Smogg Posted March 23 Share #181 Posted March 23 Advertisement (gone after registration) 7 minutes ago, Besprosvet said: M246 is the most underrated digital M ever Leica M is a completely different level in terms of price, quality and ease of use. It is not worth comparing it with the GFX100RF. Humanity has not invented anything better than Leica M and probably will not. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 23 Posted March 23 Hi Smogg, Take a look here Leica Q3 or Fujifilm GFX 100RF. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #182 Posted March 23 3 minutes ago, Phatcat said: Not just crop, but aspect ratios, this will enable some creativity when framing. The biggest difference is having dedicated dials and knobs on the camera. On current GFX cameras you can change but it’s in the menu, so I think people don’t go through the hassle. But having physical buttons you can adjust on the fly couple with software assistance, will encourage people to experiment. I am not a fan of multiple aspect ratios. 3:2, 4:3 are enough for me. Either you need to do the whole project in a single aspect ratio, or you will be tormented by choosing pairs for the book. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besprosvet Posted March 23 Share #183 Posted March 23 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Smogg said: Leica M is a completely different level in terms of price, quality and ease of use. It is not worth comparing it with the GFX100RF. Humanity has not invented anything better than Leica M and probably will not. Let's say that -hypothetically- the lens on this Fuji has a better tonal richness/color separation than the lens on the Q (which is what matters the most to me), the only thing that would throw me off from buying that is the way it's tailored to work with the AF. The M is amazing because it's the only camera that makes me nail shots at f2 in dim light of my kid playing around and running. The M is ergonomically studied to be manual focus, and so, lets me "predict" the future: where and when the photo is going to happen. This Fuji, like all the AF based cameras, has an horrible manual focus experience, so I know I'll nail less shots compared to the ones I do nail now. Little exception for Leica Q, which tries well enough in implementing MF as a decent emergency shooting style when you want to think "M" but you have the Q with you. Also, my vintage 'crons have plenty of the so called "micro contrast" (more than most modern lenses), not easy to convince me to give away that experience in favor of something else. About color science, Leica is very "opinionated" about it. I like them, I learned how to squeeze the juice out of their interpretation, enough for me. All in all it's my favorite color science for my personal stuff. Edited March 23 by Besprosvet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #184 Posted March 23 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Besprosvet said: Let's say that -hypothetically- the lens on this Fuji has a better tonal richness/color separation than the lens on the Q (which is what matters the most to me), the only thing that would throw me off from buying that is the way it's tailored to work with the AF. The M is amazing because it's the only camera that makes me nail shots at f2 in dim light of my kid playing around and running. The M is ergonomically studied to be manual focus, and so, lets me "predict" the future: where and when the photo is going to happen. This Fuji, like all the AF based cameras, has an horrible manual focus experience, so I know I'll nail less shots compared to the ones I do nail now. Little exception for Leica Q, which tries well enough in implementing MF as a decent emergency shooting style when you want to think "M" but you have the Q with you. Also, my vintage 'crons have plenty of the so called "micro contrast" (more than most modern lenses), not easy to convince me to give away that experience in favor of something else. About color science, Leica is very "opinionated" about it. I like them, I learned how to squeeze the juice out of their interpretation, enough for me. All in all it's my favorite color science for my personal stuff. M is a versatile camera and a very compact camera, with which I can shoot everything I need and with excellent quality. It will always be in first place for me. I have a Q3/43 and had a Q3 28. I have no complaints about the Q28/43 in terms of picture quality, the lenses are excellent, the pictures are excellent. However, I categorically do not like the quality of the EVF and LCD in the Q series and the recognition of people. I also do not like the manual focusing in the Q, I prefer the sliding ring like the X2D. The zone focus in the Q is also inconvenient because the distance scale is too narrow. The GFX100RF, judging by the reviews, has high-quality EVF and LCD and controls that are convenient for me (S / C / M switch, digital zoom switch). F4 does not bother me, since any f5.6+ lens suits me. I consider it exclusively as a documentary and travel camera for situations when taking the M11 with me is undesirable for safety reasons. Edited March 23 by Smogg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #185 Posted March 23 10 hours ago, Dazzajl said: Poor might not be the most accurate choice of words, in the wider sense. The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. But on the flip side, if you’re not working commercially in colour critical environments, you get a camera that offers a gorgeous, artistic interpretation of the world that hopefully inspires great images. Again, I find this bizarre. Of course you can adjust the colour temperature and hue. Again, there is a very respected photojournalist who shoots Leica, mostly M11P and some SL3 and his images are stunning, beautiful colours. He would definitely use a different system if it was a hassle, or he couldn't achieve his own style with a Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #186 Posted March 23 1 hour ago, Smogg said: I consider it exclusively as a documentary and travel camera for situations when taking the M11 with me is undesirable for safety reasons. I've never met a mugger who'd ever heard of Leica. You think a blingy, medium format camera is less desirable to robbers? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #187 Posted March 23 Advertisement (gone after registration) 3 minutes ago, Chris W said: I've never met a mugger who'd ever heard of Leica. You think a blingy, medium format camera is less desirable to robbers? I think they know as much about cameras as we do. Also, whole bags are often stolen. Losing a 5k camera is not as bad as losing an M11-P with an APO lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #188 Posted March 23 I travel a lot. Robbers want mainstream items they can sell on very quickly - Rolex, iPhone, Laptop etc. You can sell a Nikon, Canon, Sony in a bar very quickly. You don't want buyers to ask "what is a leica?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #189 Posted March 23 5 minutes ago, Chris W said: I travel a lot. Robbers want mainstream items they can sell on very quickly - Rolex, iPhone, Laptop etc. You can sell a Nikon, Canon, Sony in a bar very quickly. You don't want buyers to ask "what is a leica?" It seems to me that robbers want everything you have with you and I doubt that they will disdain a Leica camera, just because it may be unfamiliar to them.😅 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #190 Posted March 23 Once, when I was taking pictures at one of the eastern markets, I was surrounded by security and taken to their boss. So then I was lucky that I had an M10 in my hands, and when he saw it, he exclaimed: Oh, Leica! He quickly looked through the shots I had taken and told the security guards not to touch me anymore. So sometimes even people who are far from photography know our cameras😀 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #191 Posted March 23 7 minutes ago, Smogg said: It seems to me that robbers want everything you have with you Right, so a medium format Fuji camera is no less dangerous to carry around than a Leica. Ugh, this is exhausting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besprosvet Posted March 23 Share #192 Posted March 23 13 minutes ago, Smogg said: I think they know as much about cameras as we do. Also, whole bags are often stolen. Losing a 5k camera is not as bad as losing an M11-P with an APO lens. But, I don't know if the lens on this Fuji is going to be on par with Leica APO ones, and it's still over 5k anyway, not cheap at all. If that's the case, to me it'd feel awkward roaming around with a 100mpx medium format that gives me worse result when compared to my full frame gear... I don't mind f4 and lack of IBIS, I want to see a side by side comparison with a Q 28: mid and close distance portraits in different lighting conditions, with the Fuji at f4 and the Q at f3.something. And then I may decide if this Fuji can go in some future wish list for the next years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #193 Posted March 23 1 minute ago, Chris W said: Right, so a medium format Fuji camera is no less dangerous to carry around than a Leica. Ugh, this is exhausting. It won't be such a pity to give it away😃 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #194 Posted March 23 5 minutes ago, Besprosvet said: But, I don't know if the lens on this Fuji is going to be on par with Leica APO ones, and it's still over 5k anyway, not cheap at all. If that's the case, to me it'd feel awkward roaming around with a 100mpx medium format that gives me worse result when compared to my full frame gear... I don't mind f4 and lack of IBIS, I want to see a side by side comparison with a Q 28: mid and close distance portraits in different lighting conditions, with the Fuji at f4 and the Q at f3.something. And then I may decide if this Fuji can go in some future wish list for the next years. I hope that Fuji will have "enough" quality for my purposes. I am not chasing medium format. I see it as a FF camera with a focal length of 35mm, with which I will occasionally shoot frames a little wider (28mm) or a little narrower (50mm) with acceptable quality at f8-f16. I clearly understand that this is a narrow application, but this is exactly what I need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besprosvet Posted March 23 Share #195 Posted March 23 Just now, Smogg said: I hope that Fuji will have "enough" quality for my purposes. I am not chasing medium format. I see it as a FF camera with a focal length of 35mm, with which I will occasionally shoot frames a little wider (28mm) or a little narrower (50mm) with acceptable quality at f8-f16. I clearly understand that this is a narrow application, but this is exactly what I need. I already got burned once with fuji, the praised by all X100V has been the worse camera I've ever had: the lens is sub par even in aps-c terms, quirky menu, awful flash management, low quality nd filter, sub par build quality. Nearly everybody praises the lens on that X100V, and everybody praises the one on this GFX100RF too... that's why I'm really distrustful of the way Fuji tailors its flat and dull lenses for their fixed lens compacts. At least the X100V worked as a gateway for my Leica Ms (at least for that, thank you Fuji). 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #196 Posted March 23 3 minutes ago, Besprosvet said: I already got burned once with fuji, the praised by all X100V has been the worse camera I've ever had: the lens is sub par even in aps-c terms, quirky menu, awful flash management, low quality nd filter, sub par build quality. Nearly everybody praises the lens on that X100V, and everybody praises the one on this GFX100RF too... that's why I'm really distrustful of the way Fuji tailors its flat and dull lenses for their fixed lens compacts. At least the X100V worked as a gateway for my Leica Ms (at least for that, thank you Fuji). I like the idea of the X100 with a hybrid viewfinder, but I also have a very bad opinion of the lenses in this series, both the first and second versions. So I gave up on it as a secondary camera. The Ricoh GR has a much higher quality lens, in my opinion, but alas, it has no viewfinder. If Tri-Elmar wasn't so awkward and provided better quality, I'd be happy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #197 Posted March 23 29 minutes ago, Besprosvet said: I already got burned once with fuji, the praised by all X100V has been the worse camera I've ever had: the lens is sub par even in aps-c terms, quirky menu, awful flash management, low quality nd filter, sub par build quality. Not the worst camera I've ever had, but I used an X100T for a couple of years, then bought the original Q, I was shocked (when A/Bing) the difference in image quality. I think it is the difference in the two lenses, the Q lens being incredible. I lost faith in Fuji at that point. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 23 Share #198 Posted March 23 33 minutes ago, Smogg said: I see it as a FF camera with a focal length of 35mm, with which I will occasionally shoot frames a little wider (28mm) It is native 28mm not 35. You'll have to crop every image to achieve 35mm filed of view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Perceptive Posted March 23 Share #199 Posted March 23 10 minutes ago, Chris W said: It is native 28mm not 35. You'll have to crop every image to achieve 35mm filed of view. Hence FF! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted March 23 Share #200 Posted March 23 10 minutes ago, Chris W said: It is native 28mm not 35. You'll have to crop every image to achieve 35mm filed of view. That's what I'm going to do with this camera. My starting point will be the FF crop, which is where I'll be shooting most of my shots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now