Selling my Fujifilm GFX 100s for Leica SL2-S

[KenLW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

By the way, I'm revisiting my GF100s with a manual focusing M lens to evaluate it one last time before deciding whether to sell the system. The experience has been great so far. One major advantage of the Fujifilm system is the digital split screen, which emulates the old split prism found in film SLRs and provides an RF-like manual focusing experience. The split screen moves smoothly as you adjust the focus manually, and this feature works with the EVF as well. If you prefer, you can disable the split screen and use the normal focus peaking like any other digital camera.

I've often hesitated to use the M lens on the GFX system because some lenses don't provide full coverage, thus compromising the full image quality of the GFX system. However, in the past few days, I've realized that the GFX100s, being only slightly heavier than the SL, can be used as a full-frame system in 35mm mode. The second image is a SOOC JPEG captured with the Voigtlander 50mm APO M on the GFX100s in 35mm mode. As you can see, you can easily focus on the eyes and achieve pleasing image quality. The sensor size in 35mm mode is around 61MP, which is comparable to the Leica SL3 (without the Leica color science of course).

 

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!

Edited July 13, 2024 by KenLW

[Olaf_ZG]

Looks you need a new couch instead of a new camera…

[KenLW]

17 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Looks you need a new couch instead of a new camera…

Hahaha! It won’t help! Our cat will destroy any new coach within a week 😅

[chrismuc]

11 hours ago, KenLW said:

I don't print often but more resolution is helpful for landscape especially with the GF 35-70 kit lens because I can just crop instead of carrying a telephoto with me. 

My experience is: you need 5 pixel (or at least 4) per millimeter for an excellent sharpness in a print, without seeing any sensor pixels. That means with 6000 pixel wide (24-26 MB) you could print up to 120-140 cm wide, with 8400-9500 pixel (47-61 MP) about 170-230 cm wide and with 11.500 pixel (100 MP) about 230-290 cm. I do that frequently, … but of course not every one 😋.

[hansvons]

4 hours ago, chrismuc said:

My experience is: you need 5 pixel (or at least 4) per millimeter for an excellent sharpness in a print, without seeing any sensor pixels.

You probably will hear many photographers say that you can't print 44” large prints off a 24MP sensor as 24 MP wont deliver a 44” print at the typical 300 PPI, and therefore only a high-resolving sensor is ok for large prints.

But agree with you from a practical point of view. The viewing distance is pivotal to PPI, the image’s texture (grain/noise) plays a huge role, also the paper’s texture, and most importantly the content and intent of the picture. 

Most of my work is shot on 35mm negative, colour and BW, often way beyond 24MP. I learned that 36” long edge works nicely for a typical living room because the picture isn't too large, dominating everything, and a viewing distance of 1m is realistic if people take a closer look. In that case, they will recognise the grain and any other technical “errors” that come with analogue photography. The trick is to work on these and make them part of the experience. 

Printing large gives you interesting insights in the term resolution. In the end, it’s about perceived resolution, which is not the same as PPI, and deserves an own discussion. 

 

Edited July 14, 2024 by hansvons

[frame-it]

On 7/12/2024 at 1:30 PM, KenLW said:

Am I crazy for considering this switch?

yes

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 7/13/2024 at 12:00 PM, hansvons said:

I read the printing-large argument quite frequently. It's probably the most often-heard argument for the GFX series as being the best system for landscape photography for the price. However, given the number of those systems in the market, I can't imagine an equivalent of massive prints hanging on walls. For reference, a 44" x 33" print at 200DPI, which is the maximum human vision can resolve at a 100cm viewing distance (primarily kids), would require a 60MP sensor - if the resolution was part of the artwork's theme (often it's probably not).

 

Can't say that i disagree with you. I've directly compared my M11 vs GFX100 (same scene, same composition, tripod mounted etc), and the difference at 40" in their respective recording of fine detail is remarkably similar - GFX is native file size at 300dpi at c 40", and the M11 file needs to be slightly resampled larger to get to 300dpi, but the end difference in fine detail capture is extremely small.

Despite having a 100mp camera, and as contradictory as it might sound, i'm actually a much bigger fan of prints from analogue film, and am on an endless quest to get my digital files to more closely match (say) 120 film; in that regard, IMHO, high megapixel cameras of (say) 60mp+ are something of a tricky starting point for a filmic rendering. It's almost as though the very high megapixels exacerbates the high acutance that's a characteristic of digital, which isn't a good starting point for a film look that benefits from a softer "feathering" of edges. The most success I've had in getting a "less digital" look at c 40" is with files from an SL2-S (24mp) and with my M11 using DNG-S (18.5mp), resampled up to 40" at 300dpi. Sure, some fine detail is lost vs the cameras using 60-100mp sensors, but equally gone is the overly sharp acutance, which to my eyes gets me a lot closer to a 120 film file that i like. 

Edited July 14, 2024 by Jon Warwick

[hansvons]

5 hours ago, Jon Warwick said:

Despite having a 100mp camera, and as contradictory as it might sound, i'm actually a much bigger fan of prints from analogue film, and am on an endless quest to get my digital files to more closely match (say) 120 film; in that regard, IMHO, high megapixel cameras of (say) 60mp+ are something of a tricky starting point for a filmic rendering. It's almost as though the very high megapixels exacerbates the high acutance that's a characteristic of digital, which isn't a good starting point for a film look that benefits from a softer "feathering" of edges. The most success I've had in getting a "less digital" look at c 40" is with files from an SL2-S (24mp) and with my M11 using DNG-S (18.5mp), resampled up to 40" at 300dpi. Sure, some fine detail is lost vs the cameras using 60-100mp sensors, but equally gone is the overly sharp acutance, which to my eyes gets me a lot closer to a 120 film file that i like. 

Thanks for the insights! I agree with everything you said. I'm on the same endless quest and still unable to get digital working. In my case, that's 35mm colour (cine stock) and BW scans and a 44" printer plus Hahnemühle Photo Rag (plain and baryta). My scanning devices are an Sl2-S, the Sigma 70mm Macro, and the Valoi. It's all about overall scanning quality, grain sharpness, and colour separation.

[intermediatic]

Have you tried the Hasselblad X2D? The build quality is excellent, the color science is as good as it gets, and the interface is ludicrously good. It pairs well with an M or Q. 

[KenLW]

10 hours ago, intermediatic said:

Have you tried the Hasselblad X2D? The build quality is excellent, the color science is as good as it gets, and the interface is ludicrously good. It pairs well with an M or Q. 

I have the 907x CFV 100c and it has been my most used camera since I brought it. I heard the Hasselblad X2D handles better and the IBIS is amazing and has better water and dust resistance comparing to my 907x so I might pick up the next iteration of X2D whenever it comes out or wait for the price to go down a little bit more.

With that said, as you may know, the lens selection for Hasselblad is pretty limited. For example, you won’t be able to 28-200 zoom for a lightweight travel kit. And there is no ultra wide angle zoom or telephoto zoom unless you adapt lenses which may have jelly effects due to the slow reading speed of the electronic shutter.

I feel like one M, one apsc / full frame, and one medium format setup is the way to go at least for the digital cameras. M + 35mm or 50mm lens still has the best shooting experience IMO, and you can go crazy with any apsc / full frame setup with high quality cheap lens (or high quality experience lens in Lecia’s case). And for the best digital camera IQ, I would opt for digital medium format.

[charlie_s]

On 7/12/2024 at 8:45 AM, KenLW said:

Thanks, Mark! It is good to know that the SL-S has the best color of the SL cameras. I typically purchase from Leica Miami or KEH since I believed my local Leica stores had higher prices. However, after checking the Leica Store San Francisco website, I found the SL system pricing reasonable. I might give it a try.

Interesting. I think you should try both / look at sample images and make your own decision. My research & limited testing led me to believe the SL2 has better color than the SL-2S. My theory is that this has to do with the backlit sensor of the SL2-S. Also, if you're taking photos as night, does that mean you are taking long exposures on a tripod? If so, the added 1-2 stops of ISO performance on the 2S might not matter (per reviews and also some in-store testing, YMMV). I am taking night time shots with my 2, and they look great since I'm typically bumping the ISO down to 100-400 and compensating with longer exposure times. 

[KenLW]

4 hours ago, charlie_s said:

Interesting. I think you should try both / look at sample images and make your own decision. My research & limited testing led me to believe the SL2 has better color than the SL-2S. My theory is that this has to do with the backlit sensor of the SL2-S. Also, if you're taking photos as night, does that mean you are taking long exposures on a tripod? If so, the added 1-2 stops of ISO performance on the 2S might not matter (per reviews and also some in-store testing, YMMV). I am taking night time shots with my 2, and they look great since I'm typically bumping the ISO down to 100-400 and compensating with longer exposure times. 

My understanding of the colors are based on my research online and the sample images. 
 

For night photography, I usually like to walk around without tripod if possible when I travel. I also use a tripod whenever it is needed.

[Archiver]

On 7/13/2024 at 7:01 PM, Smogg said:

There is another factor: if you have large hands, then you will find it more comfortable to hold the SL than the GFX100s. On the GFX100s, the depth of the grip is a little lacking for me; the outer phalanx of the fingers sticks into the body and the overall hand grip turns out to be weak. I don't have the SL now, but I remember it being comfortable, similar to the X2D. X2D+35-75 is about the same convenience for me as G100sII+35-70, although formally the weight of these combinations is very different.

 

P.S. Sorry I'm a bad drawer😂

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!

You... you're a snake??

[Archiver]

On 7/14/2024 at 3:05 AM, KenLW said:

I am tempted to buy the SL APO 35 with Lumix S5 just to try things out. Do you think I could get 99% of image with the APO + Lumix S5 combo? I am pretty sure the SL APO lens are tuned for the SL system which also applies lens profiles automatically. With that said, S5 seems to have similar color rending as SL2s with Panasonic lens at least.

I tried the S5 with APO 35 and shot it back to back with the SL2S, and processed the images to taste in Lightroom. It was surprising to see that the SL2S had a very different colour palette and shadow/highlight profile, and I had to make considerable adjustments to the S5 image to make it look like the SL2S, which took only a few simple LR adjustments. Having said that, it depends on your own taste, and how much you push the files. The image quality of the APO 35 is still stunning on the S5, but just not the same default colour palette as the SL2S.

[KenLW]

5 hours ago, Archiver said:

I had to make considerable adjustments to the S5 image to make it look like the SL2S

Thank you very much for the info! I will keep this in mind while making a purchasing decision!

[Paul K]

What an incredibly timely post. I just returned my entire GFX system to B&H and walked away with an SL2-S and two primes. No regrets.

In case you haven't already decided yet, the resolution of the EVF on the SL2-S is so good that I've hardly needed to use any focus peaking for manual focus.

Edited July 24, 2024 by Paul K

[Donald M]

I can recommend using Cobalt for calibrating colours (https://www.cobalt-image.com/basic-pack/). I have several cameras (a.o. SL and S5ii) and with the basic pack they are interchangeable as a starting point for working with raw files. For a review see fredmiranda.com. 

[intermediatic]

On 7/18/2024 at 7:49 PM, KenLW said:

I have the 907x CFV 100c and it has been my most used camera since I brought it. I heard the Hasselblad X2D handles better and the IBIS is amazing and has better water and dust resistance comparing to my 907x so I might pick up the next iteration of X2D whenever it comes out or wait for the price to go down a little bit more.

With that said, as you may know, the lens selection for Hasselblad is pretty limited. For example, you won’t be able to 28-200 zoom for a lightweight travel kit. And there is no ultra wide angle zoom or telephoto zoom unless you adapt lenses which may have jelly effects due to the slow reading speed of the electronic shutter.

I feel like one M, one apsc / full frame, and one medium format setup is the way to go at least for the digital cameras. M + 35mm or 50mm lens still has the best shooting experience IMO, and you can go crazy with any apsc / full frame setup with high quality cheap lens (or high quality experience lens in Lecia’s case). And for the best digital camera IQ, I would opt for digital medium format.

I am a crazy person. I have both. The form factor and ability to shoot from the waist for landscape and plant photography on the 100c is amazing but the X2D gets far more use. The IBIS is incredible and the more SLR like format makes it very easy to use. As far as a lightweight travel kit. I went to the Baltics with my M11 and Sony A7CR. Both were fun, but since my wife flew our half way through my trip, I begged her to just being the X2D and whatever lens was on it. She did, it was the 38V, which has staggering quality, as I expected. I got some absolutely amazing shots with it. That said, I had left it in the hotel room one day and the best shot of the trip was with my M11 and a lens that I otherwise decided I really did not like (asking my wife to bring more lenses was not happening… that would have been too complicated), the Voigtlander Notion Classic 40 1.4. So you never know. 

[jaapv]

On 7/23/2024 at 3:36 AM, Archiver said:

I tried the S5 with APO 35 and shot it back to back with the SL2S, and processed the images to taste in Lightroom. It was surprising to see that the SL2S had a very different colour palette and shadow/highlight profile, and I had to make considerable adjustments to the S5 image to make it look like the SL2S, which took only a few simple LR adjustments. 

That can indeed be a bit of a hassle with the S5. The S5ii has eliminated that problem. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Paul K]

Not crazy at all. When I left Sony recently, I jumped into the GFX realm. I loved some of the results, but I hated the experience and the size of the gear. I returned the entire kit to B&H and picked up the SL2-S instead. I haven't tested pixel-shift shooting yet to see how it matches the GFX, but everything else is by far the better experience.