M246 or Fuji film GFX 100RF in Monochrom mode ?

[newnew]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The recently released Fujifilm GFX 100RF camera has some attractive features to me. I am not going to discuss all of them here as there are other treads on Q3 forum. However, it has an interesting B&W mode with additional Y,R and G built in filters. I currently have an M246 which I use minimally for a few sorties or special sessions. My objective is to trade it in to finance the GFX 100RF. This may seem real heresy as I am since long Leica user but somehow I feel that with the possibility of tethering and large CCD size I should have the equivalent quality to the M246, with the additional convenience of the added filters. What are your thoughts on this ? Does anybody has any similar temptation or experience ?

Edited May 8 by newnew

[Advertisement]

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

[Dazzajl]

Fuji images in B&W out of the camera are fantastic and Acros sims are rightfully heaped in praise. It wont look much like the 246 though. 

It's a bit grey and dull here this afternoon but I'll stick a 35mm lens on my GFX100 and shoot some side by side snaps with the 246, then you can have something to start forming an opinion with.

[newnew]

1 hour ago, Dazzajl said:

Fuji images in B&W out of the camera are fantastic and Acros sims are rightfully heaped in praise. It wont look much like the 246 though. 

It's a bit grey and dull here this afternoon but I'll stick a 35mm lens on my GFX100 and shoot some side by side snaps with the 246, then you can have something to start forming an opinion with.

Thank you. Looking forward.

 

[Dazzajl]

Okay, some quick snaps using the M246 with a Voightlander 40mm f1.2 Nokton and the GFX100 with the 35-70 at 35mm. The lenses are clearly not a match for field of view but they are the closest in rendering and the best I can do to remove lens character from the comparison. The results are not quite what I expected to see. Each set of five is the 246 first, DNG converted to jpeg and then a jpeg from the fuji. Acros film sim, no filter, then yellow, red and green.

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!

[Dazzajl]

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!

[Dazzajl]

And a little more fun, one of these is GFX, one is M246 but which is which?

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!

[newnew]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Your comparison is with  the FX 100 but still it gives an idea. It seems that the Test 1 picture is from 240 and the Test 2 from the Fuji , based on the fine detail rendering for the larger format. The detail in the low light is also well rendered by the Fuji.

[sometimesmaybe]

8 hours ago, newnew said:

I feel that with the possibility of tethering and large CCD size I should have the equivalent quality to the M246, with the additional convenience of the added filters

m246 and gfx100s shooter here.

GFX has more detail for sure, but i find the m246 without the bayer filter punches above its weight - maybe equiv of 30mp to 40mp of a bayer conversion. i dont care for the Acros film simulation, but the Monochrome film simulation is superb (more contrast and deeper blacks)

if you do a lot of editing, budget for a new computer. on my old rig, once ive applied 20 edits to a GFX image, each additional edit takes 3 to 4 seconds to apply... this esp if you need to touch up skin blemishes. sometimes the GFX captures too much detail

if you only put your work in the interweb, you wont be able to tell the difference

 

GFX100s

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!

 

m246

 

 

 

  

 

[newnew]

sometimesmaybe

Thanks for these nice pictures. The Leica captured the hair with a lot of character. Agree with the GFX blacks . Sometimes I find the M246 blacks a bit murky and need to work on the curve. If I got it I will use the GFX mostly for Landscapes and maybe a bit for street. Also I have a MP 240 from which I get good B&W conversions.

[DadDadDaddyo]

I've owned and used the M246, the M10M, the M11M, the GFX50R, the GFX100, and the GFX100S.

Of these, the one I still own and use is the M11M. 

That said, I think the three Fujifilm models I mentioned produced about the best monochrome conversion files I had ever seen. I think it helps that these Bayer filter files begin conversion with such high resolution. 

Great as those converted files are, and they're truly great, the M11M surpasses them, at least to my eyes.

My printer is a 24 inch Canon, so my normal "largest print size" is 24 inches on the short side. At these print sizes, the M11M files retain buckets of room for cropping, while still offering resolution that will, frankly, blow you across the room when you look closer. 

I could have kept any of them, or all of them, but I kept the M11M, and turned the rest into lenses for it, and for my M11.

[Ne314satel]

On 5/9/2025 at 1:16 AM, sometimesmaybe said:

m246 and gfx100s shooter here.

You need to compare photos on the Internet at least at 200% zoom. Otherwise, if you don't look at the sharpness and details (and the quality of beautiful photos), everything is boring. This is definitely not film and definitely not CCD monochrom. I'll say more - x2d is good in b/w (especially with 65mm and 80mm), but the tonality of the transitions immediately gives away the digital. Unfortunately.

[sometimesmaybe]

On 5/9/2025 at 4:24 PM, newnew said:

The Leica captured the hair with a lot of character. Agree with the GFX blacks . Sometimes I find the M246 blacks a bit murky and need to work on the curve. If I got it I will use the GFX mostly for Landscapes and maybe a bit for street.

i find m246 DNG files to be very linear (i.e. flat). if you like editing this is what you want as none of the 'looks' are baked in. this is obviously a pain if you just want something ready to go. adjusting the black point in post is a simple fix and produces punchy monochrome images. i normally prefer to take the m246, but I take the GFX when i need AF or when i need to use strobes

[newnew]

sometimes

On 5/19/2025 at 4:35 AM, sometimesmaybe said:

i find m246 DNG files to be very linear (i.e. flat). if you like editing this is what you want as none of the 'looks' are baked in. this is obviously a pain if you just want something ready to go. adjusting the black point in post is a simple fix and produces punchy monochrome images. i normally prefer to take the m246, but I take the GFX when i need AF or when i need to use strobes

Thank you this is quite useful. I take a lot of photos of textiles and the large sizes require the help of tethering. As to the landscape or street I believe I will get the same type of B&W quality as the M246. AF is a definite plus.