Industry News

Industry News: Fujifilm to launch the GFX 100S this month

This site contains affiliate links to products and services. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.

It looks like Fujifilm is ready to update their medium format GFX lineup. It looks like Fuji is bringing a new 102mp BSI image sensor and an aggressive launch price of $5999 USD.

Rumoured Fujifilm GFX 100S Specifications:

  • 102MP 43.8 x 32.9mm medium format  BSI CMOS Sensor
  • Smaller body compared to the Fujifilm GFX 100
  • Phase detection
  • IBIS (5-axis sensor-shift image stabilization)
  • Price: $5,999USD
  • To be announced at the end of this month

Fujifilm is also planning a new GF lens according to Photo Rumors in the form of a GF 80mm f/1.7 WR.

 

If this has most of the capabilities of the first one in the smaller form factor or possibly a few improvements this could be a very compelling option for many landscape photographers. Especially with the price of many full frame cameras pushing into the $4000 range.

I'm going to have to buy a whole set of new lenses at some point for the R5, this may be a time to re-think and look into (small) medium format.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
Last year I got a good deal at B&H on a "used" one for $8K.

Honestly, I could hardly tell it had been unboxed before much less used...I got a used 120 Macro lens they have for it too and at the time the 50mm was on sale for $499.

This thing has been a ton of fun...and have been enjoying adapting lenses for it, one of the fun things, is using the Metabones speedbooster adapter to put my true Medium format Hasselblad lenses on this. That focal reducer allows me to use the full lens circle on the smaller medium format digital sensor and I gain a stop of light.

I've also adapted some EF lenses and other ones to this camera and MANY of them seem to cover the sensor, and if there is any vignetting, it's minimal and easily fixable in post.

I'm still curious if Canon would ever venture into the digital medium format area...if not, why not?

It appears that Fuji will corner the market on this if they keep this trend up....and with the form factor coming in coupled with prices....this could be inviting for a lot of folks.

The IBIS really helps out with that large sensor....easy to hand hold shots you'd not think you could get away with on a 100MP sensor.

I've been saving...looking forward to that new fast 80mm lens they have coming out for the platform.

Exciting times we live in.....

cayenne
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
468
541
USA
medium format does call to me...but honestly there are enough tests out there that show many of the new 35mm sensors and lenses approaching MF resolution and optical performance. Maybe someday though.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

BirdDudeJosh

I'm New Here
Feb 6, 2020
19
17
I literally just sold my GFX50R this last weekend. The IQ was amazing but the AF wasn't and only being able to get to 350mm or 299mm in the reverse 35mm crop just didn't work for me. I could crop really deep but in the end a 350mm f5.6 cropped hard vs 600mm or 800mm on FF with much better AF and the full frame R5 and A7RIV work better for me. The ergonomics on the 50r aren't great and battery life wasn't great either. I suspect the battery life will still be poor on the new model especially adding a better EVF and IBIS to it. Hopefully this new one doesn't top out at like 1.5 frames per second. The lenses are all light but really huge and the 1.4x TC was $850. I did manage to get over 15K actuations in under a year so I did give it a fair shot. In the end it just wasn't much fun to shoot with something that slow and having to fight the AF even though the results were always really good.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
I literally just sold my GFX50R this last weekend. The IQ was amazing but the AF wasn't and only being able to get to 350mm or 299mm in the reverse 35mm crop just didn't work for me. I could crop really deep but in the end a 350mm f5.6 cropped hard vs 600mm or 800mm on FF with much better AF and the full frame R5 and A7RIV work better for me. The ergonomics on the 50r aren't great and battery life wasn't great either. I suspect the battery life will still be poor on the new model especially adding a better EVF and IBIS to it. Hopefully this new one doesn't top out at like 1.5 frames per second. The lenses are all light but really huge and the 1.4x TC was $850. I did manage to get over 15K actuations in under a year so I did give it a fair shot. In the end it just wasn't much fun to shoot with something that slow and having to fight the AF even though the results were always really good.

IT depends a lot on your shooting needs and style.

I"m not the type of person to just have ONE camera...I have my 35mm (currently 5D3) and lenses but I love the GFX100 for the unique things it can do.

Whenever we get out of covid, I plan to bring both to shoot concerts....I could do wider on the gfx100 and crop in as needed, and have the longer 70-200 on the 5D3....use that one for speed and for faster shooting....the MF camera for wider shots and all when I didn't need faster frames per second...

Hell, if I were in better shape I"d try to sneak in the Leica M10M too for extreme low light performance....but that's pushing things.

I tend to not spend much money on small things...I save and save and save till I can drop a large amount on a big toy or tool I want.

And, over time, you can get various cameras that suit various needs.

Just like one lens or focal length for every job...I like a different camera for shooting different things that it excels at.

LOL...I'll not even get into the medium format film cameras I play with, but I will say that 6x17 images DO have a special place in my heart that none of these digital ones can come close to.

But it depends on your wants and needs.

Thank goodness we live in this age of so much choice!!

C
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
996
833
www.flickr.com
Last year I got a good deal at B&H on a "used" one for $8K.

Honestly, I could hardly tell it had been unboxed before much less used...I got a used 120 Macro lens they have for it too and at the time the 50mm was on sale for $499.

This thing has been a ton of fun...and have been enjoying adapting lenses for it, one of the fun things, is using the Metabones speedbooster adapter to put my true Medium format Hasselblad lenses on this. That focal reducer allows me to use the full lens circle on the smaller medium format digital sensor and I gain a stop of light.

I've also adapted some EF lenses and other ones to this camera and MANY of them seem to cover the sensor, and if there is any vignetting, it's minimal and easily fixable in post.

I'm still curious if Canon would ever venture into the digital medium format area...if not, why not?

It appears that Fuji will corner the market on this if they keep this trend up....and with the form factor coming in coupled with prices....this could be inviting for a lot of folks.

The IBIS really helps out with that large sensor....easy to hand hold shots you'd not think you could get away with on a 100MP sensor.

I've been saving...looking forward to that new fast 80mm lens they have coming out for the platform.

Exciting times we live in.....

cayenne
If the R5s rumour is correct then the ~100mp would be similar. Yes, the pixel size is different but would that be enough of a benefit compared to the range of EF/RF lenses/flash/AF/fps etc system that is already available with Canon. I can't see Canon creating a new medium format camera and lens system. The GFX100x will move MF down the price range taking some sales from full frame but it will still remain a niche.
What is the cost difference for MF lenses vs the equivalent RF lenses?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cayenne

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
740
885
IT depends a lot on your shooting needs and style.

I"m not the type of person to just have ONE camera...I have my 35mm (currently 5D3) and lenses but I love the GFX100 for the unique things it can do.

Whenever we get out of covid, I plan to bring both to shoot concerts....I could do wider on the gfx100 and crop in as needed, and have the longer 70-200 on the 5D3....use that one for speed and for faster shooting....the MF camera for wider shots and all when I didn't need faster frames per second...

Hell, if I were in better shape I"d try to sneak in the Leica M10M too for extreme low light performance....but that's pushing things.

I tend to not spend much money on small things...I save and save and save till I can drop a large amount on a big toy or tool I want.

And, over time, you can get various cameras that suit various needs.

Just like one lens or focal length for every job...I like a different camera for shooting different things that it excels at.

LOL...I'll not even get into the medium format film cameras I play with, but I will say that 6x17 images DO have a special place in my heart that none of these digital ones can come close to.

But it depends on your wants and needs.

Thank goodness we live in this age of so much choice!!

C

Let the record state that Cayenne fully supports me buying 3 separate film cameras in the last 12 months, all in different formats, including a 6x12 Holga Wide medium format panoramic camera ;)
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
If the R5s rumour is correct then the ~100mp would be similar. Yes, the pixel size is different but would that be enough of a benefit compared to the range of EF/RF lenses/flash/AF/fps etc system that is already available with Canon. I can't see Canon creating a new medium format camera and lens system. The GFX100x will move MF down the price range taking some sales from full frame but it will still remain a niche.
What is the cost difference for MF lenses vs the equivalent RF lenses?

Well, I"ve only really bought Canon L lenses....and then looking at the price for the good RF mount lenses, I"d say the prices are in the same ballpark for the Fuji MF lens line.

So far, the GF lenses seem to be of very high quality and give great rendering from what my feeble eyes can tell.

I've not had a chance to pay with the RF lenses yet, FYI.

But I'd say, in general, the GF line of lenses in cost are comparable to the RF line of lenses. Of course with MF, they will tend to be a bit slower, and not quite as many choices.

However,r with the IBIS if the gfx100, I"ve not found the slower lenses to be an impediment to shooting handheld at all.

Again, different tools.....whatever works best.
;)

Isn't GAS fun?

C
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
Let the record state that Cayenne fully supports me buying 3 separate film cameras in the last 12 months, all in different formats, including a 6x12 Holga Wide medium format panoramic camera ;)


I not only support this behavior...I encourage it enough to where it becomes the "norm".
;)

Sounds like a lot of fun there!! I really am enjoying the different formats...they do seem to make me think (when I"m planning some images) on which tool would be best for the job and sometimes...the different formats drive what I plan to shoot.

And if nothing else, if no inspiration that day....just grab one at random and see where it leads me to shoot that day.
:D

cayenne
 

Neutral

EOS RP
Oct 19, 2012
346
21
IT depends a lot on your shooting needs and style.

I"m not the type of person to just have ONE camera...I have my 35mm (currently 5D3) and lenses but I love the GFX100 for the unique things it can do.

Whenever we get out of covid, I plan to bring both to shoot concerts....I could do wider on the gfx100 and crop in as needed, and have the longer 70-200 on the 5D3....use that one for speed and for faster shooting....the MF camera for wider shots and all when I didn't need faster frames per second...

Hell, if I were in better shape I"d try to sneak in the Leica M10M too for extreme low light performance....but that's pushing things.

I tend to not spend much money on small things...I save and save and save till I can drop a large amount on a big toy or tool I want.

And, over time, you can get various cameras that suit various needs.

Just like one lens or focal length for every job...I like a different camera for shooting different things that it excels at.

LOL...I'll not even get into the medium format film cameras I play with, but I will say that 6x17 images DO have a special place in my heart that none of these digital ones can come close to.

But it depends on your wants and needs.

Thank goodness we live in this age of so much choice!!

C
The same as me
Not a person to have one camera brand, also the same that better not to waste money on small things and better save and spend on big toys.
Have GFX100 since its release in 2019 and all the time continue to enjoy it. GF lenses are excellent, image quality is superb, last firmware updates significantly improved AF. IBIS is excellent, I just enjoy using this camera all the time and it also saves a lot of time providing a lot of flexibility in what I am doing and practically eliminating need of post processing. No problem with file sizes , C1 on my 7 years laptop handles them with no problems, the same as Affinity Photo which for few monthes I use instead of Photoshop. Nothing in FF world could compare in image quality. And it is lighter then my old 1DSm2.
Fuji did a smart thing moving into MF and if they will release new one in smaller body and lower cost that could be strong competitor to high end FF mirrorles cameras.
Now with new GF45-100mm lens it is my main tool for fashion and portrait shoots instead of Sony a7rIV with gm24-70mm.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,522
5,779
I hope Fuji would also release a monochrome version of this new GFX 100S.
Why? What advantage do you see in a dedicated B&W sensor over the same sensor with a CFA and desaturated? Personally I find having the channel and color controls available in post when developing B&W images vastly superior to dedicated B&W sensor images.
 

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
Why? What advantage do you see in a dedicated B&W sensor over the same sensor with a CFA and desaturated? Personally I find having the channel and color controls available in post when developing B&W images vastly superior to dedicated B&W sensor images.

Well, a few months ago, I hocked a kidney and got a Leica M10 Monochrom.

From shooting it so far, I believe the advantages they tout about a monochrome sensor.

With no bayer filter on it, you get more light directly on the sensor, and it can make them into a LOW light monster. I've found that to be true so far.
This thing can also give me useable images at ISO of 50K and at 100K...the grains are there, but it often looks like film grain....but you can get very usable images at very high ISOs regularly.

This has to to, I think, with the various green, red and blue filters on the color array blocking some light hitting the sensor...that is missing on the bare sensor on monochrome shooters?

It seems a bit sharper too...I don't remember what causes this exactly...maybe some sort of anti-aliasing that a color filtered sensor needs?
As I understand it, this is missing on the monochrome sensor.

So, there appears to be some distinct advantages of having a pure sensor without the color filter array on top of it affecting light before it hits the sensor itself.

Yes, you do have to watch to make sure you don't blow your highlights out, but if you've ever shot color negative film, you're used to this...not that big a deal.

So, expose to keep your highlights sane....and so far, I've found I have HUGE latitude in post to bring up and recover shadows if need be.

The contrast on the camera is amazing too, and that's even with a lens that's not $$$ like most Leica stuff.
I started with a voigtlander Ultron f/2 lens, I keep a yellow filter on it at all times and so far, it has really changed my views on how I shoot images.

I"m starring to train myself to "see" scenes in terms of different levels of luminance...and learning to try to ignore color to see the luminance.

It is very different but fun to learn so far.

I know it is new to me, but lately I'm really starting to think Paul Simon had it wrong....I"m starting to think the world looks better in Black and White!!!
:D

cayenne
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,522
5,779
Well, a few months ago, I hocked a kidney and got a Leica M10 Monochrom.

From shooting it so far, I believe the advantages they tout about a monochrome sensor.

With no bayer filter on it, you get more light directly on the sensor, and it can make them into a LOW light monster. I've found that to be true so far.
This thing can also give me useable images at ISO of 50K and at 100K...the grains are there, but it often looks like film grain....but you can get very usable images at very high ISOs regularly.

This has to to, I think, with the various green, red and blue filters on the color array blocking some light hitting the sensor...that is missing on the bare sensor on monochrome shooters?

It seems a bit sharper too...I don't remember what causes this exactly...maybe some sort of anti-aliasing that a color filtered sensor needs?
As I understand it, this is missing on the monochrome sensor.

So, there appears to be some distinct advantages of having a pure sensor without the color filter array on top of it affecting light before it hits the sensor itself.

Yes, you do have to watch to make sure you don't blow your highlights out, but if you've ever shot color negative film, you're used to this...not that big a deal.

So, expose to keep your highlights sane....and so far, I've found I have HUGE latitude in post to bring up and recover shadows if need be.

The contrast on the camera is amazing too, and that's even with a lens that's not $$$ like most Leica stuff.
I started with a voigtlander Ultron f/2 lens, I keep a yellow filter on it at all times and so far, it has really changed my views on how I shoot images.

I"m starring to train myself to "see" scenes in terms of different levels of luminance...and learning to try to ignore color to see the luminance.

It is very different but fun to learn so far.

I know it is new to me, but lately I'm really starting to think Paul Simon had it wrong....I"m starting to think the world looks better in Black and White!!!
:D

cayenne
Photons to photos shows a less than 1 stop advantage over the R5 (similar age and resolution) at most iso's and never more than 1 stop, so nothing that extensive.

Increased resolution? I have heard that argued before but I don't understand the reasoning for it and from the sample images I have found it seems very similar to a comparable resolution sensor with a bayer array but no AA filter.

From a technical point there really isn't much justification for the monochrome, BUT, this isn't just a technical art form. I'd love to have the disposable income for an M10 Monochrome to play with and it would take me back to my roots of hundreds of rolls of B&W developed in my bedroom and, to the consternation of my mum, bathroom and sometimes kitchen!

As it is I find the B&W Picture Style pretty effective at getting the occasional B&W fix as that is what it shows on the camera preview and, as I said earlier, would find the color channel adjustability of desaturated color images in RAW much more useful, effective and artistically interesting than out of the box B&W captures.

I can see a viable market for monochrome Leica's, I can't see the same for Canon R5's.
 
Feb 15, 2020
543
378
The original GFX 100 seems like a great camera let down by some very questionable ergonomics. That portrait grip looks painful as does the tiny joystick. Hopefully Fuji addresses complaints in this new smaller body. An 80mm 1.7 combined with the great 110mm f2 would make a great system.