Welcome to the blog! Here I'll share news, photography insights, creative plans/thoughts, and whatever piques my interest.
Want equipment recommendations?
Check out my gear list.
The Panasonic S9: What Were They Thinking?
The camera that killed Panasonic.
Even the marketing images for this camera are cringe.
For years I shot with Panasonic’s L-Mount cameras and chronicled my experiences with them here on the blog(now archived). After banging my head against the wall dealing with all the quirks of the system(weight, autofocus, support, etc.) I switched to Sony and never looked back.
Sure there were times I missed the output of the Panasonic S1R(a camera way ahead of its time) compared to what I achieved with my Sony cameras, but the Sony’s were not only similar in terms of quality(better in some instances), the shooting experience was much more enjoyable. Like Apple’s old slogan, “It just works!” is something I would attribute to Sony’s system as well as Canon and Nikon.
Before I exited the L-Mount for good, I cited the lack of support and ambition on Panasonic’s part to really make a dent in the market. It’s like they just stopped caring. The S cameras were originally launched in 2020 and since then, Panasonic hasn’t realeased any additional S PRO lenses. No 85mm S PRO, no 135mm S PRO, no updates to their wonderful 24-70 and 70-200’s. Compared to a company like Sigma who just released version II of their 24-70 Art Lens within a 3 year timeframe, Panasonic is just sitting around letting the industry pass it by. Sigma is single-handedly keeping the L-Mount afloat.
There’s just no hunger or ambition from the brand. They released the S5II last year and as much as people were holding their breath for a true successor to the S1/S1R/S1H, today they announced the Panasonic S9. A pathetic camera that never should have made if off the concept floor. This is the type of product that destroys a brand in terms of both sales and its image with customers. A very apathetic, tone deaf release that serves utterly no one.
$1500. Electronic shutter only so good luck taking photos with this thing. No headphone jack. No hot shoe! And a recording time limit of 15 minutes. Who is this camera even for?
At $1500, you definitely should spend a little more and buy the Sony ZV-E1. Similarly small but way more functional. 4K 120fps, a hot shoe, built in microphone, headphone jack, ability to use LUTS. And Sony makes a plethora of amazing lenses that are small to keep the entire kit compact. It’s my go to travel camera for video. I love it.
Or if you insist on L-Mount, you could get the Sigma FP or S5II and get a much better price to performance ratio. The size savings alone are not worth it if the camera is severely crippled in several other areas.
What should be disappointing to L-Mount users is that Panasonic probably spent hundred of thousands, probably millions on R&D, marketing, etc. All of which could and should have gone to an update of one of the other cameras in their lineup like the S1H. A camera fans of the L-Mount have actually been clamoring for. But the company continues to ignore the needs of its base and slowly put out uninspired products while the competition is on it’s third or fourth iteration of whatever amazing product they’re releasing. You think the new S1H will even matter when Sony releases an update to the FX3? It’ll be too late.
This sort of release just feels like the death kneel for the brand. They will never get a solid grasp in the market and with micro-four thirds essentially dead, Panasonic will likely come up with a couple more releases that are too little too late and fade into obscurity.
It’s over guys.
The Gear Bubble Has Burst
What ya’ gonna do now that no one’s picking up what you’re putting down?
Photography (and videography) went through an amazing growth period in the mid-2010’s. Especially with the popularity of platforms such as YouTube and Instagram. Plus the prospect of becoming an influencer as a viable career option. This lead to the rise in popularity of various channels centered around photography and video. Blogs, YouTube Channels, entire websites centered around these disciplines saw large amounts of traffic for a good 3-5 years. All of which pushed gear, luts, workshops, tutorials, etc. But mainly gear for that sweet, sweet affiliate revenue.
The niche was red hot.
Now? Not so much.
DPReview almost shuttered for good last year. Various YouTubers have called it a day. Photography blogs aren’t what they once were. And even the actual camera companies aren’t producing a ton of gear as in years past. They see the writing on the wall and they’re in the act of course correcting. Which has also resulted in gear rumor websites declining because they have nothing new and exciting to report on at a high enough frequency.
I’ve noticed some of the channels I use to keep up with have become somewhat of a ghost town in the comment sections. Views are down across the board and I’m sure they’re feeling the pinch if all their eggs were in this basket.
The industry is declining and the “Gear Bubble” has burst. And with it, you’ll notice a steep decline in interest in the art form. Not to mention the rise of A.I. and other disruptive technologies. Some avenues such as becoming an influencer or YouTube content creator aren’t as commercially viable anymore with drastic changes to algorithms that impact growth on said platforms. You can be posting everyday, using catchy titles, commenting on other people’s post and see little to no growth. But big brands, i.e., corporations, see huge growth on the platforms. The social networks have sold out. They no longer care for the small content creator and instead want the big bucks and prestige associate with large brands.
So people are throwing their hands up and looking elsewhere for the next gold rush.
As for gear related content in the photography niche, the party’s over guys. You’ll actually have to generate interest in your art or other endeavors. But sadly, most of the audiences that follow this niche aren’t interested in that. They just want to know which lens is better than the one they already have. Or if Sony is better than Canon. They were never in it for an interest in you or your work, just the gear. And now that that’s dead, your channel probably is too.
Sad, that.
An Honest Review of the Fujifilm GFX 100 II
A no-nonsense review from someone who actually bought and used the camera.
After a botched pre-order from Best Buy, I managed to get the new Fuji GFX 100 II via B&H on release day (September 28th, 2023). To my surprise they had plenty in stock. They aren’t just flying off the shelves as people anticipated after the announcement. Given the fact the camera was announced only 2 weeks prior to release and costs $7500, it’s not shocking many people just don’t have that kind of money lying around to spend on a camera. If you’re not already invested in the system, that could end up being well over $10,000 when you factor in a GF lens or two. And of course there are other factors that will always prevent people from buying into the system which I’ll cover later in this post.
The following will detail my use of the camera. The positive, negatives, and if the GFX 100 II is the right camera for me. Hopefully it will help you make an informed purchasing decision. After owning the camera for a couple of months, here are my thoughts:
The GFX 100 II is by far Fuji’s best GFX design. The body seems to have been made with such care and purpose. We get more function buttons, an incredible EVF(similar to the one on the Sony A1 that I loved), a beautiful top LCD that makes reading information a breeze, and ergonomics that make holding the camera feel comfortable in the hand. This was clearly designed to be a workhorse. It feels like holding a fine piece of machinery with its metal-like veneer. When they say the camera is a tool, the 100 II lives up to the sentiment.
Beautiful new design. I love the new textured finish and the depth of the grip. It feels great in the hand and looks sexy to boot.
It’s larger and heavier than the GFX 100S. Fujifilm really struck a balance between the design of the original GFX 100 and 100S. If you fused the two together this is what you’d get. As a result, the camera is smaller than the GFX 100, but larger than the 100S. The GFX 100S weighed 900 grams whereas the GFX 100 II weighs 948 grams. Although that may seem like a small difference, you can definitely feel it. I could see the size and weight being off-putting for some, but as someone who’s regularly used the Panasonic S1R(a notably heavy camera) in their day-to-day work, the weight doesn’t bother me in professional settings. Although I will note that it’s markedly bigger than even the S1R(see below). In defense of the GFX 100 II, the extra size and weight feels justified. It is medium format after all, so you do expect a size discrepancy when compared to full-frame. Bigger sensor = bigger camera.
Additionally, the GFX 100 II has added a lot of new features. 8K Video, better IBIS, a new processor, improved autofocus, etc. I’m sure the increased size helps with keeping it all cool under stressful loads. We have to be reasonable with our expectations when it comes to matters of physics.
The Panasonic S1R is already a big camera. The GFX 100 II eclipses it.
The new function buttons are nice, but I wish they were either a different shape or featured the little braille-like dots you often find on camera buttons that provide you tactile feed back as your finger rolls over it. The “chiclet” design means all the buttons feel the same. It would be nice to be able to differentiate between them without having to look. Raised dots on them would help. Perhaps button 1 has one dot, button 2 has two dots, and button 3 has three dots. A small change that I think could be very helpful.
The Panasonic S1R has a similar 3 button layout, but the buttons are both a different shape and the middle button has two raised dots so you know which button you’re pressing. I know I sing their praises a lot, but Panasonic has the best camera design in terms of functionality. Aesthetics wise, you can argue in favor of other companies, but no one does function better than Panasonic. I’ll also add that I’m glad Fujifilm went with a horizontal layout versus the vertical layout of the custom buttons on the GFX 100S. The vertical orientation of the 100S’s buttons made them sort of awkward to press without looking. Horizontal feels more natural to your finger position when holding the camera.
Notice the braille-like dots on the S1R’s ISO button. Both circular buttons and the raised dots would improve the ergonomics of the GFX 100 II.
The Panasonic makes better use of the rear real estate of the camera. The GFX 100 II could use an additional dial as well as less flush joystick, but overall the ergos are great.
I also prefer the rounded eyecup design and top plate on all my cameras.
The optional battery grip is welcome. The new grip is a bit expensive, but worth it if you’re a portrait shooter like me. While I don’t mind large cameras, I do prefer the grip being optional versus the single body design of cameras like the Nikon Z9 or original GFX 100. If I’m spending over $5000 I want a more versatility in my camera. Being able to take the grip off means I’m much more likely to carry it with me on trips or just out and about. Good job Fuji.
The new battery grip features the same texture and button design as the GFX 100 II’s camera body. The integrated grip of the original GFX 100 was a huge oversight.
Ergonomically, it’s fantastic. I know I mentioned the weight, the shape of the custom function buttons and a few other minor things, but ergonomically, I think the GFX 100 II is fantastic for medium format. The grip feels natural and deep enough to hold comfortably. The plethora of custom function buttons makes customizing for your specific needs a breeze. I have little need to go into the menus again because practically all the features I use are mapped to a custom button. Combined with the GF 50mm f/3.5 lens it’s fairly easy to carry around despite the size when compared to smaller camera options.
Improved operational speed makes it less cumbersome to use. For years medium format was synonymous with not only slow shooting speed, but slow operational speed. The concerns diminishes significantly with the GFX 100 II. It feels more responsive than previous models and other medium format cameras in general. It turns on quickly, the menus operate fast, and touch functionality is reactive and accurate. I took it for a walk around Chinatown and I smiled when I noticed just how fluid operating the camera was. I could switch between Film simulations, exposure metering modes, and focus modes with little effort. No delays or weird UI lag like previous models. That really made me realize the GFX 100 II is the most mature GFX model yet. The lack of weird operational quirks or slow response mean it’s ready for primetime.
Autofocus (especially Eye-AF) has been improved across the board. Autofocus was definitely one of the areas holding the previous GFX cameras back. As someone who has embraced Eye-AF, I was very disappointed with the feature on the GFX 100S. In my opinion, it was downright unusable and very unreliable for professional work. Not so with the GFX 100 II. Taking the same autofocus features of the wonderful Fujifilm XH2-S, autofocus is greatly improved. Eye-AF is now fast and reliable. While not as snappy as, say the Sony Alpha 1, in my opinion Fujifilm’s Eye-AF integration here is more reliable than the A1. With the Sony A1, I often found it focused on an eyelash. Fujifilm’s version hits the actual eye 9 times out of 10. Of course autofocus performance will also be affected by lens selection. The new GF 55mm f/1.7 performs wonderfully. I did get some hiccups using the older GF 50mm f/3.5, but overall the autofocus is up to par and will cover all but the most demanding situations. A sports camera this is not, but models walking towards the camera or for general portrait use, it more than suffices.
In terms of image quality, it’s pretty much the same as previous GFX cameras. Sharp, lifelike images. To my eye, the images are sharper than those produced by the GFX 50S II and the 100S, but I notice no significant difference in color or rendering versus the previous cameras. This is to be expected, but it would have been nice if Fuji wowed us with updated color science or something significant in the image quality department besides better high ISO performance. I don’t find myself shooting at high ISOs often so I can’t comment on this versus previous cameras in the GFX lineup. Overall, the image quality is what we’ve come to love about medium format and specifically the GFX. In one word, brilliant. The detail you’ll notice in things like fabrics or the crispness of leaves on a tree will make other formats feel a bit flat by comparison. With the cameras improved ergonomics and speed, it kinda makes you want to capture everything on medium format. When you photograph a loved one or just your lunch with another camera, you’ll be wondering “What if I would have shot this on the GFX?”
Fuji REALA-ACE isn’t a big deal. It’s nice to have a new film simulation, but I’m not impressed with REALA-ACE. It’s just “meh” to me. It doesn’t pop like other simulations or mute the colors in some interesting way. It’s just sort of there and I don’t see myself using it that much. Speaking of film simulations, besides ACROS, PROVIA, and VIVID, I don’t find myself using them for professional work. For skin tones, I think Astia or even Eterna are the best options for professional work. Eterna is flat, so you’ll have to make some adjustments. But if you want a starting off point, I think Astia is the most natural looking. Simulations like Chrome give the image too much of a vintage “look” and doesn’t look like real life which is what I prefer. I also have access to a library of filters I use in Capture One and Lightroom that will give me my desired color palette without changing the tone of the image too much. Despite all of the simulations, I wish Fujifilm would have included a more “lifelike” color profile instead of the film filter look that seems to be standard on all their cameras. It can be difficult to get accurate skin tones at times with the GFX. Something like what the Hasselblad X2D produces or Panasonic’s Natural profile would be great. Call it “Fujifilm Natural”. Engineers get on it!
The black-and-white images are incredible. While others camera manufacturers have their own black-and-white presets and, to varying degrees, they’re pretty good. The GFX 100 II combined with Fujifilm’s wonderful ACROS simulation produces some of the most film-like images I’ve ever seen coming from a digital camera. Deep shadows and milky highlights make it an excellent choice for shooting black-and-white images. The images look ripped from the past, almost movie-like.
Mass, c. 2023
The layers of people and their expressions makes this one look like a Renaissance painting.
The GF 50mm f/3.5 Lens is probably the best option for GFX street photography. It’s a great focal length for both portraits and wider shots like this.
The Last Time We Talked, c. 2023
Fences, c. 2023
The modular design gives it added versatility. Originally I didn’t see the big deal of being able to remove the EVF, but once I did, it dawned on me, “Wow, this is kinda like a large Sony FX3!” It packs down in my bag much easier and when I want to take the camera out for some fun snapshots, taking the top off like a convertible is a great option. I can even keep the EVF in my bag just in case I want to shoot in a more traditional manner. I do think Fujifilm could have improved the rear LCD (better resolution, slightly larger, etc.), but it’ll do for most things.
“Covertible” mode. Taking the EVF off makes the camera much more compact for a camera bag. It also seems less obtrusive and, in some ways, more fun to use.
The EVF blackout is about the same from previous GFX cameras. This is an area Fuji could have improved on to make the shooting experience a bit more pleasurable. My work around has been setting my drive mode in Low Speed Burst Mode. This all but eliminates the EVF blackout and also increases my shooting speed. If you’re shooting in Single Shot mode, the blackout may be an annoyance to some.
The joystick is pretty similar to the one implemented on the GFX100S. While it feels more durable(a definite plus), it’s still recessed too low. It should protrude just a bit more to give you an increased feeling of control. Right now, it’s pretty nubby feeling. I wish they would have brought back the four way selector to give us even better menu control. Seems like the camera manufacturers giveth and they taketh away with odd little design decisions that no one asked for.
I think Fuji’s menu system could use an update. Namely some splashes of color in the UI. It’s been the same boring gray UI for years now. For a company renown for its color, you’d think they would have some flourishes of color in the UI. Nope, boring old gray. Color also helps differentiate the different areas of the menu. It could use a more modern overhaul. Thankfully with the amount of function buttons and the Quick menu, I don’t see the need to dive into the menu on a regular basis.
No touch shutter. Not gonna gripe on this one too long, but why? Why isn’t this just a standard feature on all cameras that have a touch screen. It’s a software feature, so it should be easy to add via firmware. Such a weird oversight.
Finding a Use Case
While the GFX 100 II is a brilliant camera in terms of specs, image quality, etc. there’s always the question, “What is this camera best suited for?” In theory, you could use it for everything, but is it best suited for everything? Probably not.
I can’t speak for other artists, but for my use case, I see the GFX as being a camera for creative/important work. I.e., work where a client demands that size or work you deem important enough to want to archive. I do a lot of volume work in my headshot photography business and I wouldn’t dare use the GFX on a job where I’m photographing 50-100 people. I’d end up with about 500GB of images to sift through. While I have plenty of hard drive space, that doesn’t mean I should be in a rush to fill it up. And clients won’t even care about the perceived better image quality.
In my opinion, the GFX is better suited for low volume, creative work. In my case that would be portraits, swimwear, nudes, beauty, etc. It would be great for landscape work too. It could be used for street photography, but manage your expectations. It’s not small and discreet. It isn’t blazing fast, but doable for street and the images are gorgeous. People use the Leica SL2 for street photography and they rave about that camera, so don’t be unfair when viewing the GFX as a potential street camera. It’s not meant to be small and it’s not meant to be fast like a sports camera. So it shouldn’t be criticized for being something that it isn’t.
Advertising work is an obvious use for it because that’s often a big creative project. Those clients will appreciate the flexibility in cropping with all the resolution you’re given. I could also use it for individual portrait/headshot clients, just not high volume work. The files are just too big and there are cameras that are much better suited for that sort of project.
Fuji could fix this by offering different RAW size and/or compression options. Nikon does it and Sony implemented it in the A1 last year. I believe Canon does it as well. Regardless, there is a need for a smaller RAW file. Imagine having a 102MP camera, but you can get a RAW file the size of a 50MP file? Or 30MP file? And all without a loss of quality. That would enhance the versatility of the system. I’ve mentioned before that I think Fuji wants to convince people to buy their 50MP medium format cameras, but I’d rather just have a single 102MP camera and be able to set my RAW file sizes according to the project.
Full-Frame Is Still Its Biggest Competitor
Though I am one to tout the virtues of medium format, I still love full-frame cameras. They offer a versatility that medium format will never be able to. For many, they’re a perfect combination of size, performance, and image quality. Since my work is quite diverse at times, having a set of full-frame cameras is very helpful. For volume work, the occasional event, real estate photography, etc. my full-frame cameras are the better choice.
In my last post I mentioned having my Panasonic S1R’s up for sale. I’ve since sold them and moved on to another system entirely. More on that near the end of this post.
A tangent about the Panasonic S5 II/IIX:
I briefly had the S5IIX, but didn’t enjoy using it(or the previous S5 camera) for stills. I found the viewfinder small and the ergonomics lacking in some key areas. Also, there’s an issue with the battery grip which I’ll detail below:
“The S5II and S5IIX use the same grip as the original S5. However, the joystick on the grip doesn’t function the same way as the joystick on the camera itself. Namely, if you’re using eye autofocus, you can click in the joystick and it will switch from one eye to the other. This is extremely useful during portrait sessions. However, when the grip is paired with either camera, if you click in the joystick, it does nothing. It doesn’t switch eyes or allow you to manipulate the focus point in any way. I believe this issue is due to the joystick on the new cameras being an 8-way joystick design, but the joystick on the grip is still the old 4-way design as on the original S5 camera itself. However, I don’t see how clicking in the button on the joystick would be different whether it’s 4-way or 8-way. But unfortunately, the joystick on the grip is only for navigating the menus. It doesn’t have the same functionality as the camera’s joystick while actually shooting which is a bummer. And at $339, it’s overpriced to have such operational quirks.”
Comparatively, I never had any of those problems with the S1/S1R. Don’t get me wrong, the S1R’s were great. I’d taken well over 100,000 pictures on the S1/S1R cameras over the years and they always wowed me in the image quality department. Beautiful color, great ergonomics, and they’re just reliable.
My issues with the system have more to do with Panasonic’s lack of effort in the market and quickly becoming what I consider a dying system. Leica will remain, but I see Panasonic bowing out of the market in a few years. They just can’t keep up with the competition, unless they release a homerun of a product that turns things around in the next year or so.
End tangent.
Full-frame is often smaller, faster, more versatile, and includes many more lens options so no matter what or how you shoot, you can rest assured there are options at your disposal. And in terms of image quality? While it will never “be” medium format, for many, it’s close enough. 90% is a percentage I can live with and I’m sure many others feel the same which is why they don’t switch.
Not Flying Off The Shelves
Now that hype surrounding the GFX 100 II has died down, especially after the initial product announcement, I want to briefly discuss why medium format will remain a niche market. It’s not for everyone. Influencers and lovers of the format will try to sell you on it, but I’m a realist and will openly admit, it wouldn’t be my first choice if I were buying a camera system for the first time. I’ve been a professional photographer for almost 20 years and I’m blessed to be in a position where I can sometimes afford the latest gear. But for many out there, $7500 is a bridge too far.
Besides the price, there are other reasons many will skip the GFX 100 II like:
It’s heavy. There’s no sugarcoating it. The camera is beautiful, but it will weigh you down. I went for a walk and found it to be noticeably weighty in my camera bag. Combine the GFX 100 II with the GF 55mm f/1.7 and you have a 4-5lb combo that you really feel on your shoulders. The weight and size of the camera alone will put many people off and that’s totally a fair critique of the system. On set, it’s fine. But when you take it outside the studio, it feels like a burden at times. There is the GF 50mm f/3.5 as a lightweight option, but the setup still feels large. If Fuji releases a set of f/3.5, small primes, I think they could make the system more appealing to non-studio photographers.
It’s slow(ish). The improved frames per second is a welcome addition, but the GFX 100 II still pails in comparison to similarly priced full-frame cameras. Fujifilm put out several videos showing the camera used in sports and action settings, but I doubt many will use it in that capacity. There are much better options like the Sony A9 III, Nikon Z9 or Z8, Canon R5, R6II, or R3. Many full-frame cameras on the market are just faster all across the board and that’s not an attribute we should scoff at.
The files are huge. 102 Megapixels is impressive until you’re looking at terabytes of data from a long session. Many photographers don’t need or even want 102 megapixel files. It’s interesting to pixel peep, but if you’re shooting constantly, the large files can be a bit worrisome in terms of storage. Hard drives are cheap I hear you say, but don’t forget those large files will slow down your computer. Try retouching in Photoshop and having a file with several layers with lots of edits and effects, your computer’s fans will be revving up in no time.
It’s expensive. The GFX 100 II costs $7499. Add in another lens, say the GF 110mm f/2, which will cost you $2699. Now you’ve spent over $10,000. The grip will cost you $600. Another lens, say the 32-64 f/4, will cost you another $1500-$1800. You can end up spending upwards of $15,000 investing in the system. If you have disposable income to splurge or you’re a pro who can justify the acquisition then this doesn’t apply to you. But for the penny pinchers out there, beginners, hobbyists, or those where budget is a real concern, there are cheaper options that are available. Great options that will produce more than good enough images for you and/or your clients. And trust me, clients don’t notice and they don’t care. As long as you can produce the images you’re known for, it doesn’t matter what you’re shooting with. I switched camera brands probably 5-6 times in the past 4 years and my clients were none the wiser. They don’t care. And if you really want to invest in the system check out the GFX 50S II. It’s much more affordable and also produces brilliant, medium format images. Or save yourself some money, and rent it on an as needed basis.
Not everyone cares about “ultimate” image quality. For many, having a camera that produces images that are 85-90% of what the GFX 100 II can do is more than enough. In their mind, their Canon R5, Nikon Z8, Sony A7IV more than covers their needs. You also probably don’t care about ultimate image quality when just taking snapshots while hanging with your friends or of your pet or kids just running around the house. There are smaller, faster, and more fun cameras better suited for this. Not to mention they all cost significantly less. Speaking of which…
Fujifilm also wants to sell you on the idea of investing in their APS-C cameras as an alternative to their medium format options. So when you want ultimate image quality you can use the GFX, but when you want a smaller size with benefits such as faster frames per second, better autofocus, etc. you can use, say, the Fujifilm XH2-S. Unfortunately, APS-C doesn’t hold a candle to full-frame. The images don’t render the same. APS-C doesn’t handle highlights and shadow detail as well as full-frame does. I shot the XH2-S exclusively for months and the images pailed in comparison to the images I’d captured on my full-frame Panasonics. It actually surprised me as I’d wrongly assumed APS-C was on par with full-frame. It’s not.
If you need a system that more closely matches medium format, full-frame is the closest on the market. With APS-C cameras costing upwards of $2500, one could easily pair their GFX 100 II with a Sony A7IV or Panasonic S5IIX with much better results. Spend a little bit more and you can get great options from both Canon and Nikon as well. Full-frame, in my opinion, is the better companion to medium format and Fujifilm doesn’t have any cameras in that space.
So regardless of how much people will scream on forums or the FujiRumors guy writes countless articles on how amazing the GFX is and you should get one, think long and hard before you buy one. Most of these outlets just want to get an affiliate kickback after you click their links. They don’t own the camera and probably never will. They just want YOU to spend YOUR money so THEY can make money.
Ask yourself. Is the GFX 100 II right for you? What benefit will it really give you? Can you afford it? Is the money better spent elsewhere? Do you really need it or do you just have G.A.S.?
The GFX 100 II is a great step in making medium format more accessible and pleasurable to shoot with. But it still presents many of the same challenges unique to the format. A truck will never be a car. And a fork isn’t a knife.
So Did I Keep It?
No. I didn’t. After owning it for two months, I sold the GFX 100 II. Despite all the praise outlined above which is still valid, there were a few issues that made me ultimately pass on keeping the system. They are:
Image size. I keep repeating that 102 megapixel images are overkill. If Fuji had compressed RAW options for the camera this would be a moot point and it would be worth keeping. But giving the type of work I do, the sheer volume of it at times, having such large files is more of a burden than a positive.
Color. As I mentioned, it can be hard to get accurate skin tones on the GFX. I think this applies to all of Fuji’s cameras as Fuji seems to apply a certain look to their files. Skin tones can look a bit unnatural. I’ve heard photographers say Fuji is great for scenery but not so much for people and I would agree with this sentiment. When color accuracy is important there are better options available. Of course you can tweak things in post, but the fewer steps needed the better.
It doesn’t bring me joy. While it’s much more fun to use than previous GFX models, I personally just don’t enjoy using it. This is totally a subjective thing. I find it heavy, the menus are ugly, and I don’t like the sound of the shutter nor how the lenses sound when they focus. This seems like such a small thing, but I’m very big on user experience. BMW spends millions on small user experience things such as hiring a composer for the sound of the doors closing on their cars. I compared the sound of the shutter of the GFX to the Panasonic S1R and the S1R is much more pleasing to the ear. It’s a small, but major thing. It’s nice to hear a satisfying sound in your ear when you take a shot. Even if the shot is awful, it feels like you nailed it! In the looks department, the body is great, but the menus are ancient. It’s like Fuji is stuck in this weird place between the future and past. The body is from the future, but the UI is from the 80s-90s. Which is weird as the top LCD readout looks more futuristic than the menus themselves. The blackout is still there. The joystick is still bad. And when you pop a GF lens on it, it still feels like a brick. Despite my best efforts, I just didn’t connect with the camera in the way I’d hoped to.
Honestly, I’m probably done with medium format. It was the mythical area of photography to strive for a decade ago, but these days there are plenty of great options in smaller formats that are more fun to use. Medium format doesn’t make or break my style nor does it give me any advantages over my competition. It’s just wishful thinking, but not reality. I’m at a stage in my career that I want to have gear that I enjoy using and it makes the entire experience of photography from capture to post feel fun. After doing this as long as I have, it can be hard to keep that fire burning and slow, heavy equipment probably won’t stoke the flames. So if not the GFX or the Panasonic S1R what camera system did I end up switching to?
Enter the Sony A7RV
From the multi-angle rear LCD, diminutive size, shooting speed and images oozing with sharpness and depth, the A7RV is a tour de force of image making bliss.
After much speculation, pondering, and testing, I decided to go back to Sony. It’s been well over a year since I owned the Sony Alpha 1 so there were other options available that weren’t there before. It came down to the A1(again) or the more recent A7RV. I considered Canon’s R6 Mark II for a second, but the limitations of Canon’s system when compared to Sony took it out of the race. Namely, third-party lens support.
I didn’t want to spend so much on another A1, so the A7RV was the most likely candidate but I hadn’t used one before.
I went to B&H to test the camera in person and immediately fell in love with it. I purchased one right away.
The A7RV is an amazing camera and it ticks all the boxes for me. Let’s break it down:
61 megapixels with compressed RAW options. I can shoot a 61MP file when I want the resolution. A 26 MP file when I want something smaller. And even a 15MP file when I want something smaller still. I’ll never use 15MP, but being able to switch between 61 and 26 megapixels on the fly feels like having two cameras in one. I don’t have to have a fragmented system like owning both an S1R (45 megapixels) and S1 (24 megapixels) like in the past. One camera does the job of both.
AI Autofocus. The new autofocus features on this camera are brilliant. Fast, accurate, and reliable. Unlike the Sony A1, the A7RV hardly ever inadvertedly focuses on an eyelash. It’s just pinpoint accurate 99% of the time.
Shooting speed. The GFX 100 II is fast, but pales in comparison to the A7RV which is faster still. I don’t really use burst modes, but if I wanted to, it gives me plenty of speed for anything I’d shoot.
Image quality. I feel embarassed to say it, but the image quality of the A7RV has exceeded my expectations. When it was first announced, I dismissed it thinking it couldn’t come close to medium format. Boy was I wrong. There’s a depth to the images that give it an almost medium format like look, especially with the right lenses. I did headshots for a client recently and immediately the image quality difference was apparent when compared to the Panasonic S1R, a camera I’ve always lauded for having exceptional image quality. The A7RV beats the S1R which puts it even closer to medium format. It’s still behind, but more than close enough.
Color accuracy. Sony’s doesn’t normally receive praise for its colors, but the A7RV’s color feels much more natural and realistic compared to the GFX(or any Fujifilm camera for that matter). I have to do less tweaks to get it to match the scene in front of me.
Shutter sound. It’s not as satisfying as the A1’s, but the shutter sound is quite satisfying. It’s like eating a Pringles chip. Every crunch of the shutter feels like you’ve just captured an award winning photograph. I LOVE the sound while shooting with it.
Size and weight. The size and weight of the entire system (camera, grip, lenses, etc.) feels like such a burden lifted off my shoulders. Putting my kit in my case when heading to client’s location feels are less cumbersome. I can even comfortably shoot with one hand when I just want to do snapshots of things. Brilliant.
Small, light, and fast. This trio of characteristics is my new standard for cameras and the A7RV matches it in all categories. Small, light, and fast makes the camera more enjoyable for me to use. A smaller size means it can pack easily in a variety of bags. Reduced heft means I can carry it all day. And speed makes getting the shot that much easier. I can’t stress enough how important this is to the joy of using a camera system for me.
Other features that appealed to me:
The 4-Axis Multi-angle LCD screen. Not only does it flips out as well as flips up. I know Sony shooters want to give Sony sole credit for this design, but as far as I know, the Panasonic S1H was the first full-frame camera with such a design. Give Panasonic their props.
9.4mm-Dot EVF. The same as in the A1 and similar to the GFX 100 II’s. One you experience one of theses, it’s hard to go back to a smaller, lower resolution EVF.
10 fps shooting. Not as fast as, say the A1, but it’s plenty fast for me.
I haven’t really considered using it for video, but I could if I wanted. It’s really a versatile camera that excels at practically everything I could use it for.
A7RV Photos
In Closing
The GFX 100 II is a camera I could easily recommend to anyone wanting to dip their toe into medium format. It feels like the maturation of the GFX system. It’s a culmination of years of testing, gathering user feedback, and a willingness to improve the system in key, dare I say vital, areas. The brilliant new EVF, vastly improved autofocus, operational speed, and ergonomics make it a home run release for Fujifilm. And I didn’t even touch on the video features! If you have a previous GFX model, I’d consider it a worthwhile upgrade. Fuji really threw the kitchen sink at this one.
However, many of the criticisms (which I’ve made for years), still apply. Mainly size, weight, and speed. And that’s just physics. You can’t have everything ya know. Plus the lack of RAW file size options limit it’s practicality in many situations. Oh, and it’s expensive.
It’s not for everyone and that’s okay. It doesn’t have to be. It wasn’t for me, but there’s no need for me to dump on it. If I have a need for medium format, whether it be a special project or client request, I’ll pick the GFX 100 II every time.
I ultimately stuck with full-frame, namely the Sony A7RV. It ticks all the boxes for me and allows me to create the images I want, faster and easier than the GFX 100 II. Simply put, it matches my shooting style better. And that, to me is significant.
Your results may differ.
I hope you found this review helpful.
Thoughts on the Fujifilm GFX 100 II Announcement
The Fujifilm GFX 100 II was announced this week and I have some thoughts. Am I getting one? Definitely.
It isn’t cheap. But quality rarely is.
Oh look, a gear post! I’ll post one every now and then, but not as much as in the past. Moving on.
I’ve very impressed with the new GFX 100 II. Upfront, I must stress that Fuji should tell all of their ambassadors and influencers with the camera to refer to it as the “GFX 100 Mark II” or even “GFX 100 II”. Not the god awful “GFX 100 The Second” as Fujifilm seems to want to call it. Please get marketing on this branding blunder asap. They’ll probably adjust the spoken name since everyone seems inclined to call it the GFX 100 Mark II anyway. Sort of like Nike just going with what the people want (Nike-e) instead of the actual pronunciation (Nike).
I digress.
The 100 Mark II is pretty much everything I want in a medium format system. The 100S was on its way, but still felt like a compromise in key areas. No battery grip, lower resolution viewfinder than the GFX100, slow shot-to-shot speed, SD Cards instead of CF Express. The size and form-factor were great, but I felt like the overall camera was being held back in attempt to not encroach on the sales of its big brother.
Enter the GFX 100 Mark II and Fujifilm has righted a lot of the wrongs.
The design is beautiful. Very modern, sleek, and refined compared to previous models. Good job Fuji.
What I Loved
The New EVF. I raved about the 9.44m Dot EVF in the Sony A1 and I’m so glad to see one added to the GFX. Once you look through one of these, every other EVF seems subpar. It really makes you feel immersed in the image and is more reminiscent of using a classic viewfinder found on say a DSLR or film camera. I also like the round eyecup they used versus the more pill shaped eyecup found on their GFX 100S. The rounder design just feels much more comfortable in my opinion.
Top LCD design. The 45-degree slope is a very clever and an innovative design choice. Apple-esque even. It’s a small thing, but something I’m surprised other manufacturers haven’t thought of. Just a small incline that makes reading your important data easier. Brilliant.
Increased FPS. The previous GFX cameras offered shot-to-shot FPS from 3fps-5fps. Not exactly speed demons but tolerable given the format. The 100 Mark II gets a speed bump up to 8fps. That puts it almost on par with my beloved Panasonic S1R which I find more than fast enough for what I shoot. This alone makes the camera a worthwhile upgrade. I shoot fast and more speed is always welcome. Slow and deliberate be damned.
Overall body design. The original GFX 100 was a brilliant technical achievement but I wouldn’t call it a looker. With its bulky brutalist design, it wasn’t winning any beauty contests. The 100 Mark II is sleeker, smaller, and more supple looking. It looks more organic then the machine like nature of its predecessor. The original had that odd gray finish which, ahem, made the camera look unfinished. The grip was also thinner than expected which gave the camera odd ergonomics for vertical shooting. One element that sets the Hasselblad X2D apart is its beautiful design. The 100 Mark II isn’t quite on par with the Hasselblad, but it’s a much more pleasing on the eye than prior GFX bodies.
CF Express Type B support. Supporting larger capacity and faster cards is a plus. I welcome this addition with excitement as I have several of these cards that I used with my Panasonic S1R. Not having to buy additional memory cards is a boon. That money can go towards lenses or shoots.
Optional Battery grip. As someone who primarily shoots portraits, I love battery grips. Improved ergonomics are always welcome and one of the biggest selling points for using a grip. Extended battery life is just the icing on the cake. Being able to shoot vertically in a more comfortable position alleviates a lot of unnecessary stress on the body. I think we’re so caught up in tech specs that we forget ergonomics and how it impacts our physical health. Our eyes get older, joints get stiff, and muscles get sore from repeated use. Putting your arm in that awkward vertical shooting position when using a camera without a grip is terrible for your body. Especially with heavy setups and for extended periods. But I get it, grips are heavy. I primarily use mine in the studio and go without it on location. Still, a welcome option for Fuji’s new camera.
SSD Recording. While I wish they would have gone with an integrated SSD design like Hasselblad’s X2D, being able to record to an external hard drive is great. I could see this being a very useful feature for video, but surprisingly for stills shooters. Imagine being in the field, on top of some icy mountain shooting landscapes, and you can record right to an SSD. An extra layer of data redundancy is never a bad thing.
There are countless other great features, little quality of life things that I appreciate but those are the ones that stood out most. The price seems right and they added enough new features to warrant an upgrade.
Things I Didn’t Like
Same Flash Sync Speed. I’m no engineer but it would have been greet to see a bump in the flash sync speed. I’m not sure how they would achieve this, but come on. 1/125th of a second is still rather limiting but I’ve gotten used to it on the previous GFX bodies. Just gotta live with it I guess.
No RAW compression options. Fuji still doesn’t have a smaller RAW file option. It would be great to be able to capture a 50MP Raw file in the camera for times when you don’t need/want 100MP’s. Maybe that will come eventually but I think Fuji sees it as an option that would potentially cannibalize sales of their other cameras.
EVF Blackout. Form what I’ve gathered, it doesn’t look particularly faster than its predecessor. They’re touting double the speed of the camera so a larger speed bump for the EVF blackout would have been very much appreciated. That’s one of the downsides of shooting with the system. Although I do find shooting in burst mode alleviates many of the blackout concerns, but it would be nice for it to be blackout free.
My Biggest Gripe
Nothing to do with the camera, but the coverage from the industry. One of the reasons I’ve never been interested in being sponsored by a big company or being an ambassador for a brand is the fact your hands are tied. You don’t have the same freedom of expression as an artist because you have to be mindful about your relationship with the brand. Maybe you like a camera or even just the features from another camera brand? That’s great. You probably can’t talk about it. They send you a new camera to “review” during the announcement period and you’re not allowed to comment critically on any of the features. What results is this odd scenario where the brand affiliate has to tip toe around giving basic information least they ruin their relationship with the brand.
I watched several videos on the GFX 100 II. And, besides many using the dumb moniker “Fuji GFX 100 The Second” (bleh), they also seemed to be directed in what they could say. You can tell because nearly all of them had the same talking points. Like they were all reading from the same press release sounding script. Most had a disclaimer like, “This is a preproduction model of the camera so things may change before release.” Probably to quell any fears about features or performance. The release is 2-weeks away from the announcement mind you, so I doubt the pre-production model will be significantly different than the release model. It usually isn’t.
The whole thing just felt weird, overly controlled, and veiled in secrecy. I shudder to think of the NDA’s they must sign and how their hands are tied. And I guarantee most of the people with their dumb goofy Youtuber smiles, “102 Megapixels!”, won’t actually buy the camera. They just want to praise it so YOU will. Spend YOUR money. I’m going to write more extensively on this subject in a future post, but I don’t think these sort of fluffy, criticism free videos are helpful to brands.
If you stand by your product, it should hold up to criticism. Help your customers make an informed decision so they make the right purchase for them. Not just to improve your bottom line.
Below is one video I found that was no-nonsense and honest in it’s breakdown on the appeal of the camera. I love how he starts off not wanting it, but by the end he’s convinced himself. I know your pain.
Credit: Christian Santiago via YouTube
Bias Against Medium Format
Another note about coverage of the camera is this seemingly inherent bias many reviewers have against medium format. No one is saying you have to shoot medium format or use it in that oddly specific use case you have. It actually, I know this is going to sound crazy, may not be for you. You’re a sports shooter? Well duh there are much better options for your use case than medium format. You want to make films? There are better options. You want smaller? Again, there are better options. Even in the medium format space their are options that can accommodate different shooting styles.
Incoming tangent: Fast forward to 4:29. Chris and Jordan are my guys but…
His take on the GFX 100 II is dumb. Yes I said dumb.
He says(rather smugly):
“At no point was I thinking, man I wish this shot faster.”
“I don’t need it to shoot faster, I just need it to look nicer!”
“Medium format is used for product photography, portraits in the studio, and landscapes.”
Bless your heart. Ye of little sense and knowledge. So there’s no need for the camera to shoot faster? No possible need for that? No one shoots medium format on location? Outdoors? Natural settings? No?! So you don’t want increased functionality and versatility for medium format? None of that would be beneficial? You just care about image quality? Then why don’t you shoot large format film. Or Phase One’s, $53,000 XF IQ4.
It’s dismissive, ignorant, and dumb takes like these that gain traction in the photo community and are parroted by commenters with little experience with or knowledge of the format. It’s best to know what you’re talking about before you chime in in such a matter-of-factly way of speaking.
Back to our regularly scheduled program.
I think comparing the format from a technical perspective to full-frame is utter folly. Smaller formats will always possess inherent advantages while larger formats will as well. Both will have trade-offs. Cameras like the Sony A1 can do a blistering 30fps in stills shooting. Its specialty is speed and being an all rounder. Compared to Sony’s own A7RV which is their “ultimate image quality” option. Reviewers understand this as evidenced by them making the same comparisons in their videos. However, when it comes to medium format they don’t give it the same level of grace. They expect the GFX 100 II to be as fast as the A1 or pocketable like a Ricoh GR.
Watch their reviews on a Leica camera and listen as they salivate over every feature. But get this, the Leica is heavier, almost as expensive(then lenses ARE more expensive), and the GFX beats it in many direct comparisons. Autofocus being one of them. They don’t compare the Leica SL2, a full-frame mirrorless camera, to Sony’s A1. No, they cover for it and say, “You’re paying for that Leica experience. You’re someone who loves the art of photography.” They review medium format and its met with skepticism, “Who is this camera for?”.
Credit: CameraSize.com
Size wise, it’s about the same size as the Nikon Z8, Panasonic S1R, and Leica SL2. All of which are well reviewed and well received cameras. Speed wise it’s on par with Leica and Panasonic. Autofocus wise, it beats both. Image quality wise, it beats them all. Sure the other systems may be more mature and have more lenses, but how many lenses do you need? The GFX has plenty of native options to cover most needs. So what’s the issue? Why does its existence upset you so? Why compare it to full frame and not Hasselblad or Phase One? I’ve yet to see a single video from a big photography outlet directly comparing the GFX 100II against any of Hasselblad or Phase One’s offerings. You know, actual medium format systems.
Granted Fuji didn’t do themselves any favors with that “Beyond Full Frame” marketing campaign with the launch of the 100S in 2021. But ever since Fuji launched the original GFX 50S years ago, I feel they’ve both revitalized medium format and activated the defenses of those who seem hellbent on a mission to protect their precious full-frame cameras. Why? Some childhood emotional attachment you have with a format? Or because maybe those other companies cut you a fatter check? Your bias is showing and it ain’t pretty.
Cameras in Limbo
Lately I’ve been mulling over my existing camera system. What to keep, what to get rid of. I have too many options and that can be paralyzing at times. I’m about to head out the door and it’s, “Which camera should I bring? Which lens? Both? One? All? Argh!” At times I’m as indecisive as a 5-year old in a candy store. Over the summer I started going out more and doing street photography. I’ve tried different cameras and finally settled on the Fuji X-S20. It’s small enough to be unobtrusive and versatile enough to capture fast action or day-to-day life stuff. The video quality is also great, but I have no plans to use it in that capacity as of yet.
With my full-frame Panasonics, I’ve just never enjoyed carrying them around. None of them. Not even the smaller S5/S5II’s. The size and weight of both the bodies and available lenses don’t make them practical for discreet street photography. And they’re too bulky for everyday stuff.
However, sometimes I want better image quality for posed portraits when I’m out. I love taking candids but there are times I see someone sitting or standing in interesting light and it would make for a better portrait than candid photograph. For those times, I want to reach for a larger format camera with stellar image quality. I considered my S1R, but again, I don’t enjoy carrying it. And, to me, the system doesn’t have a compact but uncompromising portrait lens option. Sigma has the 85mm DG DN but it’s distorted beyond belief and relies heavily on either in-camera or raw software correction. Leica has the amazing 90mm but it’s $5,000. What is a photographer to do?
Then it dawned on me. I could carry my GFX. Duh! It’s roughly the same size as the S1R, but lighter and with better image quality. It’s also small enough to fit in my bag alongside my X-S20. Slap the 80mm f/1.7 or new 55mm f/1.7 on there and I’m golden.
So that’s my plan, to carry my GFX for street portraits. My S1R’s are now on the auction block.
I’m even considering JUST shooting medium format for client work as well. But then that may not be practical for the odd event or lifestyle shoot I need to photograph. So maybe I’ll just be shooting predominantly with the GFX. Additionally, while I appreciate the new GFX 100 II’s video features, I’d still pick the the S5IIX as my video option. It’s just a much more practical system. I also prefer Panasonic’s “look” in the realm of video.
My proposed kit would look like this:
Fuji GFX 100S II (main camera)
Fuji X-S20 (street photography, day-to-day ‘fun’ camera)
S5IIX (video camera, backup full frame camera for the GFX)
To my chagrin, all three use different lenses. There’s always a tradeoff ya know. But I really like this kit. All my bases are covered.
In regards to a backup, I can’t justify buying two GFX 100 II bodies, so I’ll use my S5IIX as a backup/alternative camera. I have the GFX 50S II, but will be selling that one to fund the 100 Mark II purchase.
In Conclusion
I’m excited for this release. I think this one moves the GFX system into a very compelling space for a lot of people sitting on the fence. Before, the slow speed was off-putting(especially for me). Or the size. And while it’s still a big system compared to smaller mirrorless systems like Sony’s Alpha series, if you value image quality, you’re probably willing to deal with the heft. The price will make it unobtainable for most and in that price range, many will also consider the value proposition and pass with arguments like, “For that price I could buy two Sony A7 IV’s!” or “For that price, I could buy a used car!”.
No, this camera isn’t meant for your day-to-day, hobbyist shooter. Or the trendy shooter who just posts to Instagram. If they have disposable income, maybe. I see it built for the professional or the photo enthusiast who enjoys the experience of photography. Whether or not you should upgrade from your previous GFX is personal preference. Image quality wise, I don’t think it will be much different from the original 100 or 100S. But if the improved ergonomics, speed, ports, video features, and autofocus capability are what you’ve been looking for, then look no further.
I’m getting one.