I've had the 50R for a week and I'm really liking it. I come from a background of 4x5 and 6x7 film photographer and for the last few years I've used the d800e and the Sigma DP Merrills. I bought the 50R knowing that the GFX 100S is soon to be announced. I thought long and hard about waiting for that camera, but because of the great deal I got on the 50r ($1000 off regular price) and pixel peeping at some 100MP vs 50MP GFX files I was not convinced that the jump in pixel count was worth $3,000. From pixel peeping the GFX 100 files the main advantage I saw was the absence of moire in certain situations. I have not got any moire with the images I have shot so far, so don't know if I should be worry about this? I do have 44" wide printer, but for huge prints the only photographs folks order are from my scanned 6x7 negs! Anyways, I would appreciate your opinion on the real difference these extra pixels make. Are you really seeing a noticeable difference when printing big? It is easy to get enticed by the extra pixels, but I'm telling myself just to chill on that front and enjoy the 50R! The 50R is the first digital camera that I have used that gives me hope that I might be able to get close to the magic of my old Mamiya 7 system for shooting B&W (still got those lenses and a GFX adapter is on the way!!).
Hondo, thanks for writing. Your comments and observations are well stated and valid. My love affair with the GFX 100 are not simply about pixels, although I have to say it does make a huge difference when printing large (and also introduces some challenges). The entire gestalt about the GFX100 for me makes it the ideal camera. Buttons are strategically placed, customization is excellent and intuitive, color profiles are wonderful, lenses are top-notch, etc. While I own a GFX 50S, I have not worked with the 50R, so I cannot offer anything of value there. Having shot Nikon for 50+ years, as well as Hasselblad digital, I have come to believe it is not about the camera. Just find one you can bond with and shoot away!
Another question Lester, at what size in print is the advantage of GFX 100 apparent over the GFX 50s? With some example files that I found I could only see a noticeable difference when pixel peeping in Photoshop at 400% and with any textures that produced moire (from my reading the GFX 100 is incredibly clean compared to the GFX 50s in regards to moire). The jump from 50MP to 100MP sounds like a lot, but to my eye I am not seeing a significant jump in resolution. I obviously I will need to beg/borrow/rent a 100s when they hit the street and do some big prints. I'm wondering because of the bigger pixels of the 50s compared to the 100, if resolution is more realistically something like 60 MP vs 90 MP? The GFX 100s has me intrigued, but I just wonder - in regards to IQ - if I'm wishing for too much? Note: Just downloaded your eBook. Fantastic! I have been printing fine art for 20 years (lots and lots and lots reproductions of paintings and some (sigh...) photography) and I'm intrigued to read about your workflow and experiences.
Good job sir, really enjoyed your video. I have a question as a hobbist looking into medium format options. Out of the three (gfx 50s, 100 and 50r), which one do you think suits me best? I shoot street, landscape and portrait with a leica film body and a digital body at the moment.
Hi Jimmy. This is a really difficult question to answer. I shoot both GFX 100 and GFX 50S. I would recommend one of these two for you. However, if you are shooting street scenes and portraits, make sure that whichever camera body you choose, you also buy the articulated viewfinder. That will help immensely. Now, if you intend to use your images for the Web or for smaller prints, say up to 20 x 30, then the 50S might work well for you. However, if you ever blow up your prints beyond that, you will benefit from the extra pixels in the GFX 100. Hope this was helpful.
Thanks Lester and Bob. I just purchased the GFX 100 and I am hungry for information. I hear different opinions about whether there is a perceivable difference between shooting 14 bit and 16 bit. Any thoughts?
Bill, (This is Bob answering for Les which I assume he will agree with given we've discussed this 1000 times in the past). As far as I know Les has his camera set to 16bit because storage is cheap and it's certainly not going to make IQ worse in any give circumstance. The downside of 16bit from Les' point of view is that under very specific and limited conditions the frame rate and buffer will be slower when trying to shoot a lot of frames fast. I would bet when Les goes to Africa he'll probably set 14bit on occasion where he needs a rapid sequence of frames. We have tested various cameras (such as Nikons 12bit vs 14 bit and found there is a difference in some scenes but in most one would be hard pressed to see the difference). This is old news and a completely different camera. We've also tested 14bit Nikons a long time ago vs 16 bit Hasselblad medium format where there was a fairly significant difference but obviously that was not apples to apples. Here's the part that I've discussed with Les 1000 times and is worth repeating (especially for photographers that tend to have a lot of experience and take most of their pictures away from home). Test, test, test and test some more. Know your camera backwards and forwards. Understand it's limitations and behavior BEFORE you leave to take "real pictures". I personally test the heck out of any new camera or lens I acquire before using it on subjects that matter. I test every condition I can think of in all sorts of lighting conditions. How far can I push the highlights in camera, how much can recover shadows. More importantly what the limits look like. The other benefit beyond better confidence is that when "in the field" that familiarity will translate to less mistakes. Hope that helped. Ps. Theoretically 16bits will give you better tonality and smoother transitions in the shadows for the most part and possibly a bit more headroom in the highlights... "theoretically". Test.
I think your comment on taking portraits with the articulating viewfinder, making it more like a typical waist level finder, does make the photographer more accessible to the subject. It just might make for a more friendly photographer in the style of the classic Rolleiflex twin lens cameras.
Hi veggiefella! Thanks for your comments. We share our migration from Nikon D850 to the GFX line. I'm confident you will fall in love with the GFX capabilities and files. However, don't expect it to be a wildlife, telephoto performer. But if you are looking for dynamic, emotional wildlife images, nothing can beat the GFX. Best of luck to you.
Hi Jack. The viewfinder is ONLY for the GFX 50 and 100 and will not fit any other camera system. If you look up the Fuji GFX system on their website, you will see it on their products and accessories page. B&H and Adorama also sell it.
A good Q, but difficult to answer. The GFX100 is simply an incredible camera. I now use it for 90% of my work, with the GFX50 taking up the slack. Having 100MP does create "issues" in that it is very exacting and screwups in camera shake, etc are magnified. In that sense it is less forgiving than the 50S. However, if you have reasonably good skills, then the GFX is a terrific choice.
Lester Picker i watched many reviews i even tried it once after i saw your review tow days ago i knew this is the way to go i got gfx100 and gfx50r for hiking and now i know exactly what do you mean ! Thank you a lot looking forward to see more reviews from a master like you
Mr. Picker, I know you said the Fuji 100 and 50 are clearly better then the d850, but would you say that for the cost, the d850 is a good choice? For the 100 it’s $10,000 for the 50 it’s $5500 and the d850 it’s $2700. I would think the Fuji should be a clear winner. What do you think?
Todd, you raise an excellent - and complicated - question. In the way of explanation, I was a Nikon photographer for 50 years before switching to Fuji GFX. I switched not because Fuji is "better" or Nikon is no longer a great camera. In fact, I loved my two Nikon D850s and Nikkor lenses. They were workhorses. It was simply that my photography has evolved more toward a more mindful artistic side. If you are looking to capture wildlife or fast action, the Nikon system would be the way to go. If you are looking for impeccable files, huge DR and a more deliberate type of photography, then the GFX 100 would be an excellent choice. It is really about your direction and goals as a photographer.
Hi Lester, I have one other question. I'm a studio portrait photographer. Currently I use a Nikon D810. I'm very pleased with the camera, but in large prints (120cm by 120cm) I miss the dynamic range and sharpness. I'm planning to upgrade to the Fuji GFX 50S. Hoping to get a much better result in printing. Do you think the upgrade is worth the money? Do I really gain much more dynamic range and sharpness? Or is this step too small and should I save some more to go for the GFX 100.
Hi back to you, Jack. This is a very difficult question. I was a Nikon photographer for 50 years and liked my D810 more than my D800. However, since I switched to Fuji GFX I am stunned by its DR and less "digital" look in the files. Having used both the 50S and the 100 now, I say they are both wonderful cameras. You will be able to generate somewhat larger prints with the 100, but so much of that depends on proper technique. If you wait and save up for the 100, the prices may drop a bit as rumors of a successor start to make the rounds. There is also the possibility of picking up a used one. You need to ask yourself if the tradeoffs of going to medium format are worth it for you. You will also need to adjust to a new aspect ratio.
@@lespicker Thanks again for your quick reply Lester. I's a difficult choice. The aspect ratio can even work in my advantage since I crop most of my images to a square format. At this moment I print to max. 1mtr x 1mtr, Bigger then this, the quality is not acceptable anymore for me. I like to go to 1,5 mtr by 1,5 mtr. If I could have the same quality as the 1 by 1 mtr of my D810, I would be satisfied. Since the sensor is 1,7 times bigger, I hope this might be possible.
@@latjetab Jack, all I can say is that in our studio we print 40" x 60" (approx 1 mtr x 2 mtrs) all the time with superb, limited edition results. Good prints also depend on several other variables. Have you downloaded my FREE fine art print ebook yet? Its distribution is supported by Moab Fine Art Papers and X-Rite calibration tools. Here is the link: fineartprintebook.com/
Lovely videos, thanks for sharing🙏🏻 I wondered about a proper tripod for the gfx50/100 - do you think the gitzo gt2545T can be sturdy enough for those cameras with the 63/45/110?
Ori, I'm not really knowledgeable about the 2545. I own a Gitzo 3541, but have switched to Really Right Stuff tripods. In general, I prefer a really solid tripod, unless I'm hiking long distances or I am working in tight spaces.
Dear Lester - thanks for your response. After extending my research I ditched the travel tripod idea, I would love to know which really right stuff tripod you can recommend about. Much appreciated!
Is it not the case that the GFX 100, having ibis, you can shoot at lower shutter speeds compared to the GFX 50? Because of that ibis, is it not preventing hand shake to affect the image? I thought it was more forgiving than the GFX 50, despite having more megapixels. The other question I have is, are images from both cameras similar in the overall output, in terms of colors, tonality, style, character etc, with the only or biggest difference being the more mp so more cropabiliy and detail when pixel peeping?
You raise good points. First, you can shoot at slower shutter speeds if that is necessary and still hand hold. But to my eyes the difference is minor. Overall, the files are similar, but the 100 does have slightly better dynamic range. The main issue with the 102MP files on the 100, for me at least, is that it allows us to create the large fine art prints that we sell. We not only do 40 x 60" prints, but also wallpapers that are 30 feet wide by 10 feet tall.
I'm guessing it's simply because of the sheer size of the sensor. Medium format have a certain look to it that cannot be replicated by smaller sensors.
Thx for your in-depth info. Can i ask about the filesize. Currently my pano shots ( nikon d 850) are made like 36 shots ( 3 x 12). In post processing photoshop cc i can save up to 4 gig filesize resulting i have to throw away pixels per inch to even save the file. Is there anything to say about the total size of pano’s with the gfx 100 in comparison and if you need to “throw away” very costly pixels? Thx in advance
Sadly you need to save as a "PSB" large document format if your image exceeds 4G which is compatible with nothing else. We've run into this for years given that Les has been shooting panos similar to yours with the D800, Hasselblad H4D-50, D810, etc for a long time.
Thank you Robert. Tbh im a bit confused. If the aspect ratio of the mid format is the same as my current full frame, does this mean that in the end i have to throw even more data ( pixels) away before i can even send the image towards the printershop? Or am i overlooking something here? Is the panorama image with the 100 still sharper, more detailed even after resizing so that it can be saved as TIF. or JPEG in comparison with lets say the D850?
@@martstevensprojectfotograf9078 I am not sure what you are asking. Just to clarify my first answer was only to address the photoshop file size issue. Specifically the only way to save a file larger than 4G is to use the PSB/large file option which is not compatible with other software as far as I am aware. We do all of our printing in house (with minor exception) so I cannot comment on sending super high resolution files to a printer specifically. In general if you are out sourcing your printing and want full resolution on a gigantic print you will probably have to negotiate sending a PSB file to the service assuming their software etc can handle those. As for the second part of the question that I am not sure of what you are asking, I'll take a stab... 1. Yes cameras have differing aspect ratios but so do various pano scenes. 2. When constructing a multi-shot pano at the taking stage it's not a pixel perfect process. Obviously one needs to overlap the shots to some degree horizontally and vertically. 3. When setting up for a particular scene there are trade offs in terms of focal length aspect ratio and number of shots (rows/columns) that are inter related depending on what resolution and what aspect ratio the target end result needs to be. Having stated the obvious I am sure there are various scenes and desired end results where 3:2 is more efficient than 4:3 or the other way around. I would say it comes out as moot when not talking about any specific scene... The end result of all of this is that generally significant increases in megapixels like 50 to 100 or 100 to 200 (25% increase in linear resolution) will benefit multi shot pano shooters only so far as to reduce the number of shots required for the same final result or provide incrementally more resolution with the same resolution. I would say the primary benefit is potential reduction of shots for a similar end resolution when working in real world landscape conditions. I cannot speak for Les but for myself the primary reason to go with higher resolution sensors is single shot resolution given that you can get arbitrary resolution with multi-shot stitching and a 25% linear increase in resolution is only providing a marginal reduction in number of shots for ultra-large multi-shot panos. I hope that helps or if I did not understand what you were asking let me know. Les can tell you how many shots he might save with the 100 vs the 50 GFX (although I will be he hasn't done the math or calculated the overlap ;-) )
You mentioned infinitive. Wish I was just thinking about the other day and if you recall back in the Day of films cameras all of your lens just about had an infinitives Setting.
I owned a Hasselblad H4D-50 several years ago and did not like it. I have tried the X1D, but not the X1D-II. I felt the X1D was a very nice camera, but I still prefer the Fuji GFX 100.
I already shoot mostly in monochrome with the GFX. It is mind blowing. But I do get your point and it would be something to have a dedicated monochrome.
@@Fluxion11 medium format isn’t cheap in digital but you can get the gfx50r instead. That’s like $3500 and a Leica 35mm digital and new film camera is over $5000
@@nickfanzo makes sense, the gtx prices are very reasonable for medium format. I'm now leaning towards the 50r. Long term, I think I'll be better off putting more money towards gtx lenses.
Hi Bill. Good question. For traveling I use a ThinkTank airport roller. For walking around town I use a LowePro Slingshot 300 AW (camera with mounted lens and one extra lens, plus accessories). For all else (hiking, landscape work, etc) I use my trusty MIndshift 180 Pro, the best backpack I have ever owned. I will be doing a RUclips video review of these within the next 2 months, so please stay tuned.
Hey Lester, Love the video. Im an aerial photographer and I wanted to know if you know anything about wireless remote shooting with this camera. We are planning on hooking it up to our octocopter. Thanks.
Jorge: You are a braver man than I am!! The Fuji app will not work as it has very limited distance and, to be frank, does not work that well anyway (at least that's my experience). However, there must be some external options that you can mount on the GFX that will work. Please let us know if and when you find a solution. I'd love to share that with my followers.
Hello Lester..... Until FUJI release a reliable focus stacking can you do a tutorial on how you set yours up and what you use for the variables. Or point me in the direction of a good review of that process for the GFX systems,
If the GFX100 is going to be on a tripod you would better off using a7riv Sony with pixel shift... it just not worth the weight and price... it is a great hand held camera, not great for tripod landscape.., may be they will upgrade their firmware one day to allow pixel shift...
you didn't mention cost of all your equipment, easy to to when you have money to buy whatever, would be nice to tell us cost of your blessed equipment old mate, you know it took me like 20 years to buy mamiya7 11 equipment for film, im now looking at Pentax 645z because its a bargain, love your stuff mate, keep giving me your insight, thank you, I also use Nikon D3 plus primes, whoops didn't look long enough on your video yep, expensive , body 10, lenses 3 each , that makes 20, and USD, im in australia, my goodness, can't afford, omg, love to have, if I have many funds, love your stuff, and your if I win lotto no problem, Im still going Pentax 645z bargain now with manyyyyyyyyyy lenses, what you think old mate?
Gregory, so sorry to be delayed, but this Covid thing has made some things difficult. In any event, I totally see your point about costs. BTW, it's not easy to invest in all this stuff. I see money flying out the window, but as a pro photographer it's necessary to have the right gear for what I want to do. The Pentax 645 is a terrific camera and a real bargain in today's hyper-inflated market. I have one client who does amazing work with his 645. I'm really not a gear head at all. That is one of the reasons I went to medium format. I want to keep things simple and stay mindful instead of shooting 12 or 20 FPS.
Goran, sorry that the video did not meet your expectations. No video can be helpful to everyone. Out of 5,433 views as of today (8/28/20), your thumbs down is only one of two. If you follow me on Facebook and go to my website you will see examples of my GFX images. Also, if you join the Fuji GFX Facebook page you will see images that I contributed. Best of luck with your photography!
@@lespicker what a classy response, I cannot afford that camera, coming from a very poor background, but that video was very informative and keept me interested. Thumb up Lester.
@@mrMitrycz Thanks, Adam. So nice of you to say that. And remember, it is not the camera that makes the image, it is the eye of the photographer. You will succeed with whatever camera you use.
Goran, If the nikon gorilla picture is good and it's what needed, then buying gfx100 is waste of money too. Nikon is enough for any paid work. And sony is even better.
I am proud to be a fuji shooter. They are an amazing camera maker, especially now.
I've had the 50R for a week and I'm really liking it. I come from a background of 4x5 and 6x7 film photographer and for the last few years I've used the d800e and the Sigma DP Merrills. I bought the 50R knowing that the GFX 100S is soon to be announced. I thought long and hard about waiting for that camera, but because of the great deal I got on the 50r ($1000 off regular price) and pixel peeping at some 100MP vs 50MP GFX files I was not convinced that the jump in pixel count was worth $3,000. From pixel peeping the GFX 100 files the main advantage I saw was the absence of moire in certain situations. I have not got any moire with the images I have shot so far, so don't know if I should be worry about this? I do have 44" wide printer, but for huge prints the only photographs folks order are from my scanned 6x7 negs! Anyways, I would appreciate your opinion on the real difference these extra pixels make. Are you really seeing a noticeable difference when printing big? It is easy to get enticed by the extra pixels, but I'm telling myself just to chill on that front and enjoy the 50R! The 50R is the first digital camera that I have used that gives me hope that I might be able to get close to the magic of my old Mamiya 7 system for shooting B&W (still got those lenses and a GFX adapter is on the way!!).
Hondo, thanks for writing. Your comments and observations are well stated and valid. My love affair with the GFX 100 are not simply about pixels, although I have to say it does make a huge difference when printing large (and also introduces some challenges). The entire gestalt about the GFX100 for me makes it the ideal camera. Buttons are strategically placed, customization is excellent and intuitive, color profiles are wonderful, lenses are top-notch, etc. While I own a GFX 50S, I have not worked with the 50R, so I cannot offer anything of value there. Having shot Nikon for 50+ years, as well as Hasselblad digital, I have come to believe it is not about the camera. Just find one you can bond with and shoot away!
Another question Lester, at what size in print is the advantage of GFX 100 apparent over the GFX 50s? With some example files that I found I could only see a noticeable difference when pixel peeping in Photoshop at 400% and with any textures that produced moire (from my reading the GFX 100 is incredibly clean compared to the GFX 50s in regards to moire). The jump from 50MP to 100MP sounds like a lot, but to my eye I am not seeing a significant jump in resolution. I obviously I will need to beg/borrow/rent a 100s when they hit the street and do some big prints. I'm wondering because of the bigger pixels of the 50s compared to the 100, if resolution is more realistically something like 60 MP vs 90 MP? The GFX 100s has me intrigued, but I just wonder - in regards to IQ - if I'm wishing for too much? Note: Just downloaded your eBook. Fantastic! I have been printing fine art for 20 years (lots and lots and lots reproductions of paintings and some (sigh...) photography) and I'm intrigued to read about your workflow and experiences.
I watched and immediately subscribed!
Thanks, Renato.
Good job sir, really enjoyed your video. I have a question as a hobbist looking into medium format options. Out of the three (gfx 50s, 100 and 50r), which one do you think suits me best? I shoot street, landscape and portrait with a leica film body and a digital body at the moment.
Hi Jimmy. This is a really difficult question to answer. I shoot both GFX 100 and GFX 50S. I would recommend one of these two for you. However, if you are shooting street scenes and portraits, make sure that whichever camera body you choose, you also buy the articulated viewfinder. That will help immensely. Now, if you intend to use your images for the Web or for smaller prints, say up to 20 x 30, then the 50S might work well for you. However, if you ever blow up your prints beyond that, you will benefit from the extra pixels in the GFX 100. Hope this was helpful.
Thanks Lester and Bob. I just purchased the GFX 100 and I am hungry for information. I hear different opinions about whether there is a perceivable difference between shooting 14 bit and 16 bit. Any thoughts?
Bill, (This is Bob answering for Les which I assume he will agree with given we've discussed this 1000 times in the past).
As far as I know Les has his camera set to 16bit because storage is cheap and it's certainly not going to make IQ worse in any give circumstance. The downside of 16bit from Les' point of view is that under very specific and limited conditions the frame rate and buffer will be slower when trying to shoot a lot of frames fast. I would bet when Les goes to Africa he'll probably set 14bit on occasion where he needs a rapid sequence of frames.
We have tested various cameras (such as Nikons 12bit vs 14 bit and found there is a difference in some scenes but in most one would be hard pressed to see the difference). This is old news and a completely different camera. We've also tested 14bit Nikons a long time ago vs 16 bit Hasselblad medium format where there was a fairly significant difference but obviously that was not apples to apples.
Here's the part that I've discussed with Les 1000 times and is worth repeating (especially for photographers that tend to have a lot of experience and take most of their pictures away from home). Test, test, test and test some more. Know your camera backwards and forwards. Understand it's limitations and behavior BEFORE you leave to take "real pictures". I personally test the heck out of any new camera or lens I acquire before using it on subjects that matter. I test every condition I can think of in all sorts of lighting conditions. How far can I push the highlights in camera, how much can recover shadows. More importantly what the limits look like. The other benefit beyond better confidence is that when "in the field" that familiarity will translate to less mistakes.
Hope that helped.
Ps. Theoretically 16bits will give you better tonality and smoother transitions in the shadows for the most part and possibly a bit more headroom in the highlights... "theoretically". Test.
I think your comment on taking portraits with the articulating viewfinder, making it more like a typical waist level finder, does make the photographer more accessible to the subject. It just might make for a more friendly photographer in the style of the classic Rolleiflex twin lens cameras.
Yes, I even remember using that Rolleiflex camera!
Totally agree with the focus bracketing improvement you suggested. Phase One does have this feature.
Thanks Lester for the in-depth look at the GFX 100, my GFX 100 is coming tomorrow... Coming from Nikon D850... Really looking forward to shooting!
Hi veggiefella! Thanks for your comments. We share our migration from Nikon D850 to the GFX line. I'm confident you will fall in love with the GFX capabilities and files. However, don't expect it to be a wildlife, telephoto performer. But if you are looking for dynamic, emotional wildlife images, nothing can beat the GFX. Best of luck to you.
@@lespicker Thanks!
great information! please keep making more videos like these.
Thanks, AK. We are trying to do one each week.
Hi Lester, Thanks for the indetail review. Loved watching it. Can you tell me a little bit more about the viewfinder. Name and type? Thank you.
Hi Jack. The viewfinder is ONLY for the GFX 50 and 100 and will not fit any other camera system. If you look up the Fuji GFX system on their website, you will see it on their products and accessories page. B&H and Adorama also sell it.
Such a professional review thank you , do you think is it worth to upgrade from gfx50 to gfx100 basing on IQ alone ?
A good Q, but difficult to answer. The GFX100 is simply an incredible camera. I now use it for 90% of my work, with the GFX50 taking up the slack. Having 100MP does create "issues" in that it is very exacting and screwups in camera shake, etc are magnified. In that sense it is less forgiving than the 50S. However, if you have reasonably good skills, then the GFX is a terrific choice.
Lester Picker i watched many reviews i even tried it once after i saw your review tow days ago i knew this is the way to go i got gfx100 and gfx50r for hiking and now i know exactly what do you mean ! Thank you a lot looking forward to see more reviews from a master like you
@@ggclawyer So glad it helped!
Mr. Picker, I know you said the Fuji 100 and 50 are clearly better then the d850, but would you say that for the cost, the d850 is a good choice? For the 100 it’s $10,000 for the 50 it’s $5500 and the d850 it’s $2700. I would think the Fuji should be a clear winner. What do you think?
Todd, you raise an excellent - and complicated - question. In the way of explanation, I was a Nikon photographer for 50 years before switching to Fuji GFX. I switched not because Fuji is "better" or Nikon is no longer a great camera. In fact, I loved my two Nikon D850s and Nikkor lenses. They were workhorses. It was simply that my photography has evolved more toward a more mindful artistic side. If you are looking to capture wildlife or fast action, the Nikon system would be the way to go. If you are looking for impeccable files, huge DR and a more deliberate type of photography, then the GFX 100 would be an excellent choice. It is really about your direction and goals as a photographer.
Hi Lester,
I have one other question. I'm a studio portrait photographer. Currently I use a Nikon D810.
I'm very pleased with the camera, but in large prints (120cm by 120cm) I miss the dynamic range and sharpness.
I'm planning to upgrade to the Fuji GFX 50S. Hoping to get a much better result in printing.
Do you think the upgrade is worth the money? Do I really gain much more dynamic range and sharpness?
Or is this step too small and should I save some more to go for the GFX 100.
Hi back to you, Jack. This is a very difficult question. I was a Nikon photographer for 50 years and liked my D810 more than my D800. However, since I switched to Fuji GFX I am stunned by its DR and less "digital" look in the files. Having used both the 50S and the 100 now, I say they are both wonderful cameras. You will be able to generate somewhat larger prints with the 100, but so much of that depends on proper technique. If you wait and save up for the 100, the prices may drop a bit as rumors of a successor start to make the rounds. There is also the possibility of picking up a used one. You need to ask yourself if the tradeoffs of going to medium format are worth it for you. You will also need to adjust to a new aspect ratio.
@@lespicker Thanks again for your quick reply Lester. I's a difficult choice. The aspect ratio can even work in my advantage since I crop most of my images to a square format. At this moment I print to max. 1mtr x 1mtr, Bigger then this, the quality is not acceptable anymore for me.
I like to go to 1,5 mtr by 1,5 mtr. If I could have the same quality as the 1 by 1 mtr of my D810, I would be satisfied.
Since the sensor is 1,7 times bigger, I hope this might be possible.
@@latjetab Jack, all I can say is that in our studio we print 40" x 60" (approx 1 mtr x 2 mtrs) all the time with superb, limited edition results. Good prints also depend on several other variables. Have you downloaded my FREE fine art print ebook yet? Its distribution is supported by Moab Fine Art Papers and X-Rite calibration tools. Here is the link: fineartprintebook.com/
@@lespicker Thank you for sharing this. I will study it carefully. Thanks again.
Lovely videos, thanks for sharing🙏🏻 I wondered about a proper tripod for the gfx50/100 - do you think the gitzo gt2545T can be sturdy enough for those cameras with the 63/45/110?
Ori, I'm not really knowledgeable about the 2545. I own a Gitzo 3541, but have switched to Really Right Stuff tripods. In general, I prefer a really solid tripod, unless I'm hiking long distances or I am working in tight spaces.
Dear Lester - thanks for your response. After extending my research I ditched the travel tripod idea, I would love to know which really right stuff tripod you can recommend about. Much appreciated!
Amazing full review.Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!
This was interesting, thanks. Would’ve been better if ‘Bob’ hadn’t been interrupting off camera every few minutes though.
Thanks, Dave. You are not alone pointing this out. Sorry for that. We are working hard at "upping our game".
If there was a problem with Bob ,to me ,all he would have to done is move upfront with you because I did enjoy his input and it did not bother me.
Bob was good. I do think that it would be better to see him if hes going to interact. Love the presentation. Thank you!
Is it not the case that the GFX 100, having ibis, you can shoot at lower shutter speeds compared to the GFX 50? Because of that ibis, is it not preventing hand shake to affect the image? I thought it was more forgiving than the GFX 50, despite having more megapixels.
The other question I have is, are images from both cameras similar in the overall output, in terms of colors, tonality, style, character etc, with the only or biggest difference being the more mp so more cropabiliy and detail when pixel peeping?
You raise good points. First, you can shoot at slower shutter speeds if that is necessary and still hand hold. But to my eyes the difference is minor. Overall, the files are similar, but the 100 does have slightly better dynamic range. The main issue with the 102MP files on the 100, for me at least, is that it allows us to create the large fine art prints that we sell. We not only do 40 x 60" prints, but also wallpapers that are 30 feet wide by 10 feet tall.
@@lespicker oh I see, yes. I totally get the point you're making. Thank you very much
i would like to ask, most of your art work in black and white, how come you went for the fuji gfx100 not the leica monochrom m10
I'm guessing it's simply because of the sheer size of the sensor. Medium format have a certain look to it that cannot be replicated by smaller sensors.
Thx for your in-depth info. Can i ask about the filesize. Currently my pano shots ( nikon d 850) are made like 36 shots ( 3 x 12). In post processing photoshop cc i can save up to 4 gig filesize resulting i have to throw away pixels per inch to even save the file. Is there anything to say about the total size of pano’s with the gfx 100 in comparison and if you need to “throw away” very costly pixels? Thx in advance
Sadly you need to save as a "PSB" large document format if your image exceeds 4G which is compatible with nothing else. We've run into this for years given that Les has been shooting panos similar to yours with the D800, Hasselblad H4D-50, D810, etc for a long time.
Thank you Robert. Tbh im a bit confused. If the aspect ratio of the mid format is the same as my current full frame, does this mean that in the end i have to throw even more data ( pixels) away before i can even send the image towards the printershop? Or am i overlooking something here? Is the panorama image with the 100 still sharper, more detailed even after resizing so that it can be saved as TIF. or JPEG in comparison
with lets say the D850?
@@martstevensprojectfotograf9078 I am not sure what you are asking. Just to clarify my first answer was only to address the photoshop file size issue. Specifically the only way to save a file larger than 4G is to use the PSB/large file option which is not compatible with other software as far as I am aware.
We do all of our printing in house (with minor exception) so I cannot comment on sending super high resolution files to a printer specifically. In general if you are out sourcing your printing and want full resolution on a gigantic print you will probably have to negotiate sending a PSB file to the service assuming their software etc can handle those.
As for the second part of the question that I am not sure of what you are asking, I'll take a stab...
1. Yes cameras have differing aspect ratios but so do various pano scenes.
2. When constructing a multi-shot pano at the taking stage it's not a pixel perfect process. Obviously one needs to overlap the shots to some degree horizontally and vertically.
3. When setting up for a particular scene there are trade offs in terms of focal length aspect ratio and number of shots (rows/columns) that are inter related depending on what resolution and what aspect ratio the target end result needs to be.
Having stated the obvious I am sure there are various scenes and desired end results where 3:2 is more efficient than 4:3 or the other way around. I would say it comes out as moot when not talking about any specific scene...
The end result of all of this is that generally significant increases in megapixels like 50 to 100 or 100 to 200 (25% increase in linear resolution) will benefit multi shot pano shooters only so far as to reduce the number of shots required for the same final result or provide incrementally more resolution with the same resolution. I would say the primary benefit is potential reduction of shots for a similar end resolution when working in real world landscape conditions.
I cannot speak for Les but for myself the primary reason to go with higher resolution sensors is single shot resolution given that you can get arbitrary resolution with multi-shot stitching and a 25% linear increase in resolution is only providing a marginal reduction in number of shots for ultra-large multi-shot panos.
I hope that helps or if I did not understand what you were asking let me know. Les can tell you how many shots he might save with the 100 vs the 50 GFX (although I will be he hasn't done the math or calculated the overlap ;-) )
You mentioned infinitive. Wish I was just thinking about the other day and if you recall back in the Day of films cameras all of your lens just about had an infinitives Setting.
Have you ever shoot with Hasselblad X1D II camera ?
I owned a Hasselblad H4D-50 several years ago and did not like it. I have tried the X1D, but not the X1D-II. I felt the X1D was a very nice camera, but I still prefer the Fuji GFX 100.
Great informative video thanks 🙏
Thanks!
Can you imagine a GFX 100 monochrome 🤯🤯🤯🤯, mind blasting.🇨🇦
I already shoot mostly in monochrome with the GFX. It is mind blowing. But I do get your point and it would be something to have a dedicated monochrome.
It’s an amazing camera
I'd love this system, but the 20k investment is a hard pill to swallow. Im still kicking it around...
@@Fluxion11 medium format isn’t cheap in digital but you can get the gfx50r instead. That’s like $3500 and a Leica 35mm digital and new film camera is over $5000
@@nickfanzo makes sense, the gtx prices are very reasonable for medium format. I'm now leaning towards the 50r. Long term, I think I'll be better off putting more money towards gtx lenses.
Les, what camera bag do you use with the GFX 100?
Hi Bill. Good question. For traveling I use a ThinkTank airport roller. For walking around town I use a LowePro Slingshot 300 AW (camera with mounted lens and one extra lens, plus accessories). For all else (hiking, landscape work, etc) I use my trusty MIndshift 180 Pro, the best backpack I have ever owned. I will be doing a RUclips video review of these within the next 2 months, so please stay tuned.
Bill, next Tuesday (May 26, 2020 @ 2:00 PM EST) I will be doing a short webinar on the camera bags I use, on my RUclips channel.
Thank you Les, enjoyed your GFX discussion!
Hey Lester, Love the video. Im an aerial photographer and I wanted to know if you know anything about wireless remote shooting with this camera. We are planning on hooking it up to our octocopter. Thanks.
Jorge: You are a braver man than I am!! The Fuji app will not work as it has very limited distance and, to be frank, does not work that well anyway (at least that's my experience). However, there must be some external options that you can mount on the GFX that will work. Please let us know if and when you find a solution. I'd love to share that with my followers.
@@lespicker Haha no worries. Will keep you updated if I find any.
I have the 50s and love it but I am hoping that the next camera is 150mp. I will upgrade then.
120mp aprox
Hello Lester..... Until FUJI release a reliable focus stacking can you do a tutorial on how you set yours up and what you use for the variables. Or point me in the direction of a good review of that process for the GFX systems,
We have already planned to do one, so please stay tuned!
I wanna know about printing please
who is your old mate with you?
If the GFX100 is going to be on a tripod you would better off using a7riv Sony with pixel shift... it just not worth the weight and price... it is a great hand held camera, not great for tripod landscape.., may be they will upgrade their firmware one day to allow pixel shift...
you didn't mention cost of all your equipment, easy to to when you have money to buy whatever, would be nice to tell us cost of your blessed equipment old mate, you know it took me like 20 years to buy mamiya7 11 equipment for film, im now looking at Pentax 645z because its a bargain, love your stuff mate, keep giving me your insight, thank you, I also use Nikon D3 plus primes, whoops didn't look long enough on your video
yep, expensive , body 10, lenses 3 each , that makes 20, and USD, im in australia, my goodness, can't afford, omg, love to have, if I have many funds,
love your stuff, and your if I win lotto no problem, Im still going Pentax 645z bargain now with manyyyyyyyyyy lenses, what you think old mate?
Gregory, so sorry to be delayed, but this Covid thing has made some things difficult. In any event, I totally see your point about costs. BTW, it's not easy to invest in all this stuff. I see money flying out the window, but as a pro photographer it's necessary to have the right gear for what I want to do. The Pentax 645 is a terrific camera and a real bargain in today's hyper-inflated market. I have one client who does amazing work with his 645. I'm really not a gear head at all. That is one of the reasons I went to medium format. I want to keep things simple and stay mindful instead of shooting 12 or 20 FPS.
Arabic language greeting ❤️❤️🙏 very nice from you 💐💐
Qassem Aleid Afwan, Sadeeki
One hour talking about places and camera and not a single picture sample except goorila that was shoot with a diferent camera realy waist of time
Goran, sorry that the video did not meet your expectations. No video can be helpful to everyone. Out of 5,433 views as of today (8/28/20), your thumbs down is only one of two. If you follow me on Facebook and go to my website you will see examples of my GFX images. Also, if you join the Fuji GFX Facebook page you will see images that I contributed. Best of luck with your photography!
@@lespicker what a classy response, I cannot afford that camera, coming from a very poor background, but that video was very informative and keept me interested. Thumb up Lester.
@@mrMitrycz Thanks, Adam. So nice of you to say that. And remember, it is not the camera that makes the image, it is the eye of the photographer. You will succeed with whatever camera you use.
Goran, If the nikon gorilla picture is good and it's what needed, then buying gfx100 is waste of money too. Nikon is enough for any paid work. And sony is even better.
should practice your content before making a video sounds lost
It's a Livestream with people asking him as they go.