FUJI GFX 100S vs GFX 100 II 

That Sony kit is pretty amazing, you will probably see a difference in overall speed but for most applications the 100 II is definitely fast enough. The new 907 100 hasselblad combo looks amazing, I had the 907 50 combo and loved it but IMO if one makes the decision to go that route the 100 back just makes so much more sense, especially on large format cameras. I know they keep advertising it for the 500 system but once you look down that chimney and see the crop (use the mask!) it just makes you want to cry.

@@paulschefz ok I see you compare it to the other-level-hasselblads. becuase I come from below (fullframe), I had to compare the GFX 100 II with the X2D, and this race is pretty much a nobrainer 🤩 yea was the top-line kit from sony. but I don't miss it. the support almost made me quit but now I'm even better 😂

I wont go into Sony vs fuji vs .... because it is personal and a lot happens in editing and post production. I agree that printing is a huge part of photography but most people are just glued to their screens and I dont see that necessarily as a problem either. as far as camera recommendations, the 50 is great, the 100 is just better, not only the camera but also the sensor, I have a lot of files from my fuji and hasselblad 50 medium format cameras and getting them ready for print (big prints) I mostly wish I had shot them on the 100s (or II now). I am absolutely amazed with how much (and how big) I am printing and how little I spend on ink now with the P9570, I did the math before (compared to the P900) and it came out cheaper but so far its actually much cheaper.

Thank you, glad you got something out of it, I am actually selling the 100S, I have no use for 2 bodies right now. The EVF on the 100II is larger and has better resolution but to me the key is the tilt adapter, makes all the difference in the world. I would prefer a smaller/lower res EVF with tilt adapter to a fixed higher res/larger. obviously the 100 II has both which is why it is the body for me.

🙏 just posted my thoughts on the new body!

Fujifilm may have a misfire here to our benefit! The only meaningful difference with the 100x series comes down to the amount of speed you need/get. which is kind of insane if you are just in search of IQ.

@@finder2267 yeah, the whole GFX 100 line is now pretty amazing when it comes to IQ, the very small differences between the first gen 100 sensor the the one in the 100II and 100sII probably aren't enough for trading up but there are now 3 bodies offering differences in speed covering most applications now.all in all great for the consumer and considering Sony, canon, Nikon going towards pure speed (even sometimes neglecting IQ) fuji seems to be doing their own thing with the GFX, going their own way.

definitely a different look, maybe even starting to see a very slight difference between 100S and 100II? the files from the 100 are just overall better, not just resolution. I just printed some files from the 50R (and from the hasselblad 907 50m) and even at 24x30 inch the differences are clearly visible. I do know that a lot can be done in post, uprez,....but native resolution is native resolution. not sure if you have checked out part 1 of the vintage glass video, I tried some of those same lenses on the 50R a while ago and did not like any, hard to put my finger on it, I am trying to find some of those old files but it just did not work for me. the new sensor on the 100II is really lovely, a great clean but still somehow analog look, maybe that is why those old lenses seem to work pretty well?

@@paulschefz Thank you very much for that extensive reply. I saw one "old glass" video by you. I don't care for 100MP which I basically do not need, but for handling of the body (the Gfx 50 series to me felt a bit too clunky to operate), and that nice Fuji "film" look. I guess the difference between 100S and 100 II is mainly in the AF, the EVF and general handling of the camera?

well that is what I thought at first as well, the 100 II sensor is a little different but there is not much. I had the GFX 50 and ended up switching to hasselblad, not a bad camera but it just felt clunky overall. files were good but the 100s is just a totally different class, handling and files, the 100II just took it to another level, the more I use it, the more I am starting to think it is the perfect camera, compact, amazing files, great handling, fast overall and great AF, ability to use old glass, the EVF tilt. I am sure we will see new and even better things in the future, this is pretty awesome as a complete package.@@bernios3446

100 or 50 megapixels on GFX? At 100 megapixels you will see all the advantages and disadvantages of all your adapted and native lenses. You won't see any of this at 50 megapixels.

That is one of the major differences and probably one of the reasons for the higher price of the 100II, the 100s EVF is fixed to the body, the EVF on then 100II is removable and the tilt adapter can be used. Also: I just started experimenting with manual focus lenses on the 100II, the extra resolution and size of the EVF make manual focus much easier.

the 100 mix sensor is great for architecture, the 100II might get a little more out of shadows? but the S is so so close (and probably equal in most cases). AF not eh S is still very good and the camera is overall really snappy, as always, there really are very few shortcomings until you try the new body and then you notice what has improved. I will be posting my review for the T/S adapter for Pentax lenses, which I came across by accident but am really impressed with. I know the canon T/S lenses and afaik they do work (within limits) on the GFX but it seems like there are other options with older MF glass and T/S adapters. the only issue (for architecture) is that ultra wides are harder to find since (for example) a 45 on the pentax is very wide but not so much on the GFX (obviously). I shoot architecture myself and so far the GF 20-35 has worked really well for me, I just do the corrections in post and with the huge file (and the amazing lens) it really isn't a problem at all. I would still highly recommend the S over any smaller sensor mirrorless and strongly recommend looking into older glass with adapters!

great info! Thank you @@paulschefz I generally stick with the 24mm T/S . With the 17mm T/S the foreground to background scale is just too dramatic for me. I find that shooting 24mm and shifting for a multi-frame stitch has a much reduced distortion while giving me nice large files that seem to be as wide or wider than the 17. Really do want to grab a GFX and put it into my workflow.

​@@user-cd4jg7eb1x If you are using the canon lenses to stitch I would strongly recommend the Rogeti TSE frame since they dont have a tripod mount. It's always better to move the camera and keep the lens in place.

I've heard of that Rogeti. Definitely would give it a run@@paulschefz

@@paulschefz Rogeti TSE frame kills the tilt-shift mechanism of the lens. The bias adjustment screws cannot handle the weight of the camera. It’s better to move the lens using the slider, for example Super Mag Slider Velbon: move the lens to the left, use the slider to move it to the right, etc. (Google Transletter)

thank you for your feedback!

What are you talking about? I guess when you listen to trash all day authenticity sounds foreign to you.

Never change ! It’s refreshing to hear your honest opinions in a clear and concise manner. No “RU-vidr” fluff here! I appreciate you taking the time to compare these two cameras!

No, no, it’s very good when they show the shortcomings of a product. If we make a purchase decision based on these shortcomings, we will be greatly delighted that the product has more advantages in stock. It's more pleasant. Look how they praise Ttartisan 500/6.3 - cheap, light. In practice, this is a simple tube with poor quality lenses, not sharp and with large chromatic aberrations. Such lenses destroy the enthusiasm of amateur photographers for subsequent knowledge of this art

@@theinnerdreamer7043 thank you! was thinking of adding some "zoom ins" on my next video😂

I am pretty sure it does not record 4:3 video, I know it does 4096x2160 and 3840x2160, neither are 4:3, the 100sII should be announced next week? but since the 100II does not do 4:3 video I doubt it will either.