GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

My laughter doesn't arise from anyone owning either one or both for that matter as in your case BUT from looking to compare based on weight. I think both systems are wonderful have owned a GFX in the past and current own an SL2 with big 24-90 and 35 APO but understand the issues about both regarding weight. Hopefully that clears it up. I am NOT laughing at you just the weight issues which both systems are encumbered by.

Cool.. thanks for the clarification.. 

The comparisons make more sense than one can imagine because if the max focal length.. and the IQ of both gf250 with 1.4x TC and leica90-280 are pretty awesome.. I own both and I can’t part with either.. but I don’t know when I would want to carry both!! When I want the flexibility I would go with 90-280 and when I want ultimate IQ with the ability to crop heavily I'llgo with gf250..

so, in my mind the 90-280 and the gf250(with TC) was a valid comparison 

For some people weight is a decision making factor but it’s negligible when we compare SL2 system vs GFX 100s.. so, I was just hinting that gfx 100s can’t be ignored quoting weight as a reason over the SL2.. but if 200-300g could be too heavy for some then so be it.. it’s their choice and it has to be.. 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Alistairm]

I’ll be keeping both systems too. The GFX100S is surprisingly light, but feels noticeably bulkier in hand, and also packs bigger in a bag. And, of course, the SL system plays nicely with a vast array of small, fast and optically stellar M lenses allowing it to “pack down”, or at least for you to bring a selection of smaller lenses for travel. For example, I find the M 24 Summilux invaluable for travel photography. 

If the SL system seems a little large to you, the GF system is (a little) bigger again. 

The SL2 remains a magnificent camera and while it can’t quite keep pace with the 44x33 100MP sensor, it is a more versatile system in many regards. The GFX100S is, however, an amazing package and other than lacking a long lens (also missing from the SL system) could conceivably replace a traditional SLR use case, which is extraordinary for a 44x33. 
 

We are spoiled for choice. 

[aksclix]

21 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

Couldn't agree more. I am actually toying with getting the 90-280 for my backcountry shoots of wildlife but not sure I have the strength anymore. In my younger days I carried a "lightweight" Canon 400 F4 DO lens that literally was a monster. Having recently taking delivery of the SL35 APO I have to say, I am in love with the SL2 combo but I get the love for the Fuji as I was once the beneficiary of their amazing GF series. 

Yea, I am not young either.. am 41!!
the 90-280 is pretty heavy and It’s my only complaint for that lens. 
i also bought a canon 400mm f4 DO when I first got the SL2 but sold it when I got the 90-280.. none of these choices being debated are inferior in any aspect. SL2 and GFX both are pro gear with jaw dropping IQ 

[jrp]

I first bought in to the M system because of its relative compactness (and because much of the time I shoot still landscapes).

However, I found the Sl gave me better results  -- the rangefinder + glasses is a bit of a lottery for me -- and, with the 24-90mm, the weight differences were not so great.   I haven't seen any pictures from the GFX system that make me think I'd be taking a step up significant enough to warrant the extra lens weight / bulk, although it might be just that I haven't printed big enough.

[aksclix]

Just now, Priaptor said:

Turning 68 in a couple of weeks workout like a maniac BUT still find it hard to schlep these huge lenses. However where this a will there is a way. 

lol.. sorry! didn't mean to rub it in revealing my age  I have a weak wrist from an accident 15 years ago.. and I am not sure I will be able to do this at 68 

[Simone_DF]

2 hours ago, aksclix said:

Of course they’re bigger.. MF vs FF.. bigger glass! The gf 250mm is 1400g vs Leica 90-280 1800g.. most other lenses are around 1000g or lesser.. even the Leica 24-90 is 1140g.. heavier than most gf lenses. 
 

on the 100s body, most of these lenses feel well balanced to me.. 

Err... They could be balanced, but not everybody is willing to carry x kgs all day. The Leica zooms are a big no no for me for this reason. Most Fuji lenses are too heavy for hiking or carry around all day. On the other hand

Sigma 24mm: 225g

Sigma 35mm F2: 325g

Sigma 65mm: 400g

Panasonic 85mm: 355g

Laowa 15mm F2: 500g

There are other lenses in L mount, not just the Leica monsters.

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, Simone_DF said:

Err... They could be balanced, but not everybody is willing to carry x kgs all day. The Leica zooms are a big no no for me for this reason. Most Fuji lenses are too heavy for hiking or carry around all day. On the other hand

Sigma 24mm: 225g

Sigma 35mm F2: 325g

Sigma 65mm: 400g

Panasonic 85mm: 355g

Laowa 15mm F2: 500g

There are other lenses in L mount, not just the Leica monsters.

makes sense!! 

the laowa 15mm is a bloody awesome lens!! I have it in Sony E mount but because the SL2 lacks a tilt screen I have not got it for the L mount.. I love this lens a lot

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, Priaptor said:

Canon 400 F4 DO lens that literally was a monster. 

20 minutes ago, Priaptor said:

I am literally blown away by the system. 

Misuse of the word literally drives me figuratively insane.

That aside, the SL 90-280 feels surprisingly balanced and easy to hold on my SL2.

Jeff

[ravinj]

Speaking of weight..........my lightweight gear is the Sony RX100VI and the Pixel 4. Literally weighs next to nothing and I don't need to boost shadows 6x to see the details as the exposure is always perfect.

[Alistairm]

46 minutes ago, ravinj said:

Speaking of weight..........my lightweight gear is the Sony RX100VI and the Pixel 4. Literally weighs next to nothing and I don't need to boost shadows 6x to see the details as the exposure is always perfect.

As an aside, I still use my RX100II as a pocket camera when I'm skiing. Easily the digital camera that has lastest longest in my stable. 

[ravinj]

Great camera with unbeatable IQ/size, weight ratio.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

4 hours ago, Priaptor said:

Couldn't agree more. I am actually toying with getting the 90-280 for my backcountry shoots of wildlife but not sure I have the strength anymore. In my younger days I carried a "lightweight" Canon 400 F4 DO lens that literally was a monster. Having recently taking delivery of the SL35 APO I have to say, I am in love with the SL2 combo but I get the love for the Fuji as I was once the beneficiary of their amazing GF series. 

Have a serious look at the ~Sigma 100-400. Especially if weight is a concern.

Gordon

[aksclix]

I had the Sigma 100-400 briefly but I returned it in 2 weeks.. Given the right conditions, I think the lens is alright but I was not happy with the one I had.. 1) IS seemed to be unreliable..  Static subjects at 1/100s at 400mm seemed slightly blurry.. 2) the background rendering seemed rather unpleasant to me.. not looking for a great BG separation but I personally wasn't thrilled.. I was waiting for the Pana 70-300 but I am not super thrilled about that either.. 

[stout_trapdoor9]

16 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

True that, but it applies only to camera bodies. The thing that is holding me off from getting a GFX straight away is the size of lenses. A couple of them are small, like the 65mm, but the vast majority are bigger and heavier than SL lenses, especially if compared to the new Sigmas.

Absolutely true, the lenses are large.  I am going to try the pancake GF 50mm f3.5, but it doesn't seem to be of the same calibre as the big guns like the GF 110mm f2.

[stout_trapdoor9]

20 hours ago, frame-it said:

interesting..ive made some beautiful b&w conversions with my 50R, using silverfx

I haven't done enough conversions yet at this point to make a logical conclusion. My little Ricoh GR III makes outstanding B&W conversions, and that is the standard for me at this point. I've had reasonable results with the Leica Q2 as well, but the conversions I was happiest with were my Nikon D810 with Zeiss lenses.

[Succisa75]

I notice not many talk about adapting M lenses to the 100s. Set the camera to 35mm mode and you don't get any vignetting and you have a 61 MP image that is beautiful. This also reduces the weight of the 100S and one may argue the manual focus assist options are better in the GFX than Leica's own system. 

[aksclix]

29 minutes ago, Succisa75 said:

I notice not many talk about adapting M lenses to the 100s. Set the camera to 35mm mode and you don't get any vignetting and you have a 61 MP image that is beautiful. This also reduces the weight of the 100S and one may argue the manual focus assist options are better in the GFX than Leica's own system. 

It’s on my list! But only when I am ready for the M Noctilux.. 😌

[ZHNL]

2 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

I notice not many talk about adapting M lenses to the 100s. Set the camera to 35mm mode and you don't get any vignetting and you have a 61 MP image that is beautiful. This also reduces the weight of the 100S and one may argue the manual focus assist options are better in the GFX than Leica's own system. 

I am not happy with adapting M glasses on 100S. 50lux seems the best with offering decent coverage but almost all M glasses show some weird distortion around corner. R glasses are much better. 

But your post remind me why not? Yes, this is a very good suggestion. I never thought about it: 61M FF sensor with M glasses. HAHA:)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[setuporg]

While I've not yet tried a GFX, I had both X1D and S 007 for a couple years.  The S lenses are all huge except for 70, 100 and possibly 35.  The great 45 looks like a tele on other systems,  The zoom and the 24 are very top-heavy.  But the rendering beats all the other systems.

Compared to those, the XCD lenses are almost all small.  The 21, 30, 45 are light.  The only heavy ones are 65 and 80.  The amazing 35-75 zoom is about as heavy as the 80.  I've not tried the long lenses because I generally don't need them.

X1Dii with a 30mm is very small and excellent.  907x + that is the smallest MF you could have.  I'm not convinced XCD owners should now drop all those excellent systems and run after the Fuji.  Let's hope DJI comes through on the electronics to fit in those bodies.  My real preference would be a better EVF.  After SL2, the flickering 3MP+ EVFs on an MF are beyond the pale.  Fortunately the 907x comes with an awesome top-mount OVF and you also can use it on the V bodies for an absolutely magnificent OVF experience with the WLF or prism.

Edited March 30, 2021 by setuporg

[aksclix]

6 minutes ago, setuporg said:

Whike I've not yet tried a GFX, I had both X1D and S 007 for a couple years.  The S lenses are all huge except for 70, 100 and possibly 35.  The great 45 looks like a tele on other systems,  The zoom and the 24 are very top-heavy.  But the rendering beats all the other systems.

Compared to those, the XCD lenses are almost all small.  The 21, 30, 45 are light.  The only heavy ones are 65 and 80.  The amazing 35-75 zoom is about as heavy as the 80.  I've not tried the long lenses because I generally don't need them.

X1Dii with a 30mm is very small and excellent.  907x + that is the smallest MF you could have.  I'm not convinced XCD owners should now drop all those excellent systems and run after the Fuji.  Let's hope DJI comes through on the electronics to fit in those bodies.  My real preference would be a better EVF.  After SL2, the flickering 3MP+ EVFs on an MF are beyond the pale.  Fortunately the 907x comes with an awesome top-mount OVF and you also can use it on the V bodies for an absolutely magnificent OVF experience with the WLF or prism.

I thought the top mount OVF for 907x isn’t compatible with all xcd lenses?