I’ve had several people ask me what my opinions are of the upcoming Fujifilm GFX100RF fixed-lens X100-like GFX camera, which will supposedly be announced in the first quarter of 2025. Apparently, according to Fujirumors, the camera will be about the size of an X-Pro, have the 100mp GFX sensor, a 35mm (28mm full-frame-equivalent) f/4 lens, and will not have IBIS. That’s all that they’ve reported so far.
I don’t currently own any GFX cameras. They’re outside of my budget, are large and heavy compared to the X-series, and I think my use-case for one would be fairly limited. But, something like the GFX100RF would be interesting to me because the size and weight are likely to be less than typical GFX gear, and probably less expensive than a GFX100S II plus a lens. It would be a good way to dip my toes into GFX without having to buy a whole new system, or lug around something large and heavy.
One criticism that the camera is likely to receive is the lack of IBIS, but I think not having IBIS is just fine for a camera like this. First, outside of video and low-light situations, IBIS is really unnecessary for wide-angle lenses. Second, it adds size, weight, and cost, so its exclusion might actually be beneficial. Third, I think the whole “you need IBIS on 100mp because you can see even the smallest blur” argument is overstated. On this camera, IBIS would be occasionally nice to have, but far from essential, so it doesn’t bother me that the GFX100RF will apparently not have it.
The lens choice will probably be debated for a long time. Since fixed-lens cameras are stuck at whatever focal-length they are, you have to really like what it is. The 35mm lens on a GFX is like 18mm on APS-C (think Fujifilm X70 and Ricoh GR), or 28mm on full frame (think Leica Q3). That’s obviously a very popular focal-length, but it’s not for everyone. I personally prefer less wide-angle lenses most of the time (the X100VI, for example, is sometimes too wide for me). I completely understand the focal length choice for the GFX100RF; however, I kind of wish it was more like 50mm (40mm full-frame-equivalent), but that’s just my preference, and probably not what would be most desired by the majority of potential buyers.
And let’s not forget the maximum aperture of “only” f/4. That’s not an impressive maximum aperture, but also not unusual for medium-format. A larger maximum aperture would require a larger and heavier (and more expensive) lens, which would defeat the purpose of the GFX100RF. Back in 2021 I talked about this a bit: while GFX has a potentially smaller depth-of-field and better low-light capabilities, the fact that the maximum apertures are often smaller means that you oftentimes can’t fully realize those advantages. It’s a catch-22. Although f/2.8 would have been nice, f/4 as a maximum aperture is completely unsurprising to me, and probably required some engineering magic to even make that work.
We will have to wait a few more months to really know what the GFX100RF camera will be like, but what I can tell you is that this is the most excited I have been for a GFX model in a very long time. I need to prepare now—make room in both my budget and in my camera bag—for when it is announced. I’m sure, like the X100VI, if you’re not quick to order, there will be a wait to get your hands on one, as I’m pretty sure that this will be a popular camera.
I love the Idea of the Rangfinder body, but a 28mm equivalent Is not my favorite focal length. 28mm to me, is not wide enough to be a useful WA lens, it needs to be at least 24mm but really should be closer to 20mm. If I wanted an all around lens, then 35mm would be my choice.
I own the GFX 50s and 3 lenses, 23mm, 32-64mm and the 120 Macro. I have always wanted a lighter RF style body as I used to be a Leica M-6 shooter. So I love my Fuji Pro2. But (for my needs as a small but hi quality camera) a short zoom minimum of 24-75. (but 24-120 would be ideal as a carry around travel camera, without having to carry extra lenses) and then only need one size filters.
I think wider could be interesting. I’m not a zoom person myself, but a zoom lens could be interesting, too. I think, in the end, more people will be happy with the focal-length choice than unhappy… the Ricoh GR and Leica Q series I think demonstrate that. But, maybe Fuji will have conversion lenses like with the X100-series.
A 30mm focal length might have made a lot of sense for this if they were insistent on going wide. 24mm native, crop to 28mm with more resolution than a Leica Q. And thus more resolution than the Q for every further crop focal length.
I don’t disagree. If you’re going to go wide, go wide. It would set it apart, at the least.
Good thing you have 100 million pixels to crop in 😂
I have exactly the same thoughts as you Ritchie after this last rumors.
A bit too wide for me. And I’m get old so shaking a bit more now, hence why I migrated from the X100V to VI. But having the GFX50R + GF50, which is neat combo, the lack of IBIS is indeed an issue but not so much after all for my handheld way of shooting. In common situations I go along 1/125 or more so 1/200 and simply go higher in ISO. The IQ difference of MF is significant compared to the same MP I can have on my X100VI or X-T5…
As I do not hesitate to go very high in ISO with those last 2, I have absolutely no hesitation with my GFX50R!
What miss is that indeed the GFX are for the moment way more bulky, the 50R is a brick even though lighter than a FF, and it’s sensor as no PDAF (so in poor light conditions it can hunt quite a bit) and can be more slow in processing the data (but I find it more than OK for my type of photography).
But if Fujifilm put a 100MP sensor with an extra small MF pancake lens in the size of what is rumored of the X-Pro3, hence being very light and not bulky, that would be a tremendous engineering achievement and user experience!
So all depends on exact specs, handling experience and more so price tag. If all super packed with all present goodies and performance from the current 100MP sensor and X-Trans V processor generation, it will be a huge!
I do hope the price will be way less than the current GFX100 series offering and the GFX100RF will have the same digital zoom facility as the X100F/V/VI and X-T5. At 100MP ‘cropping’ will not be an issue to be less wide (I hope for a 3x, not simply a 2x). If so the GFX100RF will be the true gateway to Fujifilm GF system like the X100 series is for the X system.
And maybe also lens converters like for the X100 series and XF70 will be offered in later stage???
Anyhow with its release I will keep my GFX50R. It’s price will definitely go down even more than upon the release of the last GFX100 series and may be hard to resell afterwards. Plus, the GFX50R can change lenses, and ‘playing’ with it with my old Nikon AI (manual) lenses is more than very fun!
Let’s see how it goes until March 2025! And it will very interesting rumors to follow!
The GFX50R and the upcoming camera are really the only two GFX models that I’m interested in. The 50R has got almost a cult following now… a surprising large number of people had one on the various photowalks I led this year (and mostly with vintage manual lenses). I think Fujifilm should strongly consider a successor.
As far as the digital zoom (“digital teleconverter”), I think that will definitely add some versatility, as there’s just a ton of resolution. A crop to 50mp and a crop to 25mp should be the options. I would probably use it frequently.
I appreciate the comment!
I am one of those guys with the “vintage” manual lenses on a GFX 50R. The lenses are mostly modern design (not actually vintage, they just look it) Voigtlander and Zeiss M-mount full-frame lenses. Only a few cover the full 33x44mm sensor, so I am mostly shooting in 1:1 or 33x33mm format, and my 50R becomes a 38R. But the size and weight savings is huge!
I’ve read that the Helios 44-2 covers the frame… that’s one I would consider trying (you know, if I had a GFX camera…).
Won’t consider it if it’s over $4500. If the price is bellow $4500, I will struggle for a long time.
I have no idea what the price will or won’t be. I’m hoping for $3,999 or less, but it could be anything.
I got an x100VI because I won the Fuji lottery, or would never have even considered buying one…. Now it is easily my favorite camera. I do sometimes wish it was a 50mm eqv rather than 35mm.
Medium format is out of my price range but a gfx100rf with a 63mm lens (50mm eqv) or 85mm eqv lens with an F/4 (or faster) would be something to save for.
I’d probably want an X100 VI with a 50mm F/2 (75mm Ff eqv) too
Congrats on winning the lottery!
I would be very interested in a longer focal length version of the X100VI, if Fujifilm ever decided to make one. Sigma did that with the DP series awhile back… had three or four different focal length options for their fixed-lens camera.
The 28mm equivalent could easily be cropped to 35mm on a 100mp gfx format camera, giving the option like the Leica Q. Also approx 2/3 stop shallower than f4 for dof on gfx. Could be a perfect hi-iq street camera!
I should add.. it can also incorporate the X-pan aspect ratio.
The XPan ratio is the top reason for my interest in GFX. Thanks for bringing it up!
Fuji really needs to start putting TX-1/XPan into their 40mp APS-C cameras. There’s still more than 20mp to work with after cropping. Just send it out in a firmware. Even a paid firmware.
I agree. I think a lot of people want it, and it doesn’t seem like it would be terribly difficult to do. Would be well-received by the community.
The X-pan 65:24 ratio crop works out to 50MP on a 102 MP 33x44mm sensor. If that’s not enough, you are going to have to wait for a real X-pan/TX digital camera with even larger image circle coverage than GFX. Or an even higher MP GFX sensor, say 200MP.
I can’t imagine that a 50mp-ish XPan crop isn’t enough resolution… except for maybe a handful of people across the entire globe, who might need more for their unusual situations. For the vast, vast majority, 50mp is way more than enough.
The ability to crop (or the “digital teleconverter”, as it’s called on the X100 series) is a good point. There’s a ton of resolution to work with.
Fujifilm has a long tradition of unusual and niche cameras, and this appears to be a spiritual successor to their GW 120 film cameras. It’s nice to know that they believe there’s a sufficient market for cameras that aren’t absolutely mainstream.
I do think, though, that they should put more effort into marketing the system as an alternative to top-end full frame cameras. Obviously the GFX system isn’t as large or versatile as those from SoNikCan but I believe that for very many people it would provide a better alternative, and for comparable prices.
I think the camera to best compare it to as a spiritual successor is the Fuji GS645W, which has a 45mm f/5.6 lens, which is pretty equivalent to the lens that the GFX100RF will apparently have. The modern equivalent of that camera. It will be a hot item upon release, in my opinion—niche can become mainstream sometimes (like the X100VI and Ricoh GR III), but not often; however, I think this one has a good shot at it, as long as it’s not too expensive.
I appreciate the input!
I agree with you, Ritchie, on all counts and especially about the focal length. Either side of 18 APSC(equiv to 28) works better for me for wide angle, and I love the calmer look of a 35 APSC normal (equiv to 50) or a short to medium tele.
I wonder if Fujifilm will offer converter lenses like the X100-series. Could be intriguing to go a little wider and/or more telephoto.
I think you have parsed the reasons for the fixed lens camera’s spec’s just right. You can crop in from a wide angle to a normal field of view, but not the other way around. There is a reason that the FF Leica Q series is 28mm, and the new 43mm model is just an add-on for people who can (and will) pay for both.
I love my GFX 50R, but the only Fuji lens I use is the pancake 50 (mostly I have adapted FF lenses), otherwise I would find camera and lens too big and heavy to carry. I would like IBIS, but would that add a lot of size and weight? The X100vi IBIS is tiny and light compared tp previous versions, so maybe not so much. And I don’t think a 100MP sensor would be heavier than a 50MP one. Either upgrade would add lots of cost, however. And I think this is a camera that is treading a very narrow cost/benefit ledge
I am still hoping for a real GFX 100R and an X-Pro 4/5. If a fixed lens GFX adds fans to that mode of shooting, I very much welcome it’s addition.
I think IBIS would add a little size, but not much… maybe just a hair. It would definitely add some weight, and cost, too. This is something I think they could have gone either way with, and either path is fine with its own advantages/disadvantages.
I wonder if the GFX100RF sells well enough, if that will compel Fujifilm to make a GFX100R. I hope so.
I had a Leica Q3 28 and happily sold it to acquire the 43. I am not in any way alone in doing so. My shooting style often had me wanting for reach and the 28 (which is actually probably closer to a 26mm in practice due to in-body distortion correction). Compression and bokeh on the 43 are magnificent even at f2.0 vs 1.7 on the original Q3.
I personally would prefer the Q3 43 over the “regular” 28mm version, I’m pretty sure. Not that I have ever touched either… 🤣 😀
I have zero interest in the 28mm Q, but would get a Q3 43 if I could afford it. It’s not just a gimmick–some folks are standard rather than wide shooters.
Very exciting news, rangefinder style which I like.
But no IBIS on a 100 mp sensor?
And f3.5/ f4.0 is just two slow, having to resort to higher ISOs in lower light.
It needs to be at least f2.8/ f2.5 to persuade potential buyers over the Leica Q3.
Bokeh isn’t everything, but very useful on occasions.
Not sure about this one…
I think the difference between an f/4 lens and f/2.8 lens on this camera is similar to the difference between the Fujinon 18mm f/2 and the Fujinon 18mm f/1.4. I don’t think it would be physically possible without having a very large lens on the front, which would defeat the purpose of the camera. Aside from that, f/4 is a pretty common maximum aperture for GFX (I count 6 in the G mount lineup).
I’m personally not interested. At heart, I’m more of a 50mm shooter than a 35mm or 28mm shooter. “But you can crop” doesn’t do it for me, since I’d rather crop a 50mm to 90mm than a 28mm to 50mm. The GFX lenses which I find most interesting are the 55/1.7, the 110/2, the Mitakon 65/1.4. And also the 50mm f/3.5 pancake, but just for form factor.
Saying that this is a spiritual successor to the GS645W with the 45mm f/5.6 makes sense… but what I want is the Fujica GS645 with the 75mm f/3.4. On GFX, that’d be roughly 60mm f/2.8, rather than a 35mm f/4.
That said… I probably still wouldn’t buy it, just couldn’t afford it or something like the Q3 43. I feel like I can’t really justify a film GS645, since it’s an old electronic camera that costs at least $600 and could easily turn into an unrepairable brick, and there’s enough mechanical 645 folders out there that are a lot cheaper.
If presented with a 28mm (equivalent) lens and 50mm (equivalent) lens, four out of five times I’m choosing the 50mm. That’s just me, though.
The problem with GFX lenses is that the ones that are the most interesting are soooo expensive (aside from the Mitakon… but even that is a little expensive for what it is, and heavy). You have to drop a small fortune on a body, and by the time you assemble a good kit, you could have purchased a used car. 🤣
Can we please have the XPro4 already? I don’t care nor have the money for GFX…. C’mon Fuji.
My best guess is that the X-Pro4 will likely come in the last quarter of 2025, or the first quarter of 2026, and will be the first X-Trans VI camera.
Your take on this camera is about where I land too. If bringing down size is the priority, they’re making the right choices. I shoot a 50R and particularly with the GF 50mm or adapted glass, the GFX is a real pleasure. The only “big lens” I own is the Mitakon 65mm because the f/1.4 is just that good, but it’s a boat anchor and weighs as much as the 50R body.
IBIS really hasn’t been a big deal. I think for street shooters during blue hour it has merit, but otherwise inconclusive. I’ve rented the 100S and I mostly noticed the improved autofocus, IBIS didn’t play much of a factor in my shooting. I think for those where it does, they might be elderly and shaky.
I think there are also people that have been told that they “need” IBIS, so they believe that they do. You can’t convince them otherwise, but if they were to turn IBIS off, they would see that it doesn’t adversely affect nearly any of their photographs. For some, IBIS really is critical to have, but for many, it is a safety net that is only occasionally helpful.
A zillion photos taken before IBIS was invented, everyone managed just fine. It’s a nice to have, not essential. On my 50R compared my 100VI I miss USB-C charging a lot more than IBIS.
Most of my photographic journey has been without IBIS. It’s nice to have sometimes, and for video (without a gimbal) it is a necessity, but otherwise I could be very happy without it.
A few people have mentioned that adding IBIS might add weight and bulk.
However the little X100VI manages to incorporate IBIS though so I don’t think it would be an issue.
The GFX sensor is about twice the size of APS-C, so I assume that the IBIS unit is at least twice the size and weight of the X-series unit. This is merely speculation, but it could be the difference of a quarter of a pound or so, and maybe 4mm in depth?
Turned out to be a pretty cool camera.
Yes, it did. I hope to buy one someday….