GFX100S vs SL2/X1D

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, setuporg said:

In my experience, alongside SL2 and X1D, I feel that S 007 is really fast to focus with its AF.  I never lost a shot waiting for it to focus as with X1D.  It's not immediate but it is usually a single motion with 30.35.45.70,100,180.  The only slow lens is 120 because its donkey protrusion has to extend or retract a lot.:)

Interesting.. I’ll shoot more with the S and comment again.. but one thing for sure right away is that these systems are not as fast as gfx 100s. PDAF vs CDAF

[BernardC]

34 minutes ago, aksclix said:

Interesting.. I’ll shoot more with the S and comment again.. but one thing for sure right away is that these systems are not as fast as gfx 100s. PDAF vs CDAF

The S007 is phase-detect when using the optical finder. It switches to contrast-detect in live view.

[aksclix]

20 minutes ago, BernardC said:

The S007 is phase-detect when using the optical finder. It switches to contrast-detect in live view.

Oh.. I thought all Leica systems were cdaf.. thanks

Edited April 8, 2021 by aksclix

[ravinj]

1 hour ago, setuporg said:

In my experience, alongside SL2 and X1D, I feel that S 007 is really fast to focus with its AF.  I never lost a shot waiting for it to focus as with X1D.  It's not immediate but it is usually a single motion with 24,30,35,45,70,100,180, and the zoom.  The only slow lens is 120 because its donkey protrusion has to extend or retract a lot.:). The TS is manual only.

I hope you agree that 120 donkey of a lens is a star performer when it comes to image quality. 

[setuporg]

1 minute ago, ravinj said:

that 120 donkey of a lens is a star performer when it comes to image quality

It's one of the best in the world!  I was just talking about the AF slower among the other S lenses but it's fine for real life use, and as fast or faster as X1D + XCD lenses.

[setuporg]

2 hours ago, Succisa75 said:

It’s much faster than the 007. I find it as fast as the S1R but with better and faster AF. 

I am really curious about your use cases as it sounds like you need the super-fast AF!:)

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I never had AF speed issues with my 007 (or S2 for that matter) when using the OVF. Live view AF is a pig. The speed though, is offset by the need to focus recompose most of your images when using the OVF and that it does sometimes miss by an annoyingly small amount. Mostly I find getting accurate AF in studio a frustrating experience, especially wide open.

The X1D is slow but exceptionally accurate. I have had almost zero issues with missed focus with that camera. I think of it like having the speed of focusing an M camera but an AF version. It also has a very good MF implementation so it can be used for zone focusing as well without hassle. The jewel in the crown of the X1D is its ability to handle exposure of more than a minute and the interface that makes it so easy to shoot long exposures. The leaf shutter lenses are also a highlight.

The GFX 100 is somewhere in between the XT4 and X1D, although much closer to the XT4. It's not in the same class as an A9 but it's leagues ahead of anything else in the miniMF space. It's as fast as the 007 but with the flexibility of the X1D PLUS eye AF and surprisingly good object tracking. Compared to the SL2 it feels very very similar in AFS and superior in AFC. The one area where I think the SL2 is better is focus acquisition in low light. I am still learning the limits of the GFX focus system but the SL2 currently feels more confident in low light situations, as long as you understand how CDAF works. My S1R's *might* be slightly better again than the SL2 in AFC. But I don't shoot them or the SL2 enough in AFC to have seen any real world differences. The interface is better but I'm not sure the results are different between the SL2 and S1R. I dislike the experience, a lot. The GFX, on the other hand is a pretty decent AFC experience and I'm far more likely to shoot it in AFC than I am the SL2 or S1R.

One thing with the GFX. There's a LOT going on with the AF system and I've already had to discover some things to make it work as the settings required to get it working are all over the place. It's not intuitive at all. Like you need a separate custom button to enable changing which face the eye af locks onto as well as one to turn eye AF on an off. I'm still trying to work out why by default you can't choose which eye the camera locks on to or change it when there's more than one head in a scene. I would have thought the default was to have it on. The default is to have it off, which is, to me, bizzarre. Lots of stuff requires menu diving, like that.

You really appreciate the menus of an SL2 or X1D after a day with the GFX...

Gordon

[aksclix]

13 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I never had AF speed issues with my 007 (or S2 for that matter) when using the OVF. Live view AF is a pig. The speed though, is offset by the need to focus recompose most of your images when using the OVF and that it does sometimes miss by an annoyingly small amount. Mostly I find getting accurate AF in studio a frustrating experience, especially wide open.

The X1D is slow but exceptionally accurate. I have had almost zero issues with missed focus with that camera. I think of it like having the speed of focusing an M camera but an AF version. It also has a very good MF implementation so it can be used for zone focusing as well without hassle. The jewel in the crown of the X1D is its ability to handle exposure of more than a minute and the interface that makes it so easy to shoot long exposures. The leaf shutter lenses are also a highlight.

The GFX 100 is somewhere in between the XT4 and X1D, although much closer to the XT4. It's not in the same class as an A9 but it's leagues ahead of anything else in the miniMF space. It's as fast as the 007 but with the flexibility of the X1D PLUS eye AF and surprisingly good object tracking. Compared to the SL2 it feels very very similar in AFS and superior in AFC. The one area where I think the SL2 is better is focus acquisition in low light. I am still learning the limits of the GFX focus system but the SL2 currently feels more confident in low light situations, as long as you understand how CDAF works. My S1R's *might* be slightly better again than the SL2 in AFC. But I don't shoot them or the SL2 enough in AFC to have seen any real world differences. The interface is better but I'm not sure the results are different between the SL2 and S1R. I dislike the experience, a lot. The GFX, on the other hand is a pretty decent AFC experience and I'm far more likely to shoot it in AFC than I am the SL2 or S1R.

One thing with the GFX. There's a LOT going on with the AF system and I've already had to discover some things to make it work as the settings required to get it working are all over the place. It's not intuitive at all. Like you need a separate custom button to enable changing which face the eye af locks onto as well as one to turn eye AF on an off. I'm still trying to work out why by default you can't choose which eye the camera locks on to or change it when there's more than one head in a scene. I would have thought the default was to have it on. The default is to have it off, which is, to me, bizzarre. Lots of stuff requires menu diving, like that.

You really appreciate the menus of an SL2 or X1D after a day with the GFX...

Gordon

Spot on.. I agree.. 

except the M stuff as I have not held an M body ever

[Succisa75]

4 hours ago, setuporg said:

I am really curious about your use cases as it sounds like you need the super-fast AF!:)

I shoot fashion, some sports and street. I like movement in shots so faster, accurate AF is always welcome. Sure if the model is still it doesn’t make much difference, but when your on set with clients and the camera is very slow or missing shots due to AF, you can only make so many excuses. 
 

The SL2 is fantastic for still subjects but when it comes anything faster you have to deal with inconsistent AFC and terrible buffering issues. 
 

the GFX100S isn’t perfect but overall it’s a faster system. Setting up AF is a bit cumbersome compared to other systems but in MF it’s the fastest out there. The X1D has to constantly reacquire focus even if the subject is in the same position and depending on the lens it can be very slow.  The 007 I found to be slow but prob due to the lenses more than anything. I had a number of missed shots with it which was frustrating. 
 

 

[Alistairm]

Well, it's been a pretty good few years for me in terms of cameras and systems. I still think the SL system is compelling, but they all are. That said, a 907X and 45P arrived today and my mind is still boggling.... how?! 

It is utterly unlike any other camera I've owned and I am smitten. I'm actually exicted to see how subjects react to it. 

[meerec]

4 hours ago, Alistairm said:

Well, it's been a pretty good few years for me in terms of cameras and systems. I still think the SL system is compelling, but they all are. That said, a 907X and 45P arrived today and my mind is still boggling.... how?! 

It is utterly unlike any other camera I've owned and I am smitten. I'm actually exicted to see how subjects react to it. 

That makes the two of us in Sydney. Maybe we should start a local user group of two and start meet-ups 😬🤭

[setuporg]

Interesting that some of the same folks who prefer GFX100S over X1D also like the 907x which is basically X1D without the EVF.:)

I thoroughly enjoy the 907x because I attach the back to a Hasselblad 503cw, thus getting a proper OVF for the MF body.  The AF becomes moot.

[aksclix]

1 hour ago, setuporg said:

Interesting that some of the same folks who prefer GFX100S over X1D also like the 907x which is basically X1D without the EVF.:)

I thoroughly enjoy the 907x because I attach the back to a Hasselblad 503cw, thus getting a proper OVF for the MF body.  The AF becomes moot.

So you have the x1d II and 907x?

[setuporg]

2 hours ago, aksclix said:

So you have the x1d II and 907x?

And the original X1D!  With several XCD lenses I’m keen on seeing the Hassy catch up.  I much prefer the ergonomics, best in the world.

[aksclix]

12 minutes ago, setuporg said:

And the original X1D!  With several XCD lenses I’m keen on seeing the Hassy catch up.  I much prefer the ergonomics, best in the world.

daaamnnn!!

nice!! 

[Jon Warwick]

2 hours ago, setuporg said:

And the original X1D!  With several XCD lenses I’m keen on seeing the Hassy catch up.  I much prefer the ergonomics, best in the world.

As a now (delighted) owner of the GFX100S, I would be open to also agree that the Hassy X1D has an incredibly good ergonomics. I almost got an X1D when they first came out, then stalled around, eventually got an SL2, and then decided there IS a difference that is very meaningful (to me) in medium format digital vs 35mm full frame, especially when looking at the 100mp options in the former that are quite a leap in image quality. I'll likely never go back to 35mm FF as a result, but will remember that it was the X1D that piqued my interest in digital medium format, and will certainly be open to what they might produce in a large megapixel sensor. If it is too much tech for now, for example, to fit IBIS into the same-sized X1D sized body, it wouldn't be an issue for me, I thought they got many things right with that camera's ergonomics.

Edited April 9, 2021 by Jon Warwick

[aksclix]

17 minutes ago, Jon Warwick said:

As a now (delighted) owner of the GFX100S, I would be open to also agree that the Hassy X1D has an incredibly good ergonomics. I almost got an X1D when they first came out, then stalled around, eventually got an SL2, and then decided there IS a difference that is very meaningful (to me) in medium format digital vs 35mm full frame, especially when looking at the 100mp options in the former that are quite a leap in image quality. I'll likely never go back to 35mm FF as a result, but will remember that it was the X1D that piqued my interest in digital medium format, and will certainly be open to what they might produce in a large megapixel sensor. If it is too much tech for now, for example, to fit IBIS into the same-sized X1D sized body, it wouldn't be an issue for me, I thought they got many things right with that camera's ergonomics.

For me, it was actually the Pentax 645z that pushed me towards medium format system. I couldn’t afford the Leica S007 back then (4 years ago) so got the seriously underrated 645z (or at least under sold?) though it’s pretty big, the deep grip was insanely incredibly comfy! Eventually sold it to get the Fuji 50r which was a MUCH lighter package! then came the x1d with more bugs than one would’ve liked 😁 but they’ve fixed many and I now have the first version of the x1d. I’ve been resisting swapping it out for the 907x. It’s such a great body.. 

@setuporg I think you’re missing out on the GFX 100s.. 😜 at least TRY it.. don’t convince yourself by underplaying the EVF resolution 

[setuporg]

Funny, I've reviewed my old photos from 2014 -- was going to give one of my daughters an old X100T camera and found an unfinished SD card there.  And boy they look OK.  Made me think of exercising Fuji X-Pro2 with so many fine XF lenses, and Pentax K-1 and K-3 ii I have...  Or even getting the new K-3 iii!  Even if you get the Pentax-D FA* 50/1.4 it's a fraction of a GFX body.  And the APS-C lenses are all so much smaller.  I guess I have enough heavy MF kits and the pendulum is swinging back towards portability and DSLR clarity...

[Mr.Q]

Well in my usage the GFX100S + 80/1.9 is the same size as a SL2 + 50/1.4 SL but even lighter in weight.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[setuporg]

X1D+45P is lighter.:). And M10R+50 APO is even lighter.