GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

To those that bought the GFX100S and kept the SL2... the GFX is similarly sized with faster AF and better IQ. When do you use the SL2?

I have both and I will use it when I need the versatility of the 24-90 and the 90-280 lenses.. my 100s will mostly get used with 80, 110 and 250.. and 23 for all landscape of course 

[Alistairm]

9 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

To those that bought the GFX100S and kept the SL2... the GFX is similarly sized with faster AF and better IQ. When do you use the SL2?

The SL lenses seem compact compared to the GF lenses. Throw in an M lens and the whole SL package shrinks. Leaving size aside, I also still much prefer the SL handling, menu system and feel in the hand of both the body and the lenses, as well as the experience of the much better EVF and also the way the Leica lenses draw. 

[Lichozaur]

@stout_trapdoor9
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I am in a similar spot right now, loving my Q2 and trying hard to decide whether to go with SL2-s or GFX100S, do post an update once you come to a conclusion!

Edited March 21, 2021 by Lichozaur

[FlashGordonPhotography]

13 hours ago, Mr.Q said:

To those that bought the GFX100S and kept the SL2... the GFX is similarly sized with faster AF and better IQ. When do you use the SL2?

I'm not yet convinced that the GFX100S does focus faster.....

Don't get me wrong. It's astounding for a larger than 135 sensor. The PDAF system doesn't wobble like the DFD system. And it's very lens dependent (the 50mm Summilux is definitely slower than the 80mm Fujinon but the Summicron is as fast). The GFX isn't nearly as quick as the XT4 let alone a newer Sony or Canon body. So far, with extremely limited testing I'm seeing the AF to be about the same but without the annoying wobble of the DFD system. I haven't had time or opportunity to test the AFC at all but the AFS looks mighty similar to me. The SL2 may be slightly better in low light. More testing to follow....

The GFX system doesn't offer the range of the L mount and there's some weird gaps, especially in the zooms and at the wide end. I still don't know whether I should buy the 45-100 or 32-64. Both doesn't make sense due to the huge crossover but both leave a big hole in coverage. Maybe a wide zoom is coming? But the road map hasn't been updated in ages (fair enough in these challenging times).

So far the camera seems to be an incredibly well rounded package but not really a master of anything, which is fine. The focus is vastly better than any *medium format* system but not close to the best in 135. The resolution is great but the DR isn't quite where the 5 year old 50MP sensor is. The colours and handing are superb but a step behind the X1D (you need to try the touchpad before you think you'll miss the joystick on the Fuji). So far though I really like this camera. The IBIS is very very good. I actually like the film simulations (I do on my XT3/4 as well). The power switch is in the proper place. I miss the XT control set. Looks like Fuji is slowly moving away from it which is a shame. I wish I could set a dial to exposure compensation in PAS modes without having to press a button first. The tri-flip screen is a personal favorite of mine. If I were doing serious video I'd use a ninja. If not I can use a GoPro.

It'll be interesting to see how the GFX handles loooong exposures. The X1D is king of the hill here and I shoot a lot of long exposures. I will need to see how easy/hard it is to bring up the reported PDAF artifacts. Probably not as bad as some reported for the GFX100 as these things are usually exaggerated. 

I just got back from a three week trip where I took a small X1DII kit and my M10R/M. Wish I'd taken the Q2 as well, to be honest. So I didn't have fast AF or IBIS or huge buffers or PDAF or any of those cool things and really didn't even think about it. Shot handheld 80% of the time and files are pin sharp.

So at the moment I'm holding on to everything. Not all of it will stay (I say that but haven't sold a single camera in years!!). We have a bit of a weather situation going on in Oz at the moment. 1 in 50 years floods and all that... Been challenging to get out and shoot.

Gordon

[Prosophos]

On 2/21/2021 at 8:45 PM, Prosophos said:

I haven't read through the pages of responses -- and I don't know whether Fuji will achieve "domination", to use the wording of the original question -- but I will be picking up a GFX100S.  Up until its announcement, I was seriously considering the SL2-S.

I would never choose either of these as a replacement for my Leica M camera (the rangefinder is Leica's killer app, so to speak), but in the mirrorless class, the Fuji is difficult to ignore.

―Peter.

 

Just an update to the above post:

I received the GFX 100S this past week, and I am really enjoying it.  The eye AF is actually pretty good, and the IQ is hard to beat.

Sample shot (an impromptu portrait) here:  https://prosophos.com/2021/03/20/d/

―Peter.

[helged]

7 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The resolution is great but the DR isn't quite where the 5 year old 50MP sensor is.

It will be interesting to see what the rumoured 50S Mark II will deliver regarding low light, long exposures and DR (if the rumours materialise, that is...).

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/21/2021 at 9:56 AM, Mr.Q said:

To those that bought the GFX100S and kept the SL2... the GFX is similarly sized with faster AF and better IQ. When do you use the SL2?

I had an SL2 and part exchanged it for the GFX100S, so I can only part answer your question based on whether I think (in hindsight) no longer using my SL2 was the right choice for me.  BTW, the SL2's AF always felt absolutely fine in terms of speed and accuracy to me, as does the GFX100S.

I prefer the build quality of the SL Summicrons over the GF lens that I have (the GF 63mm), the latter feels and sounds more hollow to me.

I prefer the perfection of the build quality of the SL2 body too, but I do like the ergonomics of the GFX100S a lot (especially the hand grip), sure it would be nice to have a better EVF and the back joystick seemed to feel less jerky on the SL2, but these are small points for me. 

Balance wise, I prefer how the GFX100S + 63mm lens sits in the hand - I find it less front-heavy than the SL2 + SL Summicron. 

I really really like having the option of camera profiles (ie, film simulations) that I can use in RAW processing of GFX100S files.

If I still had the SL2, when would I use it? The answer would be for the tactile experience, enjoyment of its EVF, and ability to use M lenses on it. The last of those points is huge, and gives remarkable flexibility of sharing an ecosystem across M-SL (eg, including using M lenses as back-ups when travelling).  But for outright image quality, I certainly prefer the GFX100S - given that is the #1 priority for me, I'm not sure I would have used the SL2 very much. Whilst the SL2 had a high resolution mode, I find the capture of fine detail is eclipsed by a true 100mp sensor for very large prints. And even more importantly for me, I also find the output of the GFX100S to be smoother and more natural. The SL2 gave the appearance of incredible sharpness, but to my eyes this was driven by a combo of its high capture of fine detail (off the 47mp sensor) + also very high acuity of the SL Summicron .....the GFX100S can capture more fine detail due to 100mp, but for whatever reason do this in a more gentle fashion IMHO. As a side note to this, I find it easier to sharpen GFX100S files without overcooking the sharpening (I found I had to be very gentle with the SL2 files, given the very high acuity from SL2 + SL primes).

    

Edited March 22, 2021 by Jon Warwick

[setuporg]

On 3/21/2021 at 2:38 AM, Alistairm said:

I’ve just ordered a 907 to keep my XCD lenses filled with light for a while.

I did that and also got the 503cw at the same time last year, with some incredible HB V lenses.  This is from a hike yesterday, with the 40mm CFI:

 

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!

[Alistairm]

In terms of AF, my anecdotal experience is that the SL2 is at least on par with the GFX. While the GFX AFC seems to work, its AFS hunts more or just won’t hit focus in some AFS situations (eg macro) where the SL2 nails focus quickly. Maybe (probably) I’m still in the learning curve, and I never had any issue with the SL2 AF anyway, but at this stage it’s not a feature that I would use to split the systems.

Edited March 22, 2021 by Alistairm

[FlashGordonPhotography]

10 hours ago, helged said:

It will be interesting to see what the rumoured 50S Mark II will deliver regarding low light, long exposures and DR (if the rumours materialise, that is...).

To see significant changes it'll need a newer sensor and as far as I'm aware there isn't one. IQ on the current sensor is still class leading. I can do single exposures of 30 minutes with no LENR and the files are simply unreal. The current 51MP sensor really has some special secret sauce. More impressive when you realise it's a 14 bit sensor (in a 16 bit wrapper) and equals or beats the DR of some 16 bit sensors like the GFX100. What isn't going to improve is AF unless we can get either PDAF on sensor or a much much faster sensor readout.

*If* there is a new sensor then maybe it'd find it's way into the X1D body. I'd buy that if it got better AF performance with the same IQ.

I'd REALLY like to see an mRAW file available, somewhere around the 40-50MP mark through pixel binning on the GFX100S. That'd give some more usable DR as well. Plus a few changes to the customisation options that make it a bit clunky to use.

Gordon

[helged]

1 hour ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

To see significant changes it'll need a newer sensor and as far as I'm aware there isn't one. IQ on the current sensor is still class leading. I can do single exposures of 30 minutes with no LENR and the files are simply unreal. The current 51MP sensor really has some special secret sauce. More impressive when you realise it's a 14 bit sensor (in a 16 bit wrapper) and equals or beats the DR of some 16 bit sensors like the GFX100. What isn't going to improve is AF unless we can get either PDAF on sensor or a much much faster sensor readout.

*If* there is a new sensor then maybe it'd find it's way into the X1D body. I'd buy that if it got better AF performance with the same IQ.

I'd REALLY like to see an mRAW file available, somewhere around the 40-50MP mark through pixel binning on the GFX100S. That'd give some more usable DR as well. Plus a few changes to the customisation options that make it a bit clunky to use.

Gordon

Thanks Gordon! 

Are there any image difference between the two GFX50 bodies? Any banding when lifting shadows? I ask of curiosity - haven't tried/tested any of the GFX bodies.

[frame-it]

6 hours ago, Alistairm said:

In terms of AF, my anecdotal experience is that the SL2 is at least on par with the GFX. While the GFX AFC seems to work, its AFS hunts more or just won’t hit focus in some AFS situations (eg macro) where the SL2 nails focus quickly. Maybe (probably) I’m still in the learning curve, and I never had any issue with the SL2 AF anyway, but at this stage it’s not a feature that I would use to split the systems.

from the link posted earlier >>  There’s something very important if you get a 100S and are coming from the 50S/50R, many of the GF lenses have a firmware update required to make use of the PDAF system in the 100S. If you don’t update the lens firmware, the camera will only operate in CDAF mode and you’ll experience the same pulsing and AF performance as the 50R. I’ve noticed many new users of the 100S complaining about pulsing and eventually solved their issues by updating the lens firmware.

[SrMi]

4 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

To see significant changes it'll need a newer sensor and as far as I'm aware there isn't one. IQ on the current sensor is still class leading. I can do single exposures of 30 minutes with no LENR and the files are simply unreal. The current 51MP sensor really has some special secret sauce. More impressive when you realise it's a 14 bit sensor (in a 16 bit wrapper) and equals or beats the DR of some 16 bit sensors like the GFX100. What isn't going to improve is AF unless we can get either PDAF on sensor or a much much faster sensor readout.

*If* there is a new sensor then maybe it'd find it's way into the X1D body. I'd buy that if it got better AF performance with the same IQ.

I'd REALLY like to see an mRAW file available, somewhere around the 40-50MP mark through pixel binning on the GFX100S. That'd give some more usable DR as well. Plus a few changes to the customisation options that make it a bit clunky to use.

Gordon

Why would you expect better DR with pixel binning?
IMO, the best way to get better DR is through dual conversion gain (already on 100MP sensors) and frame averaging (as seen in Olympus and Phase One).

[Alistairm]

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

from the link posted earlier >>  There’s something very important if you get a 100S and are coming from the 50S/50R, many of the GF lenses have a firmware update required to make use of the PDAF system in the 100S. If you don’t update the lens firmware, the camera will only operate in CDAF mode and you’ll experience the same pulsing and AF performance as the 50R. I’ve noticed many new users of the 100S complaining about pulsing and eventually solved their issues by updating the lens firmware.

Thank you! Have just checked and the lenses (all of which I only bought in the last couple of weeks) are all running current firmware. Fantastic tip though and I'll be sure to keep checking for further updates. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

20 hours ago, SrMi said:

Why would you expect better DR with pixel binning?
IMO, the best way to get better DR is through dual conversion gain (already on 100MP sensors) and frame averaging (as seen in Olympus and Phase One).

Because that's what happens, although I couldn't say to what extent without testing. Pixel binning simulates a larger pixel. Larger pixel means lower noise floor which means more *usable* DR. Multishot does something similar as well. The 100MP 44x33 sensor has less usable DR than the old 50MP one so dual gain hasn't been able to account to the reduction in pixel size in this case. If it were able to average across more pixels we might see a small improvement in usable DR.

The 100MP sensor is NOT a bad sensor. It's superb. The DR reduction is small and mostly the issue is if pushed too hard you get some banding from the PDAF elements, *occasionally*.... I'm not one of those people trying to say it's a poor sensor in any way. It's great. But when measured against the old one there's a small drop in usable DR.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

23 hours ago, helged said:

Thanks Gordon! 

Are there any image difference between the two GFX50 bodies? Any banding when lifting shadows? I ask of curiosity - haven't tried/tested any of the GFX bodies.

I have never owned the Fuji 50MP bodies. Tested the 50S and decided to go with the HB X1D, which has the same sensor. I also have a Pentax 645Z that also has this sensor. I have also tested the 50R but didn't like the handling and saw no benefit over my X1D's. Lastly I have had the 100S for a week and have 1 lens until my order arrives tomorrow. So I think I can say I know the 50MP sensor well but not the 50MP Fuji cameras and I'm getting there with the 100MP camera (as it's so similar in use to the XT bodies I own) but I have yet to stress test the sensor. I have been playing but it's been rather wet here and my lounge room isn't a comprehensive testing environment. Finally got some sun today though so maybe....

I see little to no difference between the 50MP sensor in my 645Z and X1D's. And I saw little or no difference other than some colour science with the Fujis. The differences were in the bodies mainly. The Fujis started up quicker, focused a tiny bit faster (due to the lenses I suspect), have a focal plane shutter (so higher shutter speeds) etc. I love the colour from all of them but prefer the HB then the Pentax (a HIGHLY underrated camera) but think the Fuji film profiles are fab. I have never seen banding in the 50MP sensor and I've pushed shadows up to 5 stops. I'm sure it's possible but you're into silly processing to make it happen. The 50MP sensor is as close to ISO invariant as I've seen. So no matter which camera you get the sensor is not the issue.

As this is a Leica forum I will say that I wish the S3 sensor was in a body worth buying. Same body, SL2 internals. The files I saw when I tested it were sublime. I really think Leica has a sensor that is at least as good as the others and they missed a huge opportunity by not getting it in a mirrorless body. They could have been a contender..... Such a shame.

Gordon

[aksclix]

37 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

the Pentax (a HIGHLY underrated camera)

+1 to that.. I chose the 645z over the S007, 4 years ago when I first got into medium format.. sold it after about a year and half when I bought into the gfx system. The deep grip on the 645z was so good! 

[aksclix]

On 3/22/2021 at 4:09 PM, frame-it said:

from the link posted earlier >>  There’s something very important if you get a 100S and are coming from the 50S/50R, many of the GF lenses have a firmware update required to make use of the PDAF system in the 100S. If you don’t update the lens firmware, the camera will only operate in CDAF mode and you’ll experience the same pulsing and AF performance as the 50R. I’ve noticed many new users of the 100S complaining about pulsing and eventually solved their issues by updating the lens firmware.

Right.. those firmware updates for the lenses are from 2019 still.. I didn’t see any new updates after that.. I guess if it’s compatible already with gfx 100 it would be with 100s as well.. 

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Because that's what happens, although I couldn't say to what extent without testing. Pixel binning simulates a larger pixel. Larger pixel means lower noise floor which means more *usable* DR. Multishot does something similar as well. The 100MP 44x33 sensor has less usable DR than the old 50MP one so dual gain hasn't been able to account to the reduction in pixel size in this case. If it were able to average across more pixels we might see a small improvement in usable DR.

The 100MP sensor is NOT a bad sensor. It's superb. The DR reduction is small and mostly the issue is if pushed too hard you get some banding from the PDAF elements, *occasionally*.... I'm not one of those people trying to say it's a poor sensor in any way. It's great. But when measured against the old one there's a small drop in usable DR.

Gordon

I am not following.

Larger pixels generally do not mean lower noise floor unless looking at the pixel level. At the output level (same sized output), it is the larger sensors that have better DR. Pixel size is not significant. Examples: Nikon Z 6 vs. Z 7, Sony A7m3 vs. A7rm3 (same sensor size, different pixel size, same DR).
Multishot is a bit like frame averaging, bringing more "light' to the sensors, thus significantly increasing DR.

I do not understand what you mean by usable DR. Measured PDR is similar between 100MP and 50MP sensors until dual conversion gain kicks in.

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm%20GFX%2050S,FujiFilm%20GFX%20100

There is no (more) banding caused  by OSPDAF on GFX100 or GFX100s.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[SrMi]

On 3/22/2021 at 1:01 AM, helged said:

It will be interesting to see what the rumoured 50S Mark II will deliver regarding low light, long exposures and DR (if the rumours materialise, that is...).

The DR will likely be the same as 50S Mark I. The only thing that could lift the DR would be dual conversion gain, which I think is not feasible with the 'old' sensor that is in X1D, GFX50 Mark I and likely in Mark II as well. It is likely that it will still require LENR to eliminate hot pixels.