The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

First photos of the GF45-100

biglouis

Well-known member
Fuji Rumours showed off the first photographs of the forthcoming GF45-100 zooms and they revealed something I was not expecting, OIS on the lens.

https://www.fujirumors.com/fujinon-gf45-100mmf4-hands-on-images-and-announcement-late-january/

When the lens was announced I was a bit 'meh!' but Fuji's OIS is very good indeed (I can handhold shots with my XF lenses that have OIS down to very low speed). This lens could make my 50R much more usable in lower light and the fov range is great.

Just thinking.

LouisB
 

Pelorus

Member
That fills the zoom gap! The OIS on the 100-200 zoom is fantastic. I can handhold quite easily at 1/50 and sometimes 1/25 which is amazing to me.

Fuji Rumours showed off the first photographs of the forthcoming GF45-100 zooms and they revealed something I was not expecting, OIS on the lens.

https://www.fujirumors.com/fujinon-gf45-100mmf4-hands-on-images-and-announcement-late-january/

When the lens was announced I was a bit 'meh!' but Fuji's OIS is very good indeed (I can handhold shots with my XF lenses that have OIS down to very low speed). This lens could make my 50R much more usable in lower light and the fov range is great.

Just thinking.

LouisB
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Fuji Rumours showed off the first photographs of the forthcoming GF45-100 zooms and they revealed something I was not expecting, OIS on the lens.

https://www.fujirumors.com/fujinon-gf45-100mmf4-hands-on-images-and-announcement-late-january/

When the lens was announced I was a bit 'meh!' but Fuji's OIS is very good indeed (I can handhold shots with my XF lenses that have OIS down to very low speed). This lens could make my 50R much more usable in lower light and the fov range is great.

Just thinking.

LouisB
Why the initial 'meh!' ?
If it as good as the GF32-64/4, it'll be terrific !
My only slight hesitation concerns the focal 'overlap'.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Excellent! I'm not a huge fan of the 32-64 FoV region (great lens, I just don't shoot there), so a 23, 45-100, 100-200 would be my everyday kit. Sometimes the 100 is just a bit too long. A 70 or 80 prime would have been nice, but the other zooms have been stellar.

M
 

Pelorus

Member
Bart, have you used the 100-200? I have both current zooms and I think they are both fantastic, however if I had to choose one, I'd say the 100-200 is the best of the pair by some margin. It just draws so beautifully. In any event neither is a slouch.

[snip]
If it as good as the GF32-64/4, it'll be terrific !
My only slight hesitation concerns the focal 'overlap'.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Bart, have you used the 100-200? I have both current zooms and I think they are both fantastic, however if I had to choose one, I'd say the 100-200 is the best of the pair by some margin. It just draws so beautifully. In any event neither is a slouch.
Yep, I’ve got both zooms. And I can see a third coming ... :)
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
Bart, have you used the 100-200? I have both current zooms and I think they are both fantastic, however if I had to choose one, I'd say the 100-200 is the best of the pair by some margin. It just draws so beautifully. In any event neither is a slouch.
Interesting. Most, including me, think that GF32-64/4 is better than GF100-200, though the 100-200 is very good as well. In practice, the preferred range will determine which lens to use.
 

Pelorus

Member
There you are then!! I just really like the way the 100-200 treats the subject and the way it renders colour. Many years ago I had a Nikkor 300/4.5 IF ED. There was something about the way that lens rendered as well. Lens choice, after all the MTF graphs and sharpness testing comes down to a subjective personal decision doesn't it!

Interesting. Most, including me, think that GF32-64/4 is better than GF100-200, though the 100-200 is very good as well. In practice, the preferred range will determine which lens to use.
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
There you are then!! I just really like the way the 100-200 treats the subject and the way it renders colour. Many years ago I had a Nikkor 300/4.5 IF ED. There was something about the way that lens rendered as well. Lens choice, after all the MTF graphs and sharpness testing comes down to a subjective personal decision doesn't it!
100% with you. The quality of a lens is not measured only by its sharpness in the corners :).
 

Pelorus

Member
I always had a prejudice against zooms stemming from a pretty ordinary Sigma zoom in Nikon F mount years ago. I have been really surprised with the GF zooms - they are much better than the zooms of yesteryear. We made a cost/focal length decision with the GF lenses to go with zooms. The penalty is weight and aperture.

With the X-Pro 3 we've gone the other way - the Fujicrons - the aim being to have the simplest, lightest kit possible. Whilst they aren't really fast lenses they are fast enough, good enough and light weight.

I wouldn't want to schlepp 3 of the GF zooms however so buying the 45-100 would lead to the need to make daily decisions :ROTFL:

I must admit to a preference for primes over zooms.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I always had a prejudice against zooms stemming from a pretty ordinary Sigma zoom in Nikon F mount years ago. I have been really surprised with the GF zooms - they are much better than the zooms of yesteryear. We made a cost/focal length decision with the GF lenses to go with zooms. The penalty is weight and aperture.

With the X-Pro 3 we've gone the other way - the Fujicrons - the aim being to have the simplest, lightest kit possible. Whilst they aren't really fast lenses they are fast enough, good enough and light weight.

I wouldn't want to schlepp 3 of the GF zooms however so buying the 45-100 would lead to the need to make daily decisions :ROTFL:
The GFX100 is by far the best IQ camera i've ever owned -but I dont like carrying it around all day. On a whim I picked up an SL2 for 35mm shooting - after exiting Leica M. for in the bag/car/plane at all times I use my XT-3 usually with the 23/2 on it or teh 16/1.4. I love Fuji stuff - almost as much as Leica.
 

algrove

Well-known member
With IOS I just wonder if eventually with many of us if this 45-100 could replace the 32-64 we now use.

I like MGrayson's 3 lens setup.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I was originally a bit 'meh!' about the lens because I found the weight of the 32-64 not worth the value of using it. However, the OIS on the 120/4 was nothing short of miraculous and I'm sure it will be as good on this lens. That makes it worth the heft, to me.

When I returned to the GFX system I initially thought I'd get by with the 45/2.8 alone but I've now got the 63/2.8 and the Laowa 17mm. I think it is inevitable I'm going to go all in and get this lens and at some point the 100-200.

I was shooting all day yesterday with the 45/2.8 and 17mm inside a historic building in London. I had to use a tripod but I did a couple of quick handheld captures, wide open with the 45/2.8. They are not bad but I'd be able to do a lot more, even with the slower aperture, even stopped down with the OIS on this lens which makes it very attractive.

Way to go Fuji.

LouisB
 
Top