Sunday, September 8, 2019

REVIEW: Canon EOS R & RF 24-105mm + Control Ring Mount Adapter with iPhone XS/8 Plus Comparisons

Canon EOS R Mirrorless Digital Camera

When I did my first thoughts on the Canon EOS R, I hadn't used this camera or done my review of the Nikon Z7. Since the Z7 was way better than I expected, I tried to go into this review with a more open mind. I was hoping for a great surprise from Canon like I got from Nikon.

There were definitely some surprises, so read on to find out how this camera would fair in every day life, a NFL game and a trip to the Arizona desert. At the same time I also picked up a new iPhone XS and my wife got a new iPhone 8 Plus, so doing a comparison of the phones vs the EOS R was inevitable for my own personal curiosity.

Settings used during testing

I don't typically include a section like this in my reviews but my inclusion of comments about iPhone vs EOS R makes it necessary for me to comment on what settings I've used to get what I felt were the best in-camera JPEG results when comparing Canon and Apple's in-camera image processing. I always shoot raw so I can change my mind later, but here's what I set for the in-camera JPEG's included in this article:

  • Peripheral Illumination Correction ON
  • Distortion Correction ON
  • Digital Lens Optimizer ON
  • Dual Pixel RAW Disable
  • Image Quality RAW+L (fine)
  • Highlight Tone Priority D+2 (Enhanced) - sets ISO to a minimum of 200
  • Picture Style Auto
  • Color Space Adobe RGB
  • White Balance AWB or Cloudy most often
  • High ISO Speed Noise Reduction Low
  • ISO Speed Settings Auto with Min Shutter Speed set to Auto Fast (+1)

Obviously the best results for any given photo requires changing one or more of these values to the best choice for the conditions at a time a photo is taken, but average camera users rarely change this many settings per photo. As a result, I intentionally excluded any photos from this article where I deviated from these or the camera default settings.

All shots were hand-held for this review with no special devices to assist with stabilization.

Things I Loved about the EOS R

f/9 @ 58mm for 1/500 sec at ISO 200

The kit lens can definitely make a nice sharp image as seen above, especially in the ideal conditions I enjoyed in Phoenix, Arizona

I'm glad that Canon is investing in a new R lens system for the future that addresses the limitations of the EF system which was optimized for film based cameras. In the long run I think this will allow for improved performance for future advancements in lens and sensor technology. I was also pleased that all of my Canon L lenses performed flawlessly with the Control Ring Mount Adapter - even my super wide and razor sharp 11-24mm. This preserves my past investment in lenses while still moving forward to a better future ahead, so this was the right thing to do.

Canon Control Ring Mount Adapter EF-EOS R

I'm a bit confused as to why Canon didn't just have one adapter to rule them all that included a control ring and drop-in filter. It seems odd that you have to settle on just an adapter (the value option) or an adapter with a drop-in filter for a $100 premium (which is great for my 11-24mm), but you can't get a control ring adapter with the drop-in filter feature too.

The OLED view finder was very good and I really liked the new white on black dot-matrix LCD panel on top over what I have on my other Canon DSLR's. It was much easier to read.

While I didn't use it in the real world due to old habits being hard to break, I found the new Fv (aka Flexible-Priority) auto exposure mode to be a great idea. Personally, I find having Manual mode with exposure compensation for the Auto ISO to be enough for my needs, but I could see myself using Fv mode if I was just getting started in digital photography.

The new RAW (CR3) file format was also handy when using C-RAW (Compact Raw) Dual Pixel RAW mode to keep the RAW files down to 40MB on average and roughly 15MB - 20MB on average with Dual Pixel RAW turned off. It worked fine with Lightroom Classic and I didn't observe any measurable real world differences with it. I did notice that uncompressed RAW mode that files ballooned up to 70MB . That said, it is technically a lossy-compression so purist will likely still prefer the uncompressed RAW format - especially if you think you'll be doing +3EV or more adjustments regularly as demonstrated in Bryan Carnathan's excellent article on this new format.

The battery did a great job with an all day outing in Arizona as well as a very cold day shooting the Seahawks - both with plenty of chimping resulting in only about half of the battery life being used. This was way better than the Nikon Z7 or Sony A7R III, so I was pleased with the battery performance in real-world use case scenarios.

Lastly, I did put the weather sealing to the test with both rainy conditions in Seattle and dust conditions in Arizona and never observed any sensor dust issues or otherwise.

Areas for Improvement

My biggest complaint of this camera was that it seems to use the same technology that makes the images in the 80D look like pixels that have been smeared and lacking for crisp and sharp details even in the RAW files. This results in images that are closer small sensor cell phone quality than what I see in other mirrorless and higher end DSLR cameras. As a result, even when this camera does everything right I end up with an image that makes me just shake my head when I'm used to seeing what is possible from the best of Sony, Nikon and even Canon.

If you've been pleased with the Canon 7D series or XXD series cameras (e.g., 70D, 80D, etc...), then you'll love this camera. If you've found them to be lacking in quality, then it's pretty clear that Canon isn't out to win you over with this camera. The 30.3 MP sensor sucks in my personal opinion, so until Canon comes out with something better I see no reason to downgrade to this camera from something like a 5D Mark IV, 5Ds, 5Ds R, 6D Mark II or  1D X Mark II. However, if you've invested in Canon gear and are looking to move up from the Rebel series, XXD series or even the 7D series (if you can live with a 2 fps drop in burst mode performance) then the EOS R should be high on your list of cameras to consider.

Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens

As for the RF 24-105 f/4L IS lens, it seemed soft and didn't perform as well as my Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS II. In fact, I'd say it performed closer to my very old 24-105mm f/4L IS with terrible diffraction after f/11. As a result, I was wishing I would have reviewed the RF 28-70mm f/2L lens instead as I can't recommend this lens. I you have existing Canon lenses then I'd recommend forgoing the kit lens and using your existing lenses with the adapter.

Just like Nikon, Canon went cheap on the slots and only offered one. I really wished this camera would have had a slot for my CF cards (or even CFAST 2.0) to go along with the single SD card, but I got over it as the price point suggests that this camera is targeted as consumers who are coming from cameras with only one memory card slot.

Diffraction Compensation Needs Work

When shooting landscapes, I like a lot depth of field, so when testing cameras and lenses I always start out at f/22 and do a series of shots more opened up (smaller f-stop #'s) to see how much depth I can get before diffraction kicks in. In the field you usually only have the in-camera JPEG and the rear LCD  to make a judgement call so when I got back to my Windows system and closely analyzed it on my NEC PA271Q display I noticed that anything beyond f/11 was very soft. Here's an example that illustrates the level of diffraction when viewing the three versions at full size:

f/11 @ 50mm for 1/250 sec at ISO 200

This f/11 shot was much sharper than the f/16 and f/22 versions which lost any advantage in depth of field due to massive diffraction which soften the entire image

Canon once again is light years behind Fujifilm, Sony and Nikon in their diffraction compensation technology that is present in both the in-camera JPEG processing as well as the raw files. The Nikon Z7 did way better even in poor weather conditions, and the Sony a7R III and Fujifilm X-Pro 2 were both excellent by comparison.

Focus Performance Observations

f/2.8 @ 200mm for 1/2000 sec at ISO 3200

The lack of eye auto focus that Sony and Fujifilm mastered years ago is quite frustrating, but the Face+Tracking auto focus mode in this camera is the worst I've seen any camera on the market - in years. In fact, it was so bad that I expected to see a firmware update to be available for this camera but that never happened during the entire time I was reviewing the EOS R.

I found myself having to rely on manually setting my AF point which was cumbersome due to the lack of a dedicated joystick for this function, and frustratingly slow speed at which the focus points could be moved using the arrow keys. Like other touch screens, I found my nose accidentally changing the AF point on the touch screen, but it seemed to happen more often in this camera for reasons I can't explain. Overall the whole experience setting the focus points was worst in class of any camera I've used in the last few years.

Yes, if I did my job right with manual AF point positioning then I could get my subject in focus even in nose bleed stadium seats even while using the Canon Control Ring Mount Adapter and my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens as shown here:

Zoomed in, click for the original full-size image

It wasn't all bad though. I love the improved AF point coverage and the performance seems to be fairly fast, but its low-light performance was abysmal in my testing. Yes, it didn't focus hunt like a typical Canon DSLR, but it did quickly find a wrong subject and/or simply stop searching and take a blurry shot more often than I've seen on a camera since the Canon 1D Mark III.

While I was glad to see that this camera offered focus peaking, once again it was a worst in class implementation that didn't come close to the easy to see and use implementation I've seen with Sony, Fujifilm or and Nikon. In fact, it was so bad that I simply stopped using it after a week of poor results. Of course this partially had to do with the terrible 1.48' / 45 cm minimum focus distance of the RF 24-105mm f/4L IS.

Compared with the iPhone 8 Plus / XS

Each release of the iPhone seems to make great progress with its "in-camera" default processing of images, so I find myself taking some shots with my phone and simply calling it a day. For social media and casual printing it offers a file that is good enough that the average person won't see the need for something better.

With this in mind, I found myself very impressed with the metering and performance of my iPhone XS and my wife's 8 Plus during our trip to Arizona - so much so, I found myself taking the iPhone shot first and then trying hard to dial in settings that gave me a better result with the EOS R.

In terms of speed and overall satisfaction, the iPhone was the hands down winner. However, with pixel peeping and the advantage of the EOS R larger sensor still won in my comparisons - but I did find myself taking a lot of shots on this trip only with the iPhone and determining that they were "good enough" to not bother to shoot it again with the EOS R.

Here's some examples of shots taking with the EOS R and links to iPhone shots of the same scene. All shots are 100% unedited from both devices and are exactly as they came out. While you are viewing this article you may download and compare the images side by side, but you must delete them from your machine after you close this article.

All images are copyright Ron Martinsen with all rights reserved. You may not edit, print, post, link to, redistribute or use any of the images featured in this article without a hand signed contract on printed paper.

f/16 @ 105mm for 1/320 sec at ISO 400

A shot like this benefits from a longer focal length lens vs the wide angle of the iPhone, so I was much happier with the EOS R result
Compare with iPhone XS in-camera HDR which isn't bad but needs a serious crop

f/22 @ 24mm for 1/160 sec at ISO 400

My wife did a better job composing her iPhone shot but I included this one as it shows off the distortion you get by default with the EOS R kit lens at 24mm vs the auto perspective correction with iPhone 8 Plus in-camera HDR. This problem can be easily fixed in Lightroom.

The iPhone 8 Plus shot was the more impressive shot but the highlights were better preserved with the EOS R in Enhanced (D+2) Highlight Tone Priority mode

f/11 @ 70mm for 1/1250 sec at ISO 800

Single exposure with camera defaults and Cloudy White Balance
Lots of shadow detail is lost with the default settings so I took it again (below) using the HDR features of both the EOS R and iPhone XS

f/11 @ 70mm for 1/1250 sec at ISO 800

In-Camera HDR +/- 3EV Natural
Shadow details come back but the image overall feels washed out
Compare with iPhone XS in-camera HDR which lacks the saturation but has a more natural color and feels more upright

f/8 @ 63mm for 1/1250 sec at ISO 2500

In-Camera HDR +/- 3EV Natural
iPhone handles extreme mixed lighting scenarios like this very well.
It manages to avoid the bleached out looking sky, tree top and saguaros (in the background)

Compare with iPhone XS in-camera HDR

f/16 @ 45mm for 1/160 sec at ISO 200

The OLED viewfinder helped me eliminate the distracting yellow box at the bottom left corner of the iPhone XS version, but I did prefer the camera default processing from my phone

f/9 @ 70mm for 1/1600 sec at ISO 200

This shot made me hate the EOS R swivel out LCD (which is great for selfies) versus how Sony only tilts up and down which makes it easier to get better composed shots like I did with the iPhone XS for objects that are close to the ground

f/5.6 @ 25mm for 1/160 sec at ISO 400

Having a hood paid off for this mugshot as there was some intense sunlight that was blocked by the hood, but it wreaked havoc on the iPhone XS version

f/5.6 @ 43mm for 1/500 sec at ISO 200

This EOS R shot above turned out so bad compared to the incredible iPhone XS version that I seriously considered not using the EOS R for the rest of the day. If it wasn't for this review, I probably would have too.

Unedited JPEG's

The images you see below are just like my "real world pics" (except these aren't so real world -- it's cool places in Arizona and an NFL game) where I'm showing the 100% unedited in-camera JPEG. You can click the photo to see the full size original, but I don't provide the raw files due to storage cost and file permissions issues.

You may view the images at full-size, but you may not save, print, edit, link to  or otherwise use any of the images in this article or in the gallery. All photos are copyright Ron Martinsen - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. I do ask that you also leave the article open in your browser while you view the images.

f/5.6 @ 180mm for 1/2000 sec at ISO 10000

Even with nose bleed level seats, I was able to catch all of the action on the field with the EOS R using the Canon Control Ring Mount Adapter and my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens.
Unlike my 1D series cameras, I wasn't left with an image that I could heavily crop and use as I did
the last time I shot the Seahawks vs the 49ers from the sidelines.
The adapter performed well, but the camera sensor and in-camera JPEG processing left me wanting for for better results, but it wasn't bad for a ~$2300 camera (at the time this was written).

f/4 @ 105mm for 1/1000 sec at ISO 3200

At the end of the game I got a better seat and shot with the RF 24-105mm, but the images weren't any  sharper when zoomed to 100% when compared to my 2012 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II lens.
Click here to see one of many examples in the gallery taken at the same ISO and the same elevation

f/9 @ 24mm for 1/1000 sec at ISO 1250

This was the first time I tried the in-camera Auto HDR (Natural) processing to see if I could make this back-lit rusted piece of rusty iron look like more than just a black silhouette. It did ok, but I immediately went to my iPhone XS when I wanted perfectly exposed in-camera shots

f/7.1 @ 50mm for 1/1000 sec at ISO 250

In-camera HDR saved this from looking like a hand flipping the bird, but the results are so gross that I still wanted to toss it. With that said, this is probably the best I've seen a camera from Canon for HDR processing of the sun as typically a shot like this would have nasty banding around the sun

f/22 @ 101mm for 1/250 sec at ISO 1000

This was one of my first f/22 shots with this camera and the first impression was "not bad", so I mistakenly used it a lot more often than I should have after this. Don't be like me - stick with f/11 or smaller f-stop numbers if you care about depth of field and sharpness at the same time

f/5.6 @ 105mm for 1/250 sec at ISO 400

This shot helps illustrate what I mean by soft when you view the details in the cut area where the focus point was set. To see what I consider sharp, consider this shot taken with the Sony a7R III at only 1/60 sec and ISO 2500 albeit with a very sharp 90mm prime lens

f/5 @ 105mm for 1/500 sec at ISO 25600

I was pleased to see that color fidelity was good even at the highest ISO's, so that's a huge improvement from what we saw from Canon in its last generation of cameras a few years back

f/22 @ 53mm for 1/1250 sec at ISO 8000

This shot was ruined with the in-camera HDR version, but thankfully the "save source images" option in the HDR settings allows you to keep both the RAW and JPEG version of each of the exposures (3 here but up to 7 possible) so I went with the +0 EV version for the keeper frame shown above

f/11 @ 53mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 200

If you have mixed lighting conditions in a frame, Evaluate Metering isn't going to save you so you better pray - or just use your phone instead as my wife did with her iPhone 8 Plus shot here

f/9 @ 61mm for 1/400 sec at ISO 200

The old saying that f/8 is great rings true, but I'd add stick with f/9 and you'll be fine for landscapes as seen here in this incredibly sharp and detailed shot

f/14 @ 70mm for 1/200 sec at ISO 320

I did +2/3 EV to brighten up the dark shadows here, but I was surprised to discover that I didn't need it when I got back to the computer. I think this was user error due to the sun playing games with my eyes, but luckily it was easy to bring this one back with a quick adjustment in Lightroom using the CR3 C-RAW file (see here for the full-size RAW processed version)

f/5.6 @ 105mm for 1/1600 sec at ISO 8000

While traveling home at desert freeway speeds, I couldn't help but open the car window and try to get a snapshot of the sunset.  I was pleased to see that even at a high ISO and shutter speed that the gradients turned out ok and there weren't any huge color splotches in the noise as I would have seen with previous generation Canon cameras. I wouldn't say this is a great high ISO camera, but I've definitely seen worse - and this is an easy one to clean with Noiseware

f/5 @ 67mm for 1/500 sec at ISO 25600

4 out of 8 frames taken in these conditions resulted in a completely out of focus image. It didn't focus hunt like a Canon normally would, it simply took a blurry shot
NOTE: Continue Focus Search was set to ON for all frames and burst mode was not used - I took each shot separately

Click here to see a gallery of 145 images taken with the EOS R and click here for a few redundant shots taken with the iPhone 8 Plus or XS while I was in Arizona. All images are copyright Ron Martinsen with all rights reserved. You may not edit, print, post, link to, redistribute or use any of the images featured in this article without a hand signed contract on printed paper.


If you are a loyal entry level (Rebel) to mid-level (XXD series / 7D series) Canon shooter with an investment in Canon lenses and/or flashes, then the EOS R is a camera worth considering. For everyone else, I still go back to saying that my 2017 Camera of the Year winner the Sony Alpha a7R III or even the cheaper a7 II is the better choice. The Nikon faithful have a much better alternative with the Z7 as it impressed me a lot more than the EOS R did.

Simply put, the EOS R isn't a bad camera - it's just hard to recommend in this era where there are so many better offerings from Sony, Fujifilm, Nikon, Olympus and Panasonic. I'd also strongly advise against the RF 24-105 kit as that lens simply isn't sharp enough in 2019 to justify its $1100 price tag.

Where to Buy?

CLICK HERE to learn more or buy today.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these reviews:

Enjoy these and more on the Reviews tab as well as Ron's Recommendations.


If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this..

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity

Saturday, September 7, 2019

REVIEW: Fujifilm GFX 50S with 32-64mm–Finally A User-Friendly Medium Format Camera, But Is It Worth It

Click to learn more on B&H
FUJIFILM GFX 50S Medium Format Mirrorless Camera with 32-64mm Lens Kit

Most people have no experience with a medium format camera from one of the big names in the business, but they are as expensive as a luxury car (not including the expensive lenses) and frequently lack all of the creature comforts we take for granted with modern DSLR and mirrorless cameras.  High ISO? – Forget about it. Format your card in your camera? – Nope, you’ve got to do that on your computer. Handhold and shoot? – Only if you are using studio lights. And the list goes on and on and on.

Now, medium format shooters who spend the money have to defend their decision to spend so much for a camera that offers so little, so they will argue til the death about why their cameras are so much better than yours. However, unless your shooting billboards or other commercial work where every pixel counts, the reality is that most prosumers these days end up discarding most of their megapixels when they post their photos online or display their images on their TV’s / digital frames.

As a result, this always begged the question – why can’t we have a camera with all of the creature comforts that high end cameras offer that simply adds a larger size sensor? Seems simple, but it sure took a long time to see that become a reality.

At just under $7800 USD (2019-03-02) the GFX 50s and its 32-64mm lens aren’t cheap, but it’s still less than some Hasselblad zoom lenses! At 51.4MP it’s also about half the megapixels which actually looks closer in specification to the Canon 5Ds/5DsR, Nikon D850 and the phenomenal Sony a7R III – all of which are much cheaper. This begs the question, is the bigger sensor worth the bigger price?

Ron’s Take on 50s Body Usability

When you analyze specs and high ISO performance, it’s easy to have a negative perception of Fujifilm cameras. However, every Fujifilm camera I’ve ever reviewed has had some magic that makes me fall in love with photography all over again. Perhaps its their more retro and classic designs, but I think it really boils down to the amazing film simulation modes (e.g., Provia, Velvia, etc…) that give you an image that straight out of the camera that is just wow – no additional work is required. To me, this makes them much like an iPhone XS in the sense that you stop thinking about what you need to do with the images after you shoot and just focus on composition which is so refreshing.

While some features will require you to peek at the manual to figure them out, once you learn you come to love this camera body real quick. Features like:

  • push button locks on the dials that make them easy to turn, but also easy to lock in place (brilliant!!!);
  • excellent touch enabled 2.36M-dot LCD
  • removable tilting (!!!) electronic viewfinder that is fantastic quality, but something you can leave off to save battery if you want;
  • built-in focus stacking that performed the best of any that I’ve ever tested;
  • excellent built-in eye tracking auto focus with auto, left, and right eye priority options;
  • and an industry leading number of drive modes that include exposure bracketing, film simulation bracketing, time lapse , and so much more. 

Check out B&H’s awesome interactive 360 view of this camera to really see what it is like in your hands and get your geek on at all of the glorious technical details about this camera on Fujifilm’s website.

Yeah, I loved this camera body and it was durable too. I shot in the rain, snow, and even took a hard fall on the ice and there was not a single scratch on this camera by the end of my review – that’s rare these days.

This love spilled over to the awesome GF32-64mmF4 R LM WR lens which features my much loved aperture dial so that with this feature and the 1.28-inch monochrome LCD monitor can be viewed in all conditions (including bright sunlight), you can easily set all of your settings without needing to get bogged down in menus that slow you down.

Simply put, this is a well engineered tool for photographers who hate menus and who know how to shoot manual. With that said, every dial and option has an auto setting so if you want to let the camera do all of the work then it will – and quite well from my experience.

Lastly, if you haven’t shot a Fujifilm camera with its outstanding film simulation modes, you are really missing out. What’s more, if you don’t like something (say Velvia is too dark in the shadows and perhaps a touch to vibrant for your taste), you can easily adjust the default settings. The customization in this camera is excellent, so you can genuinely have a series of presets and programmable buttons to match your style with final images that will cause you to just use the raw as insurance because the in-camera JPEG’s are spot on most of the time.

So yes, in case you haven’t figured it out yet – I love this camera body & lens. It was a delight to use and extremely difficult to return back to B&H when I was done shooting. In fact, I ended up keeping it much longer than the typical allotted time I devote to my review camera check-out window.

Fun with Focus Stacking

Focus stacking has been around for quite some time, but I never got into it because it was too cumbersome for my busy (and impatient) lifestyle. With that said, this camera makes focus stacking incredibly easy to use and improvements in Lightroom and Photoshop have made the process about as easy as processing a raw file. Yes, it does take some time, but the result is worth the reward.

Here’s an example of the kind of detail I got of a 58 images (2 flash misfires missing) shot of a lily with a very long stem – a shot that is totally impossible without focus stacking. This image is 100% unedited from RAW except for it being cropped and focused stacked & RAW processed in Lightroom:

Here’s a 100% crop with no post-processing of any type (including NO sharpening):
Click to see the full Photoshop stacked 8280 x 6208 original image
f/11 @ 64mm for 1/100 sec at ISO 100 (x 58 1 step frames)
No editing adjustments – only stacked from RAW via Lightroom

The 50s has a deep body so that during focus stacking the sensor can move 1 to 10 steps between each frame and you can set the interval for how long to pause between each frame (great when using a flash). This flexibility was excellent, but even more impressive is that this feature came out as a newly added feature with the 3.30 firmware update! Who doesn’t like new features after you’ve bought the camera?!!

For those new to focus stacking, here’s a great example of why you need to stack to get more depth of field:

Lightroom has FINALLY got the raw processing of Fujifilm film simulation down to where it can match in-camera results, so I found no difference between the focus stacked in-camera JPEG vs the Lightroom processed RAW. Both also resulted in a ~19.5GB file in Photoshop if you keep all 58 layers, so I always flattened to have a more manageable ~296 MB file. Oh and yes, this is one case where the more RAM you have in your computer (and you better have a fast SSD & processor) will save a lot of time.

I also should note that if you get things right in camera, then focus stacking with the in-camera JPEG results in nearly identical results to focus stacking with the RAW as you can see here:

Other than white balance, can you tell the difference? The raw is on the right, but was the time required to process it took twice as long.

However, if you get things wrong in camera, then obviously having the RAW images can save the shot as shown here:

Click here to see the amazing detail of the flowers in the yellow roses RAW processed shot. It’s another textbook case of focus stacking really saving the day!

Black & White Lovers Delight

Fujifilm is so well loved for its great in-camera black and white conversion that they even made monochrome only versions of a couple of their cameras a few years back. Here’s three shots taken in my studio where the first two are straight out of the camera using the ACROS+R film simulation and the last is obviously edited but you can click it to see the in-camera original.

f/11 @ 58mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 100

Can you believe this is straight out of the camera with zero edits? This is literally the in-camera JPEG that I loved so much that I printed it and put it on my Meural frame. Impressive!

f/10 @ 64mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 100

Even at 1/125 sec there’s still a little vignette on the left edge caused by this camera having a very slow flash sync speed. However, the JPEG image that comes straight out of the camera is pretty amazing!

f/5.6 @ 64mm for 1/60 sec at ISO 100

Kai and I even had a little fun with it (and yes he wanted to be 7’ tall)
Edited shown, click to see full original unedited file

Some say that if you really want to see the face, shoot monochrome, otherwise it gets lost in the color. I think that rings true, so if you love making black and white images you are going to love this camera.

Bracketed Exposures

I found myself using the exposure bracketing drive mode quite a bit with the 7 exposures setting with 1 stop between each exposure (i.e., -3 to + 3). I really liked the menu design for how bracketing works on this camera.

Just for fun, here’s the RAW files merged with Aurora HDR for Windows with highest ghosting, chromatic aberrations correction and the Balanced Interior preset:

I wasn’t impressed with how it handled the sky and tree line and there were some artifacts in the stream, but it did a good job in the shadow details.

Here’s a Lightroom Classic 8.2 Photo Merge HDR with Auto Align, Auto Settings and High deghost amount:

This was a much better merge but a lot of detail is lost on the rocks and in the trees.

Here’s my final edit using a high-end photo retoucher manual HDR technique from RAW then edited with Luminar 3:

GFX50S Hike-271_273_275_277_279_281_283_IY [3.1 sec at f - 22 32 mm Fujifilm GFX 50S GF32-64mmF4 R LM WR]

I think too much was lost in the sky, so I tried to distract from it via the sunrays filter in my final edit via Luminar 3.

As someone who enjoys shooting landscapes, I really loved this camera.

In the Studio

Medium formats pretty much own ultra high end studio photography, so I was looking forward to taking this camera into the studio to see how it compared to the 5Ds I used for my personal portrait. Read on to see how it did.

I was pretty shocked when I discovered that the flash sync speed was below 1/160 as shown by the black bar at the left of the frame here (f/7.1 @ 64mm for 1/160 sec at ISO 100), so I had to shoot at 1/125 sec in the studio:

This shot was also pretty heavily overexposed, but there’s tons of details in these raw files so this was a trivial recovery for a gorgeous final edit:

As someone who does a lot of studio portrait work, I was extremely happy with the GFX 50s!

Again, because this is a large sensor the depth of field is much more shallow so when the eye auto focus on my left (camera right) eye did its job, my deep eye wells and big nose resulted in unexpected softness. As a result, a face like mine required f/11 or better (photo taken by my wife):

f/8 @ 62mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 100

As you can see going to f/10 solved the problem, but that’s something I wouldn’t have needed to do on the full frame sensors I’m using to shooting with.

When you compare the image below with a similar shot my daughter took of me with the 5Ds, you’ll notice that the hot spots on the face aren’t as harsh. This is the recurring theme I’m seeing for indoor and outdoor shooting with Canon vs Fujifilm & Sony – they do sooo much better and preserving details in the highlights which saves a lot of time in post-process editing.

f/10 @ 64mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 100

The Provia film simulation is pretty impressive straight out the camera with default RAW processing from Lightroom Classic 8.2

f/10 @ 64mm for 1/125 sec at ISO 100

The same RAW file switched to Velvia processing really makes the eyes and tie pop and the blacks deeper on the suit, but it makes the background too yellow.

When I did a background replacement to white on the next frame after the shot above and asked Facebook friends to compare Velvia to the Provia, most came back saying they preferred the Velvia. I felt the skin tone was too red, so I merged the skin of the Provia to the rest with Velvia, replaced the background and did typical processing for this final result:

Yeah, I love this camera as a studio portrait camera too – the details are outstanding! This would definitely be my studio camera of choice if I had one, but I’d definitely use a longer focal length lens (I generally prefer 200mm). The 64mm focal length is the full frame sensor equivalent to a 51mm which I consider a horrible lens for portrait photography (makes subjects look fatter than they are), so keep that in mind when making your lens choice if you photograph people.

More Unedited Images

The following images in this section are all 100% unedited and exactly as they came out of the camera via in-camera JPEG originals. While I did use my mini-tripod setup, I did not use any lens filters or  in-camera photo adjustments. Most shots are Velvia or Provia film simulations with no other camera adjustments beyond setting white balance to taste.

ALL images in this article are copyright Ron Martinsen © All Rights Reserved. You may not save, copy, edit, print, link to or otherwise use any of these photos without ink on paper signature and a consent agreement with Ron Martinsen.Contact me if you are interested in prints or licensing.

If the photos in this article aren’t enough for you, click here to visit the full gallery more images with duplicates taken at various apertures or settings for comparisons.

f/32 @ 32mm for 3 sec at ISO 100

f/32 means you can pretty easily get a long exposure without needing to carry a ND filter

f/5.6 @ 64mm for 1/10 sec at ISO 100

Because this is medium format, you get roughly half the depth of field you’d get with your full frame sensors. As such, f/5.6 is pretty shallow and f/4 feels like f/2.8.

f/32 @ 32mm for 4 sec at ISO 100

You have to view with no ambient light, but even in Provia mode the shadow areas are pretty blocked up. As such, if you need shadow detail you’ll either need to adjust the shadows default behavior or handle via raw for post-processing.

f/32 @ 48mm for 4 sec at ISO 100

If you compare this shot at f/32 and the one below at f/22 & f/16, you’ll see that unlike many full frame cameras there is a visible depth of field differences. What’s more, f/32 suffers from very little diffraction compared to other brands, so I didn’t avoid f/32 with this camera.
Notice how crisp the details are in the background rock on the right in the river.

f/22 @ 48mm for 2 sec at ISO 100

Details in the background definitely drop off at f/22 so that rock isn’t as crisp, but the foreground does get slightly sharper.

f/16 @ 48mm for 1 sec at ISO 100

f/16 is plenty sharp but at the expense of a smooth river, so I found myself comfortable with longer exposures at f/32 with this camera.

f/11 @ 44mm for 1/5 sec at ISO 100

While I was pleased that flare wasn’t a huge issue, the backlit foreground details weren’t totally lost despite shooting into the sun. While dynamic range isn’t close to the Sony a7R III, it’s not terrible.

f/11 @ 32mm for 1 sec at ISO 100
(-1 EV)
This was the –1 EV exposure of a bracketed series, but a great starting point for a fun edit. However, when I got home I regretted shooting it at f/11.

f/32 @ 32mm for 20 sec at ISO 100

This is one of those fairytale scenes in nature that only Fujifilm Velvia film simulation can properly capture. I also felt f/32 was a must for the details on the tree laying down in the woods at the top 1/3rd of the frame.

f/16 @ 32mm for 6 sec at ISO 100

Yes, f/16 was sharp but the depth of field loss wasn’t worth it.

f/6.4 @ 64mm for 1 sec at ISO 100

High megapixel images give you lots of details so that when you downsize your images for the web, more details are preserved. The detail in the tree stump here is a great example – it’s way more crisp

f/32 @ 32mm for 1 sec at ISO 100

This is an in-camera natural starburst from shooting into the sun, but I did get some nasty rainbows on the rock and in the trees so the anti-flare coating isn’t close to what Canon offers in some of its amazing lenses like the 11-24mm

f/8 @ 32mm for 1/2 sec at ISO 100

Even if your composition sucks, this camera makes every scene just look gorgeous!

f/32 @ 38mm for 3 sec at ISO 100

I had a love affair with f/32 since I didn’t have a ND filter for my review, but this sensor does so well at f/32 it felt like I was shooting film. I really didn’t have the fear of diffraction like I do when shooting with Canon and Nikon (both of which are useless after f/11)

f/32 @ 32mm for 4 sec at ISO 100

The DR-AUTO feature which is supposed to help increase the dynamic range didn’t impress me. The Sony a7R III would not have blown out this long exposure as bad as this camera does.

f/16 @ 32mm for 17 sec at ISO 100

You become obsessed with scenes with tons of detail when shooting with this camera because you look on the rear screen LCD and just say “oh my god” every time you do. If you love super detailed images, this camera will delight you to no end!

f/16 @ 40mm for 10 sec at ISO 100

Personally, I love shooting in the Velvia film simulation when doing landscapes, but others mock it and call it Velveeta because it is too saturated. Compare this image to the one below which is using Provia to decide which you prefer 

f/16 @ 40mm for 10 sec at ISO 100

Provia film simulation is still excellent in my opinion, but if you hate it too there’s tons of flexibility in this camera to adjust the saturation, contrast, highlights, shadows, sharpness and more to create your own film simulation. In fact, you can even bracket shoot with multiple film simulations to give yourself options later (assuming you only shoot JPEG)

f/8 @ 57mm for 19 sec at ISO 100

This is a shot where I got burned by this being a larger sensor camera. f/8 was waaaaay too shallow depth of field for this scene, so I learned that lesson really quick

f/22 @ 32mm for 14 sec at ISO 100

Even at f/22 if you focus on nearby subjects you are going to get much less depth of field than you are used to with full frame cameras, but this thing can focus stack like nobody’s business so the choice is yours as to whether or not you embrace it (as I did in this shot) or work around it.

f/5.6 @ 32mm for 1/27 sec at ISO 800

Sadly you lose a lot at higher ISO, so 800 is the max I’d use for this camera. That’s a tremendous difference from mainstream DSLR’s where I have no reservations at shooting at ISO 25,600 (or higher on some models)

f/5.6 @ 40mm for 1/17 sec at ISO 800

Using my assisted handheld technique I managed to get a MUCH sharper shot with the GFX than I did with my iPhone XS (which is VERY RARE) due to the low light conditions. However, my pure handheld shot was completely unusable so I had to delete it in the field

f/22 @ 32mm for 4 sec at ISO 100

I started to risk life and limb to get shots with this camera – that’s a good sign of a fun camera that rewards the effort

f/11 @ 32mm for 1/26 sec at ISO 100

Some AF systems I’ve tested struggle in snow, but the Fujifilm didn’t focus hunt during my entire snow shoot

f/4 @ 42mm for 1/140 sec at ISO 200
Obviously if you’ve got good light then you can do hand held shots so I was pretty pleased with the in-camera results on this shot

f/32 @ 64mm for 1/2 sec at ISO 100

The 50s ability to capture lots of detail made this the perfect camera for a snowy day at the falls

f/4 @ 53mm for 1/100 sec at ISO 100

Edited version on Instagram
Default metering struggled with this scene, so I had to resort to some exposure compensation in the subsequent shots as shown below

f/5.6 @ 64mm for 1/40 sec at ISO 200

My 9 year old son had a shaky hand when taking this photo and the pixels literally shifted!
This is NOT a handheld friendly camera

f/5.6 @ 64mm for 1/40 sec at ISO 200

Edited version on Instagram
But with the same settings and not moving, he got a crisp shot.
My wife despised the focal length as it made her face super wide compared to what it is in real life and with longer focal length cameras. Guys, do NOT photograph your wife with this lens!

Full Gallery for more images at


The Occasional “Off” Shot

On a few occasions I got a shots where things just felt way off compared to the adjacent shots. In some cases the shots were super blue so it was obvious that the white balance was off, but the white balance was set to shade so how could that be? In the shot above things weren’t the extreme blue, but it felt darker and more blocked up in the shadows than I typically saw during my review with other shots.

Of course these are all easy to fix if you have the raw file as you can see below:

In some cases some might even prefer the result of this anomaly even more than the accurate shot!

If you’ve seen this, please feel free to comment. Due to massive spamming, I am slow to manually approve comments and I generally don’t approve comments with links in them.


In case you haven’t figured it out yet, YES I love this camera and highly recommend it. The camera body performance and features were excellent and this lens was plenty sharp. While the price is too steep for me to afford it, it’s a bargain compared to the medium format cameras I’ve used over the years with clients. I also think the odds of getting BETTER results because of all of the features (like eye AF, auto ISO, etc…) mean that this is the medium format camera of the future.

Fujifilm cameras have some special magic that always makes me love them, and this one was no different. If you find yourself in a rut and looking for inspiration, then definitely buy or rent one from my friends at

Where to Buy?

CLICK HERE to learn more or buy today.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these:

Enjoy these and more on the Reviews tab as well as Ron's Recommendations.


If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity