Bold claims for a title indeed, but as photographers, we've all had the opportunity to try different brands to see which one best meets our individual needs. So, when it comes to forking out your hard-earned cash for something like this, you want to be sure you are making the right decision. I would also like to say at the start, although this is a very positive review of the camera, I wasn't expecting it to be just as good as it is.
With exceptionally rich, detailed images in a compact and lightweight body, the Fujifilm GFX100S is a remarkable camera and addition to the world of medium format. With an impressive 102-megapixel sensor, this camera sets new standards for high-resolution photography. If you are seeking highly detailed images in an enticing blend of portability, performance, and user-friendly features, you certainly won't go wrong with this camera.
Smaller, lighter, and more affordable than the GFX100, this camera still packs some high-end specs:
- 102 MP BSI-CMOS 44 x 33mm medium format sensor
- Image stabilization system with up to 6 stops compensation
- Continuous shooting at up to 5 fps with C-AF
- 4K video at up to 30p with HDMI output of 10-bit 4:2:2 or 12-bit Raw footage
- Two-axis tilt rear touchscreen with 2.36M-dot resolution
- Fixed 3.69M-dot OLED EVF
- Lossy, lossless, or uncompressed raw in 16- or 14-bit
- Multi-shot 400 MP mode for static subjects
- Twin SD card slots
The camera is a solid magnesium alloy construction weighing in at 900 g, with a deep grip and a smaller DSLR-styled body, unlike its big brother, the GFX100. Weather-sealed in 60 different places, the camera can operate in challenging conditions and in temperatures as low as -10 °C. Admittedly and thankfully, I didn't get the opportunity to test it in colder climates, but I did in heavy downpours with no issues whatsoever.
Measuring 150 x 104 x 87 mm, the camera is remarkably compact for a medium format camera and feels very similar in size and ergonomics to that of a DSLR. In fact, the new Nikon Z8 has very similar dimensions, being 144 x 119 x 83 mm, yet weighs 10g more.
With its 3.69M-dot OLED EVF, the view is clear and crisp. With a good depth of handgrip, you don't feel as if you could drop the camera at any point. The battery life is good, although I did always carry two with me, as after about 5-6 hours of shooting, not constantly mind you, the battery was nearly depleted. Considering the specs of the camera, I was honestly surprised it didn't deplete sooner.
The camera itself performs impeccably well in all it does. The back LCD screen is sharp and has a tilt function as you would expect, which is useful for low shots, The top function screen is bright in its projection of the settings, which incidentally is an always-on display - very useful when picking up your camera for a quick shot. The top1.8-inch LCD display is also programmable, allowing you to have different information at hand, whatever your preference. There are minimal buttons and dials on the camera body to set everything up and not leave you messing around to get the photograph.
Like other Fuji menus, the system is clean and easily navigated, and like most cameras these days, you are able to save your favorite settings to your own menu.
The Fuji color science is very apparent in the GFX100S, as the camera produces stunning, vibrant images with excellent tonal range and rich colors. Also included is the range of film simulations, including the popular Acros and Classic Chrome, and a whole host of aspect ratios, including my personal favorite, 65:24. With more powerful image stabilization and the 102 MP BSI CMOS sensor borrowed from the GFX 100 you can expect the image quality to be great and you wouldn't be wrong; the images are highly detailed.
The autofocus is fast, but I can't say that it's the fastest, though that's not to the detriment of the camera, as I was testing it out on the subject matter that I shoot most, landscapes. Here, it worked exactly as I expected it to and never once lost focus or jumped to another subject in the scene. I did try a few other subjects, and again, the resulting images were most impressive in terms of image quality and captured detail. So, although as the title suggests the best landscape camera, it's actually a very versatile camera, and I now wish I had tried some portraits with it also.
- 102 MP sensor
- 60 points of weather sealing
- Smaller DSLR-styled body
- Deep handgrip
- Richly detailed images
Perhaps for most, the price is the biggest thing, but considering a medium format camera around 7 years ago would cost the best part of $10,000, this is a great deal. The weight of the camera and lenses combined on longer hikes may also put some off, but considering the image reward you get from the Fujifilm GFX100S, I think it's worth it.
I was fortunate enough to spend a month using the camera along with three lenses, the GF 23mm f/4 R LM WRs, the GF 20-35mm f/4 R WR, and the GF 45-100mm f/4 R LM OIS WR, each of which I'll cover in other reviews. Did I carry all three lenses on any long treks? No, but I did carry two at a time quite frequently and did notice the weight after a while, but it was nothing unmanageable considering the image returns. Is a month long enough to make the claim the title of the article suggests? Perhaps you would say no, and to that all I can say is you just know if something feels right.
I cannot fault something that I didn't find fault with, so I am not even going to try. It was a complete pleasure to use, and knowing that it would return great, detailed images each time was very reassuring. Certainly, with a 102 MP sensor, you know it's going to do that, but just how well it did that was, well, unbelievable. If you are a landscape photographer, I am 100% positive that you will be impressed by the images that the camera produces. Try one for yourself.
This has been an unapologetically positive review of the Fujifilm GFX100S and yes, I am a massive Fuji fan, but I did take an unbiased review approach to the camera, even though I was secretly excited to try it. But I honestly was not expecting the build quality, the ease of use, the performance, and the so sweetly detailed images the camera and all the lenses I used with it returned. The camera system, for me anyway, has nothing to even remotely think negatively about. Sure, you may say the weight, but at 900 g, it's actually not that heavy and can be carried around for daily use. On longer hikes, you will perhaps have to consider what you take with you, but the results are worth the weight. In fact, the Nikon D850 is 15 grams heavier. However, add in the GF lenses and it's a different ball game, as this quality of glass comes at a price in both weight and cost. If you currently shoot with this camera system, you'll know that the results are worth it.
As I write this conclusion, I have indeed found a negative about the system, an overwhelmingly selfish negative, in that I can't afford it just now.
Hi Gary, could you just tell what biggest size do you had printed from the files from this guy ? Thanks a lot for the answer ! You surely agree that this is the only purpose of 100 Mpx !
100mp means that you have much more data to work with. Printing big isn't the only use of this. For example, the freedom to crop while still retaining plenty of resolution is one big example of that. For landscape, this can be quite relevant as it reduces the number of lenses you have to carry, particularly into the backcountry.
At higher ISO being able to denoise at massive resolution and then shrink down will result in better IQ than had you needed to deal with that noise at a lower resolution.
I'd also add that even 100mp isn't THAT big when it comes to print sizes. Printed at 300dpi with no upscaling, the image from a GFX100 is only about 40" wide. I wouldn't call it massive by any stretch. Even on this monster sensor, if you want to make a truly massive print you will be doing significant upscaling. (Which is usually fine because big prints are generally viewed from further away but it's still worth considering. If you are looking for the absolute pinnacle of image quality then even a modest size print requires these resolution numbers)
As yet I haven't printed anything from it as I've still to finish decorating the room the prints are going into. However, these won't be big prints by any means 20x30inch at largest. It's the amount of rich detail that will be present that makes the difference, for me anyway.
I use both the 100s and 50R and both are stellar cameras. From the 100s, I have extrapolated images from 102mp to over 500mp using Topaz labs Gigapixel, or to 28,000 x18,800 pixels.
My rationale is that the 102mp sensor gives Topaz software enough data to successfully enlarge to these extremes. I enlarge select images to basically blow away clients who are still grappling with noisy 20-something megapixel images, when these are sharp, grainless, and without noise. I am not sure if I have the computing power to print a file this large, but I use this process to enlarge details from those images.
Best Landscape camera? Fugifilm? Probably not... Phase One XT? Possible.. Do I want to afford either? No.
Big price difference between the two you mention. I'll stick with the GFX.
Not only does the XT have a much better and larger sensor in the IQ4 150, the Rodenstock lenses are far superior to the fuji lenses. Harder to work with though.
Big claims we got here. "The Best Landscape Camera Ever Made", and "With an impressive 102-megapixel sensor, this camera sets new standards for high-resolution photography."
The Best, in all and any ways? And what resolution standards did it set when Phase One and Hasselblad both had 100Mpx already years ago? or the 150Mpx from PO?
I am not saying that this Fujifilm is not a great camera in any way, it's a wonderful camera, that for some uses and some people, is better than any of the other options. What I am saying is that if you're going to say Best about anything, it really has to be best in every way possible than the competition. Nowhere do you say how it compares and wins to any of the other high resolution Medium format options that the GFX100s competes against, besides the previous model (as if that was considered the best before) and 35mm DSLR.
If you have to condition how it's Best of all, than maybe you should be very clear about why it is at all times.
I get that a click bait title works, that's how I arrived here, and I am happy to contribute to your numbers, or that maybe you had some conditions on how you write about the camera you borrowed, but them maybe we all would be better served by having less bombastic but more realistic claims,
Any of these would have worked in your tittle "...for the weight", "...for the size", "...for the price" or even "...for a Fujifilm"
No conditions whatsoever for any of the writers when reviewing gear or software, it's based solely on our own experiences and opinions when using the equipment. If it's not as good as advertised or has any misgivings we do actually say.
Fuji managed to bring medium-format cameras down to a more affordable price range allowing more photographers the ability to purchase them. Admittedly in the current climate, I personally cannot buy one just now.
The camera is something I always wanted to try but honestly didn't think I would ever consider purchasing as my Nikon z7ii and Fuji XT5 serve me very well in everything I do. But after testing and seeing the results, this is the best landscape camera for me.
Hey Carlos...maybe you can be an actual adult my man? Everyone on the planet that is mature and reasonable knows that any author of any article is expressing NOT an absolute truth but, in this case, a very well intentioned sharing of the author's experience and perspective based on actual usage and a working history of many other like cameras. And news flash...any title that YOU would suggest is also simply your own opinion of how what's obvious to the rest of us should be expressed to meet YOUR preference...yet you're not the standard of articulating absolute truths, especially when you can't even meet the standard of reacting to a free and helpful article that is clearly written not as a Bible claiming to offer the absolute truth to be followed or listened to....but is simply providing helpful and edifying information to anyone interested in the camera.
If you're going for "Worst Ability to Not Be Absurdly Linear and Corrective" I'd have to correct that badge to also include..."for an adult your age"....as children can do a better job of what you just did....but they grow out of it by high school typically.
"I get that a click bait title works, that's how I arrived here, and I am happy to contribute to your numbers, or that maybe you had some conditions on how you write about the camera you borrowed, but them maybe we all would be better served by having less bombastic but more realistic claims,
Any of these would have worked in your tittle "...for the weight", "...for the size"
Most people don't have to have such a simple obvious point explained to them, that's why your comment stands alone with the dunce hat on it....but if you need to "be served" what's obvious....I'll help you by adding "for this current time of this year on this planet within this galaxy" as let's face it...there a a lot of other galaxies out there and if there is life on other planets they might have more advanced technology too so to placate both of your IQ points that title of the article really should have every other qualifier as well as there's probably at least three other people on this planet that probably couldn't make it through the article without having to complain about what someone wrote to help those considering the camera and help the organization he's a part of.
And friendly tip....when shooting for BAZAAR or any modeling shoot, it's probably helpful to inform those that hire you that "all payments will purchase the exact same image I do every single time with just a different model in a different setting that copies exactly what has been done by all the other photographers before me for many decades. For actual creativity please lower your expectations."
Best Landscape camera. This is very subjective, but I do love the Fuji. My Fuji GX680 has a bigger 'sensor' size and I can scan and do PP anytime. 4x5s, 5x7s and 8x10s.... Yeah, big and not as portable, but that wasn't part of the discussion. But man, I love the GX100 and 100 s.
Totally subjective Tim as we all have our own preferences. It's great that you mention the GX680 as that's one camera I would love to try.
Could you please provide a link or the name of the Cage and Leather grip in the photos posted, Thanks
Love my GFX 100s I have the GF23mm, GF45-100mm, and GF110mm. I use the 45-100mm 75% of the time a great lens! I'm thinking of selling my 23mm and getting the 20-35mm lens.
It's the Smallrig XT5 retro cage.
The Fuji is impressive for sure but there is an underrated 35mm ff mirrorless camera that may surpass it if handled right. The Panasonic s1r is a 47mgpx camera that has a high res mode that produces a 187mgpx raw file straight out of the camera via pixel shift. I have seen a file of a landscape that I shot upsized to 90" on the long side and still hold pristine detail.
I was an early adopter of the S1R, and I really, really loved the images and the ergonomics. What I did not like was its complete inability to focus on anything that was moving. I don't normally shoot wildlife, sports, etc, but it does happen, and I simply do not have the ability to carry two camera systems (mobility impaired).
In every other way the S1R was superb. I really liked the weight which helped control the shaky hands that came with my nerve damage.
I finally admitted defeat after a year and switched over to the A7rIV.. hated the color science, the menu system etc., so I switched again. This time I went with the brand new (then) XH-2. Wow!
I'm told that the GFX100s is similar enough to be called the XH-2's big brother. I really wanted the bigger sensor, but the $s just weren't there. Now that I see the XH-2's output I am content to stay with this one for a very long time. If the its big brother is even better that's nice, but the kid brother is enough for me ( and I am very fussy about my images).
Ok, another bait title! You fail to mention the color of any Fujifilm camera and that is the fujifilm sensor colors that is different than any other, X-Trans sensors have a unique 6 by 6 pattern of photosites with more green giving better depth and many other things, My nephew has a Fujifilm and the colors are awesome and and he only does jpegs so all in camera processed. I am a Sony since '14, but with experience I have learned it is not the camera so much as the operator knowing the tool. You say Landscape and talk about cropping, cropping is the only thing more pixels get you! Back in '15 I was on a driftwood beach and another photographer stopped to watch, he had a Phase One with no fippy screen and no IBIS had to use sticks for everything and yes very expensive, I later showed my images to him at a campground lounge. Even with using Capture One software, also his, My Sony looked better. I had some blue hour images doing bracketed at 5 @ +/- 2 EV getting brightness on the dark side of driftwood. Software back then was very bad and expensive to boot but C1 at $30 kicked it and I also was using a old Canon film FD lens and EF and EF-S lenses, Sony had few lenses offered. Next day he went and bought one also. In '17 I had a new A7RII and was on a day tour at Antelope Canyon, I forgot my camera plate for my tripod so I had to hand hold but tested Bracketing at 3 @ +/- 2 EV and with the new IBIS and all were sharp. So the whole tour all were on sticks doing long exposures while I walked about clicking as well as capturing straight up laying on my back also the new 12-24 when others only 24mm or a 16mm if! Back at the hotel I was asked how I did, showed edited images as well as on camera. There was a buying storm down in Flagstaff, I was told when I was later at the Grand Canyon and doing in camera panos and using on camera apps "Digital Filter" the 12mm was like a 3:2 pano.
My point is the camera is just a tool, study and learn the options available and lastly Software today makes the images, ever go back to your very old image and do a redo. As far as heavy I see more long hikers on YouTube with very large packs with even tents, food, stoves as well their collection lenses and the video camera/batteries/sun charging gear.... out to the outer places of who knows where. Sounds like some gym time needed.
Great images there Edwin and yes the camera is only a tool, it's the person that makes the photograph.
Hi Edwin, who was your guide for the Antilope night shots?
If money were no object, I'd have quite the GFX 100S kit. Andy Mumford has some fantastic landscapes taken with the 100S - the detail and dynamic range are truly stupefying.
If all photos were finished SOOC, that would mean something. They're not.
I thought this was going to be about the Deardorf 8x10.
Too bad Ansel Adams didn't have one of these, he could have produced some really great photos...
Isn't that like saying, "If you had a nice stove, you could be a really good cook?"
it was probably ironic. Ansel Adams could create stunning images with any equipment.
Eh, Best Landscape Camera Ever Made?
I guess you have never tried an IQ 160?
loving all the "my dad's dick is bigger than yours" comments.
This is clearly subjective, but quite an interesting read.
Thanks Gary. Well written article here
I have the Fuji X-H2 - killer gear for a enthusiast.
I'm curious how did the author pick the "best"? Did he meticulously browse through the vast array of different options to pick his best? What parameters/features made this camera to be the best?
I can see that he enjoyed to use the 100s, and within its price range for this particular subject matter it may be the best option for most, but that doesn't make it overall best in any way.
(Disclaimer: I never shot with the gfx100S, and used the gfx100 only once. On the other hand I managed to tap into the Phase One library quite extensively. There are 2 lenses from the current SK selection I never used. And I tried all Rodenstock lenses at least once.)
I am strongly considering the purchase of the 100S despite the "ouch" level of the prices for the body and lenses. Nevertheless, when I look at the pictures in the article, I cannot determine what camera was used. I do landscapes, and I currently use the Canon 5DSR (50MP -2 bodies) that came out in 2015. Those photographs don't show image quality an order of magnitude level higher sufficient to justify the price. I guess I need to see live prints.
Definitely have a look at live prints Ed. Online compression doesn't do justice to the rich detail captured with the camera.
My favorite aspect of this camera is the uncompressed 16 bit raw files. The Resolution is great and all but the editing capability is even better. You almost can't break these files in post and banding colors is a thing of the past. This thing is also actually really good in low light too. It performs AMAZING at high ISO's
"...when it comes to forking out your hard-earned cash for something like this, you want to be sure you are making the right decision." So shut up and buy what I tell you to buy!?