Fuji GFX vs SL

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well Fuji seems to be keen to buy market share.  Their GFX lenses are £1-2,000 and the bodies are £4-5,000.  Quite a challenge.  That said, the SL is available at a £600 discount at present.  Perhaps stocks are being cleared for the SL2, or perhaps it is not competitive at the price.  

[howiebrou]

The GFX50R is very comparable in size to the SL. It is less tall, actually, which is a dimension that often makes the SL difficult to fit into bags designed for M bodies. Length is not as important imho as height.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[PeterGA]

20 hours ago, thighslapper said:

Hi Vieri ....

I was more concerned with 100mpx ...... which to me does seem to be well beyond the needs of most photographers.

It looks like we will all end up with 50mpx by default within the next few years .... unless we specifically choose to sacrifice resolution for extended high ISO performance or enhanced video. 

That extra headroom in processing with more pixels would be useful at times as long as it comes with no penalties. To be honest I'd prefer extended dynamic range and better noise performance over more pixels, but if both come together I wouldn't grumble. 

However, the resolving power of the human eye will not change and 24mpx is still adequate for printing at any size if the image is viewed at a distance that allows you to see the whole print. Anyone that spends all their time 10cm from a 1m print looking at the detail has missed the point of most photographs.... It may be nice to print 1m wide at 300dpi and get 1:1 detail from the original file, but from a practical point of view it is frequently not necessary...... unless you are selling prints to other photographers, that is ...... 

We are heading the same way with TV's ...... 4K at normal domestic viewing distances is about the limit as far as required resolution ..... anything more would only be visible if you sit so close that it would be uncomfortable. They will no doubt push 8K when it appears in the mainstream ..... but it will be mostly hype from the point of watching TV and films. It may be excellent for viewing landscape shots though ....

As for data ..... it is just as well we don't do video as well ..... the last youtube vlogger I talked to said he had accumulated 20 Tb of footage and stills in the last year alone .....

6

6

Surely you jest?

Edited December 12, 2018 by PeterGA

[Vieri]

21 hours ago, thighslapper said:

Hi Vieri ....

[...]

That extra headroom in processing with more pixels would be useful at times as long as it comes with no penalties. To be honest I'd prefer extended dynamic range and better noise performance over more pixels, but if both come together I wouldn't grumble. 

However, the resolving power of the human eye will not change and 24mpx is still adequate for printing at any size if the image is viewed at a distance that allows you to see the whole print. Anyone that spends all their time 10cm from a 1m print looking at the detail has missed the point of most photographs.... It may be nice to print 1m wide at 300dpi and get 1:1 detail from the original file, but from a practical point of view it is frequently not necessary...... unless you are selling prints to other photographers, that is ...... 

[...]

As for data ..... it is just as well we don't do video as well ..... the last youtube vlogger I talked to said he had accumulated 20 Tb of footage and stills in the last year alone .....

About extended dynamic range & noise, I think that it is to be expected that new technology will improve on those as well; I think that there is a pattern there, where newer higher res sensors generally come with the same (or better) behaviour for dynamic range and noise as well, compared to the previous generations. However, the comparison here was between the SL and the GFX (or X1D, since they share the same sensor), and the GFX / X1D is an amazing sensor when it comes to DR and noise - so much so, that it doesn't require a dark frame, a feature that is not even existing on the X1D. I used the same sensor in the Pentax 645Z, and it was amazing.

About prints, I wish what you said was true. Collectors and aficionados do look at very large prints from very up close, unfortunately.

About data, as I said I don't think it's a problem for us, especially for us landscape guys not shooting like a machine gun. A vlogger obviously have other requirements when it comes to space

Best regards,

Vieri

[hhn360]

16 hours ago, ynp said:

 I am not sure that the new S008 will have the ISO 50 and even with the central shutters it would not allow us to shoot wide open in the sun with strobes.

 

 

The sync speed of S CS lenses is 1/1000s, which is still not sufficient when shooting outside in bright sunlight, for example, at the beach.  

I shoot just about 100% of the time with added light since I like to combine ambient and added light that I can control.  

[hhn360]

17 hours ago, ropo54 said:

Wonderful gallery of photos!

Rob

Thank you very much!

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It seems an odd comparison overall to me. Well the original poster had said that he had only taken a couple of snaps with the Fuji in store so it was about first handling impressions/ opinions I guess. I have never seen one. I would think they are competing with the baby Hasselblad rather than any full frame 35mm camera though. 

I really like the handling, functions and control systems of the SL and the excellent 24-90. It has its own strengths in comparison to the S (Typ 007) that I use by far the most.

Controls wise I bought into the Fuji X system twice ( used gear) to try them because I like the old school analog controls idea. . I never used them since it made no sense to me when I have Leica. They are different market segment too of course and now we have the CL available there. My own handling impressions/ opinion on the XT1 & 2 were that they felt too small and light in my hands actually. Entirely personal preference and opinion. I wouldn’t have shot more than a couple of hundred frames with them to try them.

For professional flash systems and HSS, I think it’s just market proportion that stops the flash manufacturers from offering a dedicated system. Many more Canons, Nikons and Sonys out there than SLs of course.

we know that the sync limit for the central shutter S lenses is 1/1000th  and so that won’t change whenever the S3 becomes available.

The SL2 is a hypothetical still and the other L mount brands aren’t to market yet of course. No idea what may develop in those systems.

I don’t personally need HSS but I know some others do. For any other studio application the Leicas work fine with professional, semi professional and entry level flash systems. I use Elinchrom, which provides reliable triggering and remote control. The Broncolors work fine of course

 

[caissa]

On December 11, 2018 at 4:35 PM, hhn360 said:

I own 2 SL bodies and all SL lenses, except for the 90-280 mm.  I also shoot with some specialized adapted lenses (tilt-shift), but primarily, I am a beauty and fashion photographer and prefer to shoot extensively with portrait length lenses and Profoto strobes.  I love the SL, its build quality, handling, and organic image quality from the files.  It's my favorite camera in terms of design and build.  However, the SL (like all Leicas) has one signficant drawback to me, which is that there is no high sync capabilities with my Profoto strobes.  The creative lighting options with Leicas are very limited, compared with other brands, primarily I think, because Leica photographers are "natural light" photographers.  Therefore, I greatly under-utilize my SL system.

When Profoto started supporting the Fuji GFX 50S with high speed sync, I bought into that system.  I was completely blown away by the image files.  Combined with GF 110 mm, the image files I get from the GFX is the best image quality of any file I've ever seen.  (And it's a very easy system to use to extract that quality, as well.  I also have a Phase One XF IQ3 100 mp, but that system requires extreme locked-down tripod use to extract maximum quality).  I was so blown away by the image quality of the GFX as well as the comfortable ergonomics that I ordered a 2nd GFX 50S body and haven't looked back.  I use one of the bodies for my beauty and fashion shoots and the other for personal work.  I still have my SL system, but without hesitation, I would go with the GFX hands down.  I am awaiting delivery of the GFX 50R.  

www.hhnstudios.com/

 

 

For me flash is not very important. But if it was, then I would choose PrioLite. They have a dedicated adapter for Leica SL (and other types of Leica) and they also support synchronization down to 1/8000th of a second with their own studio flashes. They are also not as expensive as others and easy to use.

For me this is a near-perfect solution , in the rare cases that I really need HSS or similar functionality.  See https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276138-moonlight-flash-with-the-sl/

For me it is not important that Leica have the perfect adapters, as long as other systems offer exactly what is needed. So flash would never be a reason for me to switch (back) to medium format. (I had Rollei medium format in the 90s and still regret the money that I lost when they went bust and I could not update my systems anymore. I still have the equipment, but the lenses are more or less useless, now.)

Edited December 12, 2018 by caissa

[caissa]

14 hours ago, Vieri said:

About extended dynamic range & noise, I think that it is to be expected that new technology will improve on those as well; I think that there is a pattern there, where newer higher res sensors generally come with the same (or better) behaviour for dynamic range and noise as well, compared to the previous generations. However, the comparison here was between the SL and the GFX (or X1D, since they share the same sensor), and the GFX / X1D is an amazing sensor when it comes to DR and noise - so much so, that it doesn't require a dark frame, a feature that is not even existing on the X1D. I used the same sensor in the Pentax 645Z, and it was amazing.

About prints, I wish what you said was true. Collectors and aficionados do look at very large prints from very up close, unfortunately.

About data, as I said I don't think it's a problem for us, especially for us landscape guys not shooting like a machine gun. A vlogger obviously have other requirements when it comes to space

Best regards,

Vieri

Hi, you seem to be generating high quality prints. Can you tell me what printers you typically use ?    I use P600 and P800 and would like to go bigger, but have no idea what is a good choice. Thanks for your reply.

For me the SL is generating enough dynamic range and also enough resolution (of course I would not mind more resolution and have a 5Ds from Canon as a backup). But regarding printing I am open for new ground .....

Edited December 12, 2018 by caissa

[Vieri]

1 minute ago, caissa said:

Hi, you seem to be generating high quality prints. Can you tell me what printers you typically use ?    I use P600 and P800 and would like to go bigger, but have no idea what is a good choice. Thanks for your reply.

Hello there,

I used to print myself and, in the end, I had a Canon 6400. Now however I decided to outsource the printing, and I found a very very good lab to do so - they are Epson Certified, and use huge Epson printers, don't remember the model. I think you'd be ok with either Canon or Epson top of the line, I found both to be extremely good these days. To me, hardware is now pretty good, the trick (and what is really difficult) is more in the profiling / preparation of the files than in the hardware itself.

Hope this helps, best regards

Vieri

[caissa]

Somebody mentioned that he waits for the 100 Mpixel camera. 
If I need panoramas, then I simply stitch several images together and easily reach the 100 Mpixel or even more. So again no reason to switch to medium format. 
Of course I cannot do this in a portrait, but then typically I do not want/need 100 MPixel.

Edited December 12, 2018 by caissa

[caissa]

13 minutes ago, Vieri said:

Hello there,

I used to print myself and, in the end, I had a Canon 6400. Now however I decided to outsource the printing, and I found a very very good lab to do so - they are Epson Certified, and use huge Epson printers, don't remember the model. I think you'd be ok with either Canon or Epson top of the line, I found both to be extremely good these days. To me, hardware is now pretty good, the trick (and what is really difficult) is more in the profiling / preparation of the files than in the hardware itself.

Hope this helps, best regards

Vieri

Progress in printers seems to be even faster paced than in cameras. So it is probably wiser not to invest in a high end printer,  but outsource to a decent print shop.  

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, caissa said:

Progress in printers seems to be even faster paced than in cameras. So it is probably wiser not to invest in a high end printer,  but outsource to a decent print shop.  

Actually, I find printer progress rather slow paced, at least compared to other photo gear, but the good news is that there are some very good options these days, Epson and Canon, supported by an increasing array of quality papers, ink sets and software support (I love ImagePrint...IP10, now called IP Black).

I also use Epson, now the P800. IP provides superb profiles for virtually all papers (and for different lighting), along with full time soft proofing and no need to worry about printer settings as it takes over the Epson driver.

Larger format printers, 24 or 44 inch, are beasts, requiring big space, and work best when used regularly.  But results can be superb with proper use and care.  Of course one needs to justify cost/benefits. Here’s a long review...

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-surecolor-p7000-printer-review/

And here’s a more general discussion on the question of whether a large format printer makes sense...

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/so-you-want-a-large-format-printer/

Jeff

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Jeff S

[Glacier]

On 12/11/2018 at 7:35 AM, hhn360 said:

I own 2 SL bodies and all SL lenses, except for the 90-280 mm.  I also shoot with some specialized adapted lenses (tilt-shift), but primarily, I am a beauty and fashion photographer and prefer to shoot extensively with portrait length lenses and Profoto strobes.  I love the SL, its build quality, handling, and organic image quality from the files.  It's my favorite camera in terms of design and build.  However, the SL (like all Leicas) has one signficant drawback to me, which is that there is no high sync capabilities with my Profoto strobes.  The creative lighting options with Leicas are very limited, compared with other brands, primarily I think, because Leica photographers are "natural light" photographers.  Therefore, I greatly under-utilize my SL system.

When Profoto started supporting the Fuji GFX 50S with high speed sync, I bought into that system.  I was completely blown away by the image files.  Combined with GF 110 mm, the image files I get from the GFX is the best image quality of any file I've ever seen.  (And it's a very easy system to use to extract that quality, as well.  I also have a Phase One XF IQ3 100 mp, but that system requires extreme locked-down tripod use to extract maximum quality).  I was so blown away by the image quality of the GFX as well as the comfortable ergonomics that I ordered a 2nd GFX 50S body and haven't looked back.  I use one of the bodies for my beauty and fashion shoots and the other for personal work.  I still have my SL system, but without hesitation, I would go with the GFX hands down.  I am awaiting delivery of the GFX 50R.  

www.hhnstudios.com/

 

 

Thanks for those thoughts. How would you compare the look of the SL lenses compared to the GFX's? Especially interested in the 75 or 90 2.0 versus the Fuji 110. I own the Fuji GFX system presently and am contemplating whether I should complement with the SL system. 

[PeterGA]

8 hours ago, caissa said:

Somebody mentioned that he waits for the 100 Mpixel camera. 
If I need panoramas, then I simply stitch several images together and easily reach the 100 Mpixel or even more. So again no reason to switch to medium format. 
Of course I cannot do this in a portrait, but then typically I do not want/need 100 MPixel.

How exactly do you go about 'stitching' a panorama with moving objects in it as subject matter - you know like people? 🤫

[Vieri]

3 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Actually, I find printer progress rather slow paced, at least compared to other photo gear, but the good news is that there are some very good options these days, Epson and Canon, supported by an increasing array of quality papers, ink sets and software support (I love ImagePrint...IP10, now called IP Black).

I also use Epson, now the P800. IP provides superb profiles for virtually all papers (and for different lighting), along with full time soft proofing and no need to worry about printer settings as it takes over the Epson driver.

Larger format printers, 24 or 44 inch, are beasts, requiring big space, and work best when used regularly.  But results can be superb with proper use and care.  Of course one needs to justify cost/benefits. Here’s a long review...

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-surecolor-p7000-printer-review/

And here’s a more general discussion on the question of whether a large format printer makes sense...

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/so-you-want-a-large-format-printer/

Jeff

 

Exactly, progress in printer has been much slower than other photo gear - however, we got to a very good place, IMHO, as far as inkjet quality goes. The reasons for outsourcing are, in my personal case, various.

Main reason has actually nothing to do with photography, unfortunately. In 2016, we got a big earthquake here in central Italy, and my office (where my Canon 6400 was), which was in an outbuilding close to my house, has been declared unfit for human presence - therefore, I had to move my office in the house, in a very small room without enough space for the (huge!) printer. Repairs in my outbuilding ended in 2018 and I am now back to my old (large) office, but the printer has been out of use for two years, during which I had to find an alternative to keep printing and selling my images. More, once my workspace has been restored, the printer of course after two years of no use was completely clogged. Good thing with the Canon 6400 is that you can replace the printheads on your own, but in the meantime I found the outsourcing very convenient for my volumes. Thing is, I do print every image I consider finished: while I certainly miss the convenience of being able to print as I wish, now I just build up a portfolio and go to the printer with a few images at a time.

I am selling my printer, and probably - while I keep saying that the outsourcing is fine - I will end up buying a smaller printer to print my images just for myself, and keep using the outsourcing for the prints I sell. I am pretty sure that, in the end, I will actually spend more time printing on my own than driving the 40 miles to go to the printer; but I just love the process

Best regards,

Vieri

Edited December 13, 2018 by Vieri

[hhn360]

10 hours ago, Glacier said:

Thanks for those thoughts. How would you compare the look of the SL lenses compared to the GFX's? Especially interested in the 75 or 90 2.0 versus the Fuji 110. I own the Fuji GFX system presently and am contemplating whether I should complement with the SL system. 

Honestly, I don't know how much the SL system would add to your repertoire if you already own the GFX.  If you want a more compact body than the GFX 50S, I would consider the GFX 50R.  

I prefer the GF 110 over the SL 90 for sure, not that there is much to complain about with the 90.  The GF 110 is on my GFX about 75% of the time; I really love the look from this lens (I love it that much that I own 2 copies of it).  It is super sharp even at f2, has that medium format rendering, and is easy to use (handling).  

The SL 75 though is unique and something that Fuji doesn't offer.  In fact, I can't think of any manufacturer that has a 75 mm prime with autofocus.  For me, it's perfect for full length (body) portraits when I don't have have enough space to back up to use the 110/90. I am not a 50 mm shooter, finding it too problematic with distortion for my usage.  For my use the only additive benefit of the SL is the 75 mm lens.

On other thing to consider - I believe the GFX has some sort of sensor covering whereby I've never encountered dust on the sensor.  It's so liberating to use a digital camera without having dust issues.  On the other hand, the SL sensor is a dust magnetic.  Sure you can clean it, but it's one less annoyance. 

[hhn360]

17 hours ago, caissa said:

For me flash is not very important. But if it was, then I would choose PrioLite. They have a dedicated adapter for Leica SL (and other types of Leica) and they also support synchronization down to 1/8000th of a second with their own studio flashes. They are also not as expensive as others and easy to use.

For me this is a near-perfect solution , in the rare cases that I really need HSS or similar functionality.  See https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/276138-moonlight-flash-with-the-sl/

For me it is not important that Leica have the perfect adapters, as long as other systems offer exactly what is needed. So flash would never be a reason for me to switch (back) to medium format. (I had Rollei medium format in the 90s and still regret the money that I lost when they went bust and I could not update my systems anymore. I still have the equipment, but the lenses are more or less useless, now.)

I have an extensive set of Profoto strobes (around 10 or so, along with many light shaping tools) that I use both in the studio and on-location that it makes no sense for me to build another lighting kit.  Lighting is not a priority for Leica because historically their customers have not demanded it.  The client base for Leica is by and large photographers who capture and document and therefore, flash isn't a necessity.   

As a fashion and beauty photographer, however, I don't capture an image but try to create the image to that I have in mind, of which shaping the light is crucial.  If Leica wants to make in roads to get more commercial and fashion photographers to use their system, they really need to address the lighting issues they have.  And clearly they want commercial and fashion photographers to use their system as the S is marketed heavily using fashion images.   

[caissa]

8 hours ago, PeterGA said:

How exactly do you go about 'stitching' a panorama with moving objects in it as subject matter - you know like people? 🤫

In my panoramas people or cars (trains) are not an important part. I wrote already that stitching does not work for portraits.
The "most difficult thing" is clouds, but if you move swiftly they are not really a problem.
So panorama is more about the "eternal" things (mountains townscape, sea, etc ...) and there stitching works very well.

For example if there are twice as many deers in a park than in reality (because they moved to another part) nobody really cares about it.  

Edited December 13, 2018 by caissa

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, hhn360 said:

 

On other thing to consider - I believe the GFX has some sort of sensor covering whereby I've never encountered dust on the sensor.  It's so liberating to use a digital camera without having dust issues.  On the other hand, the SL sensor is a dust magnetic.  Sure you can clean it, but it's one less annoyance. 

Actually you’ll probably be surprised to know that one reason you don’t encounter much dust is that Fuji placed a 9mm gap between the cover glass and sensor on the GFX so that any dust is less visible....

https://fujifilm-x.com/global/stories/gfx-technologies-2/

Jeff