFX50s are nt really fast to focus... So I guess people selling their GFX50x because of slow AF were not well informed..

Here, some pro are moving to the GFX system because it's much more flexible as others MF system.

Nico - I am fine if you think a sensor 33x44mm truly represents Medium Format. Traditionally MF started at 50x40mm and went up to 60x50mm.

There is nothing that the GFX excels in and makes it stand apart.

100 Megapixels?
- If you think you will need it. Then just buy it for that 10K to shoot goose or cat pictures

Dynamic Range?
- Nobody sees this in a blind test
Not even the pixelpeepers, unless of course you tell them

The GF lens line-up?
- The GFX lacks native lenses. Its fastest glass consist of just a few F2 lenses.
- Falling back to 35mm lenses is making buying the GFX a hoax for yourself.
- Even Nikon and Canon already surpassed the number of available native lenses with its EOS R and Nikon Z system

All you have fallen for when buying the GFX is the marketing of Fujifilm. And that's fine if you are willing to fool yourself. I am not withholding you of buying one

The advantages of the GFX are tiny and negligible but for which you pay up to 3x as much as a 35mm system

Nico - By all means buy this camera if you think you need it

I went from Fujifilm X-Series to GFX50R and back to a FF system.
Personally I did not find what I would thought to find in the GFX.

Sure when I just bought it I had the same pink glasses on that everybody has on during the honeymoonphase.

The GFX50R never overwhelmed me. It never brought me the same joy and happy experience I have had with my X-Series cameras. I just could not fall in love with it!

The GFX was nothing but troubling for me to focus well and swiftly.
I never bought it because I thought it was fast as I use it mainly for city- and landscape photography. But this thing is slow!

What it gave me was a lot of lenshunting during focus and misfires on focus. Especially when the light was poor or in situations that had backlighting. It did just not perform as I had hoped it would.

I encourage you to hire it first and test it out under difficult light before you buy. It might safe you a lot of money and annoyance!

@Indiana... It's kind of an odious comment stating that the GFX cameras aren't for Pros... Have a look rather at the GFX 100, as the GFX 50S and R are based on same very old sensor (without phase detect AF) as the Pemtax 645Z.

The GFX 100 has many advantages over the Phase One and Hasselblad H systems:

- Very modern lenses (even if the line-up is still limited)
- Advanced AF
- In-body stabilization
- All other advantages associated to mirrorless cameras...
- Possibility to adapt almost any vintage lens (e.g. Hasselblad V, Mamiya, Pentax 67, etc...)

The image quality of the GFX 100 together with the GF 110 F2 lens just can't be beat... There is also 23mm f4 lens for landscape, and a 30mm lens has been announced.

I wished that the 32-64 is 23-45 f4 so that the zoom coverage will be great and it won't overlap. But I guess, 23/24-45 will make it even bulkier than 32-64 and so they went that route, or they did not have 45-100 on their roadmap when they planned 32-64.

However, their primes are very good and hopefully with the upcoming 30mm and 80mm, it will have good amount of lenses to cover all occasions.

I am pretty sure the mark ii of 50s & r will have many goodies of gfx 100 and with a slight bump in the pixels (inevitable, although I'd prefer the current 50mp) and overall response, it will be great.

Agreed

@RhonaldJR A 25-45 f4.5 zoom may still be launched, a bit comparable to the Pentax 645 28-45mm f4.5 lens... I has this one... Good but heavy... I don't like zooms really that much but for Landscape I think it's a good option...

@IdM photography: True about the zoom lenses, but they are helpful when you go for trekking and wants one or two lenses to cover most of the use cases. The 45-100 has been to couple of trails and its been good. I am happy with the sharpness of GF zooms. For locations I don't need to hike much, I'd go with multiple primes, but its good to have some nice zoom to cover 24-45 instead of the current one. That will make 24-45 and 45-100 or 24-45 and 100-200 perfect for a days hiking.

@Indiana Jones: I used to own the GFX-100, a7rIV snd Z7. I have sold the Sony.

I own the full lens line up of both systems and they have their strengths and weaknesses.

I use the Nikon when I want compactness and flexibility (wider lenses, wider apertures, super teles such as 200mm f2,0, 120-300mm f2.8 or 500mm f5.6 PF...), I use the Fuji when I need more resolution or even more pleasing skin colors easily. The 110mm f2.0 is very sweet.

They are both great systems with amazing potential.

Cheers,
Bernard

You are incorrect about MF. It is certainly not just for the studio. I am proof of that. But there is no need for you to buy it. FF is awesome.
Fuji was very smart. They now rule the sweet spot with X and the high end with GFX.

These don’t look as MF because of several reasons. First and foremost reason is that the GFX only uses a fractional larger sensor than regular 35mm. Secondly Fujifilm use slow lenses with most apertures starting at f4. Which equals to f3.2 compared to FF. So makes that there is not much of a difference in the looks with this system. Fujifilm does this to keep the weight down. And still you come to 1Kg (2 pounds) - For the combination: camera + lens it weights 3Kg (6 pound).

Weight and size is the main reason why I am not interested in the GFX system.

Jones Indiana - a sensor size 67% larger than FF is hardly " fractionally larger".

FF is merely a legacy of 35mm film. It's a compromise like everything else is. There is no magic to it. For those who value the benefits of a sensor 67% larger then this camera is for them.

Frankly, I dare say that 90% of people could get by perfectly well with a tiny camera phone sensor given that almost all content is consumed on line / digitally but I guess that's another debate.

Its a video. Go to the library if you want books. Welcome to 2020.

Libraries are closed mate. Welcome to 2020.

Except for Bayonet, your responses are trite, even silly.

"Turn on subtitles next time." That would still take the time I don't want to waste watching the video.

"That's because it is a video." Oh, no kidding.

"Do you complain about all TV, etc." Of course not, but lens reviews are not entertainment.

"Welcome to 2020." In these advanced times, it should be easy to produce a companion text piece. I'm complaining about the time it takes to watch a video.....something that has become quite common, not only on DPR. It sucks big time, because it is a waste of time. You must be 14 years old and have nothing else to do.

@ Babart: "Turn on subtitles next time." That would still take the time I don't want to waste watching the video.

I disagree. Jordan usually talks pretty fast. I doubt you'd read faster than he talks. ;-)

Furthermore, there are links to several "chapters" of the video. You are able to jump directly to the part which is of interest for you. Unlike many YouTube vids where you have to watch a long video full of meaningless drivel just to realize that you fell for another clickbait. ;-)

You should try it.

Perhaps a more reasoned response: because Chris and Jordan want you to watch their videos. If they posted a transcript then perhaps fewer people would watch the videos, and their unique proposition would disappear. Perhaps not.

Depending on the subject and context I am also irritated by videos. However I am entertained by C&J, and I think that is more the goal here.

There are many places with text-based reviews and content of the same things C&J do here in video. Perhaps you simply skip their videos in future in favor of an information-dissemination mechanism you prefer?

In an ideal world we would have videos *and* text reviews. The former help in gaining an overall impression of the item reviewed, and I enjoy the light-hearted and informative style of presentation.

Part of the reason why dpr doesn't publish proper lens reviews is undoubtedly because it's much more complex and time-consuming, requiring mtf graphs, test charts etc,

Another reason is that only a handful of genuine potential purchasers would be likely to read them. On the other hand, a high percentage of viewers will watch short and entertaining videos, regardless of whether they have any interest in purchasing the product.

" I appreciate both, I just don't want one of them to be forced on me as a replacement for the other. "

Forced on you? Really?

Video is 10 minutes long. A transcript probably would take 1-2 minutes to skim through. Sure, if I look for entertainment, I could watch 10 minutes video or netflix, youtube or whatever but if I just want information quickly, written article is just that much more convenient and no need to waste time.

Why are you on a website instead of reading a photography magazine?

@Coomer I’m reading your comment. I’m pretty sure I would not watch you...

A written review takes much less to read than watch the review. And it is easier to scroll back to the part you want to read again. And video eats up valuable data. And I have to use headphones in the office. And I actually have to watch the video to understand what the reviewer wants to say and watching videos in some offices isn't nicely taken.
These are the best review videos in internet, I truly believe that but I'd still prefer written reviews.

First, there are examples of products that got both video and written reviews, and second, you assume that those that didn't get a written review would have got one, if it weren't for the video review. The fact is that DPR never had the resources to review every new product, so adding the video reviews means that more products can be covered.

Id just like a very technical written review. Dpr used to be the best at this. Its almost like they are forcing you to watch the video first

Yes you’re quite right the site is now the Chris and Jordan show although they are NOT Kai and Lok. I remember when every aspect of a product was gone through in fine detail, and any flaws were discussed, for instance ‘shutter shock’ on a particular camera and how to avoid or work around it, that never happens now.

@goblin
“The fact is that if DPR doesn't have the ressources to review in written form the products THEY HAVE THE RESOURCES TO "review" in video form, they should just switch to video reviews exlusively and/or give the website to Chris for him to take over for good, and be clear about it.”

You do realize that Chris and Jordan likely do all of the work on these videos and that they don’t live/work in the same place as the rest of the DPR staff, right? They don’t write the written reviews just as the rest of the DPR team doesn’t produce the DPRTV video reviews. So again, this lens (and many others) would never have gotten reviewed AT ALL by DPR if it weren’t for Chris and Jordan doing their video review. That’s life. The photography industry is shrinking and DPR isn’t immune to that. I’m sure they’ve cut staff since 2012 and things aren’t getting better from here.

Probably some wide angle Tilt shift PC lenses.

Yes there are. I've seen a post somewhere about someone using the Sigma 12-24 problem free down to about 15mm when the hood started to show. I guest there are more but haven't tested any myself.

There is only one good way to hold the camera. Most professionals or all do it every day every time. Take a look at TV news and see how pros are holding their cameras. They do it like in the picture BUT both eyes open. Thta is because they were taught that way the best way, that way I was taught and that way I teach my students, I start always about ergonomy.
I do not undestand why Yo want to insult me just because I write differently than You like.
I have saved my life twice while keeping both eyes open when taking pics in crisis Go tell a carpenter to hold his hammer the other way round.
There are some basic ways that pros do and it could make amateurs get much more better images.
But this Dpreview has started to be like Breitbart threads - what ever one writes about photography - there becomes peronal insults as answers.

The violin is taught to be hold a certain way all over the world. Same goes with dentists drill, pianoplayers hands, sculpors chisel and painters brush or carpenters hammer or surgeons blade,, They learn the very basics first, the very basic ergonomics. After that they are cabable of making progress their way, but the basics stay, also the wrong basics -which make it impossible to learn proper ways.
 So why do hatemongers think learning photography is any different than learning sculpting considering ergonomics ?

I always love hearing people whose pride is puffed up like mad tell others that they have explicit knowledge about the only way to do or say a thing. Thank you Jore.

Also, appreciate the preamble. Don't want to get political.

I always love hearing people
..................
But You have nothing to say about ergonomics and way to hold the cam. I don`t write about You, why do You write about me. I´m only concerned that budding photographers learn the right ways to hold the camera. Seems that those issues are not of importance, the main thing in this breitbart is to laugh at those who think different and are professionals.

Breitbart? Dude, you seriously are fixated on politics. And dude, I also is a professional, doing events, sport, wedding, school, and since 2014, still life photography. And guess what? I saw other pros doing both the eye closed and eye open thing. Ain’t diversity cool?

If I am shooting against the Sun, I will definitely close my eye that is not against the (electronic!) viewfinder.

It’s one thing if my camera’s sensor burns, but it’s another thing if my retina does.

@jorepuusa. There's only one way of playing the piano? Why then are there different "schools" of piano playing?

@jorepuusa. There's only one way of playing the piano? Why then are there different "schools" of piano playing?
.................................
This is useles. I wrote "The violin is taught to be hold a certain way all over the world. Same goes with dentists drill, pianoplayers hands
See the word TAUGHT, I did not wrote that there is only one way of playing piano.
-
It is impossible to write anything diffrente in so hostile environment as this, I give up. Now start tearing each other apart, it seems to be new fun of photogaphers, not photography.

But it’s still wrong with “taught”…

I'm pretty sure that the way a carpenter holds a hammer is based on whether they're right handed or left handed.

Likewise, everyone has a dominant eye. For some people it is physically challenging to shoot with their weaker eye.

I'm pretty sure they hold the violin differently in India and the Indian tradition than in the European classical tradition. Which is to say: no, they do not teach people to hold the violin the same way all over the world.

@jorepuusa Hi, personally, I like to close my eye when looking trough the viewfinder, that way I can really just think about the framing.

Here's a quote from legendary cinematographer Robert Richardson about the subject "If you have both eyes available to you, you're scanning a world and it's very hard to put your concentration on the very thing you're supposed to be shooting". The quote is an extract of this video at 9:15 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYF1qLatvhg .

Jore:

“ It is impossible to write anything diffrente in so hostile environment as this, I give up. Now start tearing each other apart, it seems to be new fun of photogaphers, not photography.”

Yesterday you insulted a nationality and its membership, put words into people’s mouths, beat a straw man, and kept castigating people as demons for the joy of setting yourself up as better. When you received pushback you claimed the same cop out: that yours was just another opinion and that people were policing you. Heck, _you_ even made fun of people for spelling and grammar mistakes. I’ll let that sink in.

You are tone deaf. You come in punching and throwing nasty insults and expect sweetness and light in return. Stop it.

Much as I have tried to practice keeping both eyes open when using viewfinder, as soon as I stop thinking about it, I find my non-camera eye closed. It's automatic.

Personally I prefer to keep both eyes shut and draw on the power of the force to create an image. 😀

OK, You all win.
I wrote about how to keep both eyes open, You write about how stupid I am. Had enough. Asked an hour ago Dpreview to remove my account. I don`t want to read here and in my private mail all that hate against my person. Dpreview used to be a place to have conversations about matters in photography, now if one writes about matters he`ll receives masses of personal hate here and in private mails etc.
I´m too old for new world filled with anger and rage coming from pseudonyms.
-
Hope dpreview moderation reacts fast and takes my account down - thank You all for ten years, good bye and stay safe and well. We´ll survive this Corona at some time and then photography will be more important than ever.