FUJIFILM GFX 100S II for landscape photography.
- Thread starter JoelKlein
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
What is the Brenizer (Bokeramah) method?
Roy
Well-known member
The Brenizer method is just like a pano but with extra frames above and below the others ...
steeves
New member
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
Like Roy said, it's another pano method, but this one is meant to simulate extremely shallow DOF with a nice bokeh.
The method requires a lens with a wide aperture and a wide physical opening, combined with many groupings of shots overlapped can produce an image that has effective aperture of much wider than the actual lens, often something below f/1 (such as f0.8).
Some example images:
A google for pages will show lots of descriptions and a list of the best lenses.
Chris
I have seen some nice shots from the Fuji XT-3. Seems they have a better option to replace my current Z30. That is a separate discussion.
Love Fuji's color science and their film simulations are interesting to try including the many custom film sim recipes available on-line.
I have an X-T4 - it and the X-T3 have 26 mp BSI sensors. The X-T5 has a 40 mp BSI sensor. Worth a look.
How does it compare to the Z30ās AF system?
No clue about Z30's AF. I was suggesting checking the X-T5 for it's 40 mp sensor as a possible alternative to the GFX.
Edward Martin's thoughts on the perceived need for high mp/medium format cameras is interesting. His key thought seems to be to stop pixel-peeping at 100-300%.
Printing usually tells us if camera is good enough for normal uses.
Last edited:
Never tested the 30, but left Fuji X (travel system, XT5) because of the AF. I don't follow the system, but I understand they still struggle.
IIRC he only had 2 GFX lenses and he missed the 200-400 range that is not available in GFX lenses.
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
WAS not available. They now have a GF 500mm. When you add the existing GF 250mm (which is 350mm with the GF 1.4TC), that range is covered better.
But it's still not a great system for BIF.
Chris
Yes but was not available when he switched. The video in post #11 gives his full reasons.
Not A Speck Of Cereal
Well-known member
Z30 AF is very much like the Z6ii.
Roy
Well-known member
The Z30 is similar to a Z6iii the way a jet fighter is like a biplane ...
Roy
Well-known member
Z30 vs Z6iii AF, image resolution, usability low light noise etc etc ...
I see the mistakeā¦lolā¦
I wrote Z6-2 and everyone related to the Z6-3ā¦
I wrote Z6-2 and everyone related to the Z6-3ā¦
Roy
Well-known member
The Z30 is a great Vlogging camera but it doesn't match up to a stills camera like any of the Z6 ...
Chris K
Well-known member
Iāve used the Z6, Zf, Z9, X-T4, and X-T5. Iām guessing the Z30 is a bit better than the Z6 for AF? In any case, the Z6 and X-T3/4 are roughly equivalent in performance. The Z6 is a little more consistent in low light, and its eye AF is a little better.
The X-T5 is quite a bit better than either, but isnāt as good as the Zf. Itās about as quick and acquires about as well, but it tends to ājitterā away from perfect focus occasionally, whereas the Zf is almost as rock-solid as the Z9. Iāll put it this wayā¦ if you fired a 10fps burst at a candid portrait close-up with a fast prime and ended up with 100 photos, the Zf would probably have 90 perfect, 5 good enough, and 5 misses. The X-T5 would probably have 80 perfect, 5 good enough, and 15 misses.
The X-T5 is good enough that Iād say other considerations are more important than AF.
To the original subject, Iāve been shooting GFX for a while now, and while I thought I was going to use it for everything but action, it is definitely a ponderous-feeling system compared to Z and X. If you ever used a 5D or 5DMk2, it reminds me very much of those two cameras. Itās deliberate. Your Z8, by comparison, is always in focus and always ready to fire a perfect burst into an infinite buffer. The GFX will get in your way for any fast-moving subject.
Also, the lens selection is poor for GFX. Fujiās lenses generally have great image quality, but not all are fast focusers, and the telephoto selection is horrible. If you like telephoto landscapes, do not shoot GFX unless youāre willing to adapt EF or F lenses.
For the positives, image quality is superior. Dynamic range is superior. When using large aperture lenses you can control DOF in situations youāre not used to (the Nikon 105/1.4 is a joy to shoot on GFX). Fujiās colors (and more importantly, control over image looks via film sims and extensive customization settings) give you better files without messing around a bunch in LR.
For personal likes, I appreciate the extensive in-camera aspect ratio support. You get 1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9, and 65:24 (XPan). The RAW files are full sensor, but LR pre-crops them for you. I struggle to visualize aspect ratios without visual masking, and I love wide ratios, so my GFX camera is my pseudo-XPan, and I get much better photos with it than I do with my Z9. I also find adapting lenses to GFX enjoyable, and I shoot a lot with my old Rokkors.
Unless you have professional demands that require 100mpix, nobody needs a GFX camera. There are a lot of compromises, and a lot of cash to be spent for not much benefit over a Z8. I enjoy mine very much, but I have to admit that I could part with it and I wouldnāt lose any significant capability.
I would not buy a GFX camera to chase specs. I would only buy one if one of its unique virtues excites you.
The X-T5 is quite a bit better than either, but isnāt as good as the Zf. Itās about as quick and acquires about as well, but it tends to ājitterā away from perfect focus occasionally, whereas the Zf is almost as rock-solid as the Z9. Iāll put it this wayā¦ if you fired a 10fps burst at a candid portrait close-up with a fast prime and ended up with 100 photos, the Zf would probably have 90 perfect, 5 good enough, and 5 misses. The X-T5 would probably have 80 perfect, 5 good enough, and 15 misses.
The X-T5 is good enough that Iād say other considerations are more important than AF.
To the original subject, Iāve been shooting GFX for a while now, and while I thought I was going to use it for everything but action, it is definitely a ponderous-feeling system compared to Z and X. If you ever used a 5D or 5DMk2, it reminds me very much of those two cameras. Itās deliberate. Your Z8, by comparison, is always in focus and always ready to fire a perfect burst into an infinite buffer. The GFX will get in your way for any fast-moving subject.
Also, the lens selection is poor for GFX. Fujiās lenses generally have great image quality, but not all are fast focusers, and the telephoto selection is horrible. If you like telephoto landscapes, do not shoot GFX unless youāre willing to adapt EF or F lenses.
For the positives, image quality is superior. Dynamic range is superior. When using large aperture lenses you can control DOF in situations youāre not used to (the Nikon 105/1.4 is a joy to shoot on GFX). Fujiās colors (and more importantly, control over image looks via film sims and extensive customization settings) give you better files without messing around a bunch in LR.
For personal likes, I appreciate the extensive in-camera aspect ratio support. You get 1:1, 5:4, 4:3, 3:2, 16:9, and 65:24 (XPan). The RAW files are full sensor, but LR pre-crops them for you. I struggle to visualize aspect ratios without visual masking, and I love wide ratios, so my GFX camera is my pseudo-XPan, and I get much better photos with it than I do with my Z9. I also find adapting lenses to GFX enjoyable, and I shoot a lot with my old Rokkors.
Unless you have professional demands that require 100mpix, nobody needs a GFX camera. There are a lot of compromises, and a lot of cash to be spent for not much benefit over a Z8. I enjoy mine very much, but I have to admit that I could part with it and I wouldnāt lose any significant capability.
I would not buy a GFX camera to chase specs. I would only buy one if one of its unique virtues excites you.
Thank you for your detailed explanation.
-
May I ask more about the X-T5 vs. Z30?
Iet me explain my needs.
I need a small footprint point and shoot that wonāt upset me when I use it.
For example, A couple months ago I traveled to a country in Europe for a day. I wanted minimal luggage. A Z30 with the tiny 26mm prime was perfect.
I use it quite a lot there. I knew it will be better than my iPhone.
I got home and found some amazing landscape shots I took in a hurry while I was walking. True point and shot, mostly in M mode. (some was auto)
Those RAW images made it in my collection, and one was sent to WHCC for a 24ā fine art print.
What bothered me, was the low pixel resolution. After cropping, the resolution really takes a hit. Specially the outdated sensor the Z30 has.
Which made me thinking, about the X-T5.
Can you use Z lenses on the Fuji?
Roy
Well-known member
Sorry the fuji lenses wont work on the Nikons.
But the fuji lenses can be used on the Nikons (with an adapter).
Nikon having the shortest flange distance makes adapting other lenses possible ..
I have a Fringer Nikon F to Fuji X mount adaptor that allows AF if the lens is not screw drive. Fuji rumours say that there will be a Z to X mount adaptor soon:
You Can Now Use Fujifilm X Mount Lenses (with Autofocus) on Nikon Z Cameras with BORYOZA FX-Z Adapter - Fuji Rumors
Wonderful news for Nikon Z shooters. Boroyoza Lens Adapters on Amazon There will be soon an autofocus adapter, that will allow Nikon Z camera owners to use Fujifilm X mount lenses on their cameras, with autofocus. Itās the BORYOZA FX-Z AF lens adapter. The adapter is already listed at some...
www.fujirumors.com