Fuji GFX100S 100Mb Medium Format shoots 4K 30p and 10bit, IBIS

"Personally, I am holding out for the upcoming 32K 8x10 sensor cameras, you know they'll be here soon. if the larger the sensor, the better the video camera, why not just go for the classic 8x10 or 9x12" sensor?
They'll probably look like big iPads eventually."

Will you get a free black cloth to put over your head and a chemical flash to go with it?
 
ahalpert said:
Huh? You can get the same FOV on either with different lenses. Except you can get wider rectilinear lenses for FF than are available for S35. And for a cheap guy like me, i can get high quality full-frame lenses and use the full FOV such that the focal length makes sense (and there are many handsome vintage lenses available for the format like my Leica M 21mm which wouldn't be a proper wide angle on S35).

And low-light capability is awesome for doc (and certainly wedding) shooting. Same goes for fx6/fx9.

Horses for courses! I don't see as much value added to MF but then again it's not as much of a sensor area increase as S35->FF. Traditionally (and currently) I think it was used mostly for higher resolution. But as they pack more pixels onto smaller sensors, that advantage may evaporate.
Click to expand...

I already went through this with stills cameras decades ago. FF isn't objectively better than APSC/S35 but is sure as hell costs a lot more, in the bodies and in the fact that you need to drop some major $$ for all new lenses typically. Having shot with both extensively, the objective advantages in FF largely lie with people who do not or cannot light. I shoot documentary mainly and I do try to light it whenever I can but that's mostly the interviews, not the b-roll. That's about it as far as advantages.

Disadvantages? FF negates an entire universe of beautifully made, already owned S35 glass in the requirement that the FF manufacturers are going to make you, even cheap guys like you, typically have to buy all new glass. To what end, besides spending a LOT more money for a tiny advantage that only applies to a small percentage of users? Not saying FF is bad in itself, it's fine, in some little ways, I see the advantage, and for your situation, it may be perfect. But as a whole, for the market, most brilliant marketing move by the industry in decades. For the users, a relative swindle.
 
Last edited:
Early reviews.

https://www.captureintegration.com/fujifilm-resets-the-table-again-with-the-gfx-100s/

A quote :
I’ve had quite a few conversations with photographers who have invested into Fuji and who told me – if the rumors were true about this camera – that they may rely on Fuji as their primary system and maybe they will continue to utilize a smaller format system as well, but … this price point seems to be defining a turning point for a lot of photographers in terms of their gear choices. They want to separate themselves from other photographers (or from their own past) who shoot 35mm or smaller formats. They want to be paid more, they want to produce more, for many of them, this desire has always been there, it has just been difficult to attain. Well, Fuji just made it easier. They’re going to sell a lot of these.
Click to expand...
 
puredrifting said:
Disadvantages? FF negates an entire universe of beautifully made, already owned S35 glass in the requirement that the FF manufacturers are going to make you, even cheap guys like you, typically have to buy all new glass. To what end, besides spending a LOT more money for a tiny advantage that only applies to a small percentage of users? Not saying FF is bad in itself, it's fine, in some little ways, I see the advantage, and for your situation, it may be perfect. But as a whole, for the market, most brilliant marketing move by the industry in decades. For the users, a relative swindle.
Click to expand...

Everything depends on what you're doing...

But not everyone already owns S35 cinema glass. A quick google shows that a used Zeiss CP.2 is $1900. I spent $5k on 4 zooms and 2 primes for E-mount when I got the A7SIII.

And I got badass badass autofocus which you won't get with any S35 lenses (aside from your 18-80.)

I want to get a crop sensor E-mount body for extra reach/magnification too. And the differences between these formats are marginal, not overwhelming.

But I shoot a lot of stuff that can't be lit. And aside from just getting an exposure that you couldn't otherwise in a dark room, it's nice to be able to choose your aperture in an average-lit interior.

So yeah, I think the marketing hype is overblown and it's not necessary for everyone. But there are definitely tangible benefits. And S35 glass is still more expensive, even used, unless you consider the new budget offerings from Meike or whoever, but I won't believe that those are on the same level as the good stuff anyway.
 
ahalpert said:
So yeah, I think the marketing hype is overblown and it's not necessary for everyone.
Click to expand...

And that's kind of what bugs me about it. If FF was presented merely as an alternative to S35 and the two co-exist side by side (which 2020 has sort of made happen, at least a bit, I'm really glad Canon kept the C70 and 300 MKIII S35 and the C500 MKII FF), then I am fine with it.
But before these cameras came out last year, we were definitely heading down a road of "Oh, a S35 camera? What an outdated piece of crap", which is an incredibly ignorant attitude that was definitely proliferating in the industry but I think Canon, BMD and the Pandemic put a halt to that
mindset. Thank you Canon. And BMD, the 12K sensor is S35 although you need REALLY good lenses to get the most out of it.

I'm all for choice but our industry has a history of "deciding" what the hot new thing is and often, the buyers, our colleagues, just go along with it without much logic, critical thinking, using flawed testing, and or inaccurate comparisons
because of manufacturer influence over YouTubers. Then you get things happening like "Tungsten is junk, LED is the only lighting technology that matters", "S35 is outdated, you have to buy a FF camera and all new lenses".

That whole thing just bugs me, that so many YouTubers with no professional experience as DPs or camera ops, have a disproportionate influence on our market and market perceptions
of the tools we use. I've felt that influence myself even though I'm not a YouTuber but have written millions of words about gear over the past couple of decades. I have manufacturer's exert subtle pressure about being able to
have continued access to review gear if reviews are not favorable. Typically that doesn't come from the manufacturer themselves but the repping/marketing firm. I have been "locked out" from certain companies because I
didn't rave about their new product.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Micro.

SMDH
Click to expand...

I agree. Things like this make me think that nobody at Fuji knows anything about professional video shooting, at all because if they did, they would
throw a fit and make them at least go full sized HDMI, although for this level camera, it really should be 12G Mini SDI. I'd pay $1,000.00 more for that
as a cost plus custom build option.
 
All we can do is hope that their eventual market research shows them that NOT having a professional connection negates the product from consideration for most of their target audience.
I'm not really sure who the video audience is for this camera though? Stills, yes for sure.

But for a pro level video shooter, I don't think the potential allure of a MF sensor outweighs all of the quirks like micro HDMI and having to buy all new glass. Think of all of the sheeple who
dumped their S35 cameras and glass at a huge loss to upgrade to FF because it's bigger and bigger must always be better. Imagine the huge loss on all of their FF gear to upgrade to MF and having to buy
yet all new lenses again. I'm almost positive there are users out there that fit this profile who are always chasing the next big thing in gear, losing a bundle in the process. I'm almost convinced there are
more gear hounds who just mainly buy and sell equipment than users who make a living with the gear.
 
I love Fuji but there would be no reason for me to switch from my Panasonic S1 to this. I was shocked how detailed the S1 24mp images are. I can punch in from a medium shot all the way in on someone's eye and its actually usable. Not sure when I'd ever need to do that of course lol. Its also downsampled 6k vs line skipped/pixel binned. Lastly you can get the S1 for around $1500 used.

Micro HDMI sucks too, might as well forget about recording prores RAW as your port is gonna break. Full HDMI on the Panasonic S1......

The GFX100s is very affordable though and for those who need medium format its awesome. The video is just a perk for the hybrid people. Video/photo cameras is a niche market and medium format is even more so.

I really want to see an XH2. If it can be as boundary pushing as the XT3, I can't wait.
 
sgttom said:
I love Fuji but there would be no reason for me to switch from my Panasonic S1 to this. I was shocked how detailed the S1 24mp images are. I can punch in from a medium shot all the way in on someone's eye and its actually usable. Not sure when I'd ever need to do that of course lol. Its also downsampled 6k vs line skipped/pixel binned. Lastly you can get the S1 for around $1500 used.

Micro HDMI sucks too, might as well forget about recording prores RAW as your port is gonna break. Full HDMI on the Panasonic S1......

The GFX100s is very affordable though and for those who need medium format its awesome. The video is just a perk for the hybrid people. Video/photo cameras is a niche market and medium format is even more so.

I really want to see an XH2. If it can be as boundary pushing as the XT3, I can't wait.
Click to expand...

Since they put IBIS in the X-T4, I am beginning to wonder if there will BE an X-H2? Not sure what else they would do to make enough differentiation between an X-H2 and an X-T4?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top