GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[setuporg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, aksclix said:

I’ve had the x1d for a month

So you got all of GFX100S, X1D and S007 within last month to pick one or keep all of them?:)

[aksclix]

31 minutes ago, setuporg said:

So you got all of GFX100S, X1D and S007 within last month to pick one or keep all of them?:)

lol... 
I had the GFX 50r for nearly 2 years.. so, getting the 100s was just on the cards anyway!
X1D - honestly, I wasn't looking to buy one but got a nice deal on a spotless camera and had a 45p f4 in stock.. so just got it to try the system but I liked it too much to return! 
S007 - again, I wasn't going to buy it now.. had bought the 006 because of a steal deal but that died on me so got the upgrade to 007 for a great price! At the moment, I don't plan on parting with any of them.. I am VERY new to S and XCD systems.. I had the 645z for nearly 2 years before getting the 50r and at that time the 007 was nearly $20K! I got it for 1/5th of that price now  

So, I won't be parting with any of these before using it for some real work hopefully this year! 

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

Of the cameras I own, Hasselblad H6D and X1D have solved hot-pixels another way. AFAIK, they are the only ones who do not need LENR.

The Pentax 645Z performs much like the X1D. It doesn't need LENR. At least I haven't needed it up to about 20 minutes.

Gordon

[SrMi]

6 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

The Pentax 645Z performs much like the X1D. It doesn't need LENR. At least I haven't needed it up to about 20 minutes.

Gordon

I wonder why 645Z had mandatory dark frame subtraction in the beginning.

[BernardC]

12 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

What's VERY interesting is that according to PTP the GFX100S has almost a stop better DR than the GFX100 although the sensors are identical. Probably some firmware improvements going on as hardware is identical.

That's well within the margin of error for PtP. calculations are done from user-submited pictures of computer screens, so the number of uncontrolled variables is quite large: screen, lens, ambient lighting, dust on lens or screen, technique, inaccuracies in EXIF (aperture, shutter, ISO), etc.

Maybe it evens-out after dozens of test of the same camera.

[SrMi]

14 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

What's VERY interesting is that according to PTP the GFX100S has almost a stop better DR than the GFX100 although the sensors are identical. Probably some firmware improvements going on as hardware is identical.

I have all those cameras except the SL2S. It'll be interesting to see how they compare in the real world.

Gordon

Photons to Photos has no data for GFX100S yet. What cameras are you comparing?

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

Photons to Photos has no data for GFX100S yet. What cameras are you comparing?

No idea! Went to the site without coffee and that's what happens.....

Apologies.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

6 hours ago, SrMi said:

I wonder why 645Z had mandatory dark frame subtraction in the beginning.

No idea. The camera had been out for quite a while when I bought mine, so I have no idea if there were any firmware improvements to the system that could have made a difference. If LENR had been mandatory I wouldn't have bought the camera as my number one reason for the larger sensor is better performance at long exposure times. That was the biggest disappointment of the S007. I couldn't even have the option of shooting a 5 minute exposure and I think the sensor would have handled it just fine. The S3 has fixed this to an extent but it's gotten into silly money for a camera with one focus point. Even the Pentax had  a few.

When I was deciding between the 50S and X1D I assumed the performance was the same as the Pentax for both. Maybe I lucked out with my choice of the X1D instead of the 50MP Fuji.

My GFX lenses arrived yesterday. I've got a 4 lens kit. 23, 32-64, 80 and 100-200. Pretty flexible with no cross over. Ideally I would want the 45-100 and a 28-45 (Pentax make an epic one) but I could work with this kit and get 95% of what I need covered. I also added a Godox trigger and my lighting kit became Fuji compatible immediately (Come on Leica!! Get with the program on flash compatibility......). I have a couple of options for long lens work although I really wish Sigma would sort out the 60-600 or 150-600 sport and a couple of long primes for L mount. Despite the 186 threads on how shit the SL2 AF is, a 60-600 on the SL would be ideal for me.

After the lenses arrived I sort of laid out what kits I want to keep and was looking at how they fit in with each other. The GFX could really be quite disruptive for me. It's nearly ideal for travel (when that happens) as well as a lot of my work and general shooting. I still have to see how it goes for long exposures (shoooting experience) as that's really important to me. And I'll need occasional use of specialty gear (long lenses, tilt shift etc). My over the shoulder cameras are my M10M/R.

But overall it'll be interesting to see how disruptive the GFX is. I'm probably going to use it at a wedding I'm shooting in a fortnight. First in well over a year.

Gordon

[thighslapper]

23 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Does the GFX50S have some hot pixels at long exposures? Honest question, as I would have assumed it behaved much like the X1D or 645Z. Possibly a processor issue rather than the sensor? Interesting....

Gordon

I thought the reason this sensor has excellent long exposure performance was because it runs cool in comparison to many others. 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

1 hour ago, thighslapper said:

I thought the reason this sensor has excellent long exposure performance was because it runs cool in comparison to many others. 

Quite possibly. I don't know. On the X1D the whole body is a heat sync for the sensor and you can feel the body warm up as it dissipates the heat. The 645Z body is big. Maybe that has some helpful thermal qualities. Interesting that some say the Fuji did have hot pixel issues though.

Gordon

[SrMi]

3 hours ago, thighslapper said:

I thought the reason this sensor has excellent long exposure performance was because it runs cool in comparison to many others. 

From what information I was able to glean in the meantime, Hasselblad uses LENR without a dark frame, applying appropriate NR at exposure. Dedicated hot pixels removal is done by actual sensor mapping data measured at the factory and saved in each body. Also, sensor random exposure noise is measured at the sensor edge zones, etc.
More details are available at hasselbladdigitalforum.com.

[helged]

9 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

No idea. The camera had been out for quite a while when I bought mine, so I have no idea if there were any firmware improvements to the system that could have made a difference. If LENR had been mandatory I wouldn't have bought the camera as my number one reason for the larger sensor is better performance at long exposure times. That was the biggest disappointment of the S007. I couldn't even have the option of shooting a 5 minute exposure and I think the sensor would have handled it just fine. The S3 has fixed this to an extent but it's gotten into silly money for a camera with one focus point. Even the Pentax had  a few.

When I was deciding between the 50S and X1D I assumed the performance was the same as the Pentax for both. Maybe I lucked out with my choice of the X1D instead of the 50MP Fuji.

My GFX lenses arrived yesterday. I've got a 4 lens kit. 23, 32-64, 80 and 100-200. Pretty flexible with no cross over. Ideally I would want the 45-100 and a 28-45 (Pentax make an epic one) but I could work with this kit and get 95% of what I need covered. I also added a Godox trigger and my lighting kit became Fuji compatible immediately (Come on Leica!! Get with the program on flash compatibility......). I have a couple of options for long lens work although I really wish Sigma would sort out the 60-600 or 150-600 sport and a couple of long primes for L mount. Despite the 186 threads on how shit the SL2 AF is, a 60-600 on the SL would be ideal for me.

After the lenses arrived I sort of laid out what kits I want to keep and was looking at how they fit in with each other. The GFX could really be quite disruptive for me. It's nearly ideal for travel (when that happens) as well as a lot of my work and general shooting. I still have to see how it goes for long exposures (shoooting experience) as that's really important to me. And I'll need occasional use of specialty gear (long lenses, tilt shift etc). My over the shoulder cameras are my M10M/R.

But overall it'll be interesting to see how disruptive the GFX is. I'm probably going to use it at a wedding I'm shooting in a fortnight. First in well over a year.

Gordon

Feel free to report back after using the 100S at long exposures/night; I am particularly interested in that... 

[SJH]

Just a thought but would there really be a need to move to a GFX100s as some have done (or are going to) if the SL series adopted the same strategy as Sigma is doing with the first L camera mount to have PDAF and the Sony 61mb sensor. Who knows what could be done with the SL2-S’s sensor given it’s a 24mb Sony but for the SL2 it would need the launch of the SL3.

Interesting times and whilst I’m not rushing out to buy the fp L nevertheless here we have the first L Mount product capable of using PDAF with our Leica glass and at 61mb, it moves the goalposts forward for Leica in terms of remaining with Panasonic or taking Sigma’s route. Imagine a Q3 with this sensor and PDAF for example and a ‘Leica makeover’.

[helged]

17 minutes ago, SJH said:

Just a thought but would there really be a need to move to a GFX100s as some have done (or are going to) if the SL series adopted the same strategy as Sigma is doing with the first L camera mount to have PDAF and the Sony 61mb sensor. Who knows what could be done with the SL2-S’s sensor given it’s a 24mb Sony but for the SL2 it would need the launch of the SL3.

Interesting times and whilst I’m not rushing out to buy the fp L nevertheless here we have the first L Mount product capable of using PDAF with our Leica glass and at 61mb, it moves the goalposts forward for Leica in terms of remaining with Panasonic or taking Sigma’s route. Imagine a Q3 with this sensor and PDAF for example and a ‘Leica makeover’.

+1. It all boils down to the fact that something is always greener on the other side of the fence. In addition, technical/optical/etc. advances will be picked up by other vendors over time, making yesterday's impossibility todays (or tomorrows) reality.

[SJH]

17 minutes ago, helged said:

+1. It all boils down to the fact that something is always greener on the other side of the fence. In addition, technical/optical/etc. advances will be picked up by other vendors over time, making yesterday's impossibility todays (or tomorrows) reality.

I agree - here though we have a Sigma with PDAF and 61mb launched roughly at the same time as the SL2-S which also has a Sony sensor. Where I was going was that why not just do a ‘Sigma’ and therefore launch future SL’s and Q’s with PDAF which would be the icing on the cake for many around what are brilliant camera’s. Sigma could do it with someone else’s sensor for the L mount lenses so why not Leica at roughly the same time

[SrMi]

On 3/25/2021 at 7:43 AM, BernardC said:

That's well within the margin of error for PtP. calculations are done from user-submited pictures of computer screens, so the number of uncontrolled variables is quite large: screen, lens, ambient lighting, dust on lens or screen, technique, inaccuracies in EXIF (aperture, shutter, ISO), etc.

Maybe it evens-out after dozens of test of the same camera.

I do not think that the margin of error for PtP is that large.

Bill Claff's tests (PtP) are designed to be "self-calibrating". Sometimes he received sets of data from different contributors and there was never a significant difference between them.

 

[ZHNL]

8 hours ago, SJH said:

Just a thought but would there really be a need to move to a GFX100s as some have done (or are going to) if the SL series adopted the same strategy as Sigma is doing with the first L camera mount to have PDAF and the Sony 61mb sensor. Who knows what could be done with the SL2-S’s sensor given it’s a 24mb Sony but for the SL2 it would need the launch of the SL3.

Interesting times and whilst I’m not rushing out to buy the fp L nevertheless here we have the first L Mount product capable of using PDAF with our Leica glass and at 61mb, it moves the goalposts forward for Leica in terms of remaining with Panasonic or taking Sigma’s route. Imagine a Q3 with this sensor and PDAF for example and a ‘Leica makeover’.

Sigma FP/L uses E shutter only. Original FP's read out speed is already at the border line of speed that I want to use it with E shutter full time. (not for a moving subject) The FP_L is even slower to about 1/10s at 14 bit output. This make it even a more niche product for general use. This is pretty much a still life machine. (landscape, city, product, none moving human etc.)

Plus it is not just PDAF itself is a magic in term of focus speed, it is also how the algorithm/tech implemented in there. Original FP has CDAF, so were Panasonic and SL2, but in use I found Sigma is way worse than Panasonic/Leica rivals in terms of speed and accuracy.

So I wouldn't be surprised FP_L is much slower/worse than Sony/Canon's PDAF. (Nikon current Z is fine but not as good as other two) Many might still prefer sensor band free CDAF camera for IQ than most FF that has PDAF sensor banding in extreme shooting condition. SL2 is really fine in term of AF IMHO leave out a few cases chasing fast move subject at close focus distance (relative to focal length). I don't know why people would/keep bring 100S AF as an advantage to choose it? First of all, It is not much better (if better at all?) and then I personally would think they miss the point about it. It is really for ultimate IQ in this size and price and adaptability, plus IBIS which is huge (my 2 cents at least) 

    

[thighslapper]

Mighty impressed with the GFX100s and it's zoom lenses after a day or two of playing.

Actually lighter/no heavier than my SL2 or S1R with SL glass .... and better balanced as the grip is much better and lighter lenses make it less front heavy.

Ergonomically nicely laid out with a good balance of button/screen/menu accessible functions.

The great feature is the wide customisation available so I can replicate my S1R set up and workflow very easily so it doesn't feel like a 'new' system where I need to learn lots of different ways of doing things. The S1R is button heavy but very flexible, SL2 is button light and I find fiddling with settings on screen is a pain. Fuji seems to be in a happy place between the two. 

Image quality outstanding and noise absent/unobtrusive at the sort of levels I'd use in landscape photography. Despite the small battery the power usage seems very well controlled ..... unlike the abysmal SL2.

IBIS/OIS is great ..... can take handheld sharp images with the 45-100 @100 mm down to 1/4 sec.... which for 100mpx MF is remarkable. 

Only downside so far is the EVF blackout time after taking a shot, which I can see would be an issue for those contemplating it for sports/wildlife. It remains to be seen whether the rather idiosyncratic range of the zooms proves to be a problem ..... and the absence of a very WA and longTele lenses .... although I don't use either much. 

I can't understand how Fuji have managed to squeeze all this into a body that's essentially the same as both my premium 35mm cameras .... 

Edited March 26, 2021 by thighslapper

[SrMi]

17 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

Mighty impressed with the GFX100s and it's zoom lenses after a day or two of playing.

Actually lighter/no heavier than my SL2 or S1R with SL glass .... and better balanced as the grip is much better and lighter lenses make it less front heavy.

Ergonomically nicely laid out with a good balance of button/screen/menu accessible functions.

The great feature is the wide customisation available so I can replicate my S1R set up and workflow very easily so it doesn't feel like a 'new' system where I need to learn lots of different ways of doing things. The S1R is button heavy but very flexible, SL2 is button light and I find fiddling with settings on screen is a pain. Fuji seems to be in a happy place between the two. 

Image quality outstanding and noise absent/unobtrusive at the sort of levels I'd use in landscape photography. Despite the small battery the power usage seems very well controlled ..... unlike the abysmal SL2.

IBIS/OIS is great ..... can take handheld sharp images with the 45-100 @100 mm down to 1/4 sec.... which for 100mpx MF is remarkable. 

Only downside so far is the EVF blackout time after taking a shot, which I can see would be an issue for those contemplating it for sports/wildlife. It remains to be seen whether the rather idiosyncratic range of the zooms proves to be a problem ..... and the absence of a very WA and longTele lenses .... although I don't use either much. 

I can't understand how Fuji have managed to squeeze all this into a body that's essentially the same as both my premium 35mm cameras .... 

The blackout is shorter with 14-bits than with 16-bits. 16-bits on GFX cameras do not make sense anyway.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[helged]

46 minutes ago, thighslapper said:

Mighty impressed with the GFX100s and it's zoom lenses after a day or two of playing.

Actually lighter/no heavier than my SL2 or S1R with SL glass .... and better balanced as the grip is much better and lighter lenses make it less front heavy.

Ergonomically nicely laid out with a good balance of button/screen/menu accessible functions.

The great feature is the wide customisation available so I can replicate my S1R set up and workflow very easily so it doesn't feel like a 'new' system where I need to learn lots of different ways of doing things. The S1R is button heavy but very flexible, SL2 is button light and I find fiddling with settings on screen is a pain. Fuji seems to be in a happy place between the two. 

Image quality outstanding and noise absent/unobtrusive at the sort of levels I'd use in landscape photography. Despite the small battery the power usage seems very well controlled ..... unlike the abysmal SL2.

IBIS/OIS is great ..... can take handheld sharp images with the 45-100 @100 mm down to 1/4 sec.... which for 100mpx MF is remarkable. 

Only downside so far is the EVF blackout time after taking a shot, which I can see would be an issue for those contemplating it for sports/wildlife. It remains to be seen whether the rather idiosyncratic range of the zooms proves to be a problem ..... and the absence of a very WA and longTele lenses .... although I don't use either much. 

I can't understand how Fuji have managed to squeeze all this into a body that's essentially the same as both my premium 35mm cameras .... 

Thanks for the update! One question - in aperture mode, how long is the longest shutter speed (not involving bulb)?