Review and Recommendation: Fujifilm GFX100RF (Part 2)

Text and illustrations by Ken Tanaka

(Continued from Part I)

Notes and impressions

• The GFX100RF uses same NP-W235 battery as other current GFX cameras, as well as the X-T5. Note, however, that it does not come with a battery charger. (What'd you expect for $5,000?)
• File sizes and formats are the same as found on Fuji's GFX100s II. That is, they're quite large but normal for today's 100-MP medium-format-sensor cameras. For example, here are files recorded from the same scene in various in-camera formats:

Uncompressed raw: 200 MB
Compressed raw: 68 MB
Lossless raw: 112 MB
Super-Fine JPEG: 40 MB
Fine JPEG: 20 MB

• Autofocus on any medium-format digital camera today lags far behind the state-of-the-art "which eyelash do you want to follow on that gnat" tech that full-frame system users enjoy. That is, the GFX100RF's autofocus is basically the same as that of the GFX100s II; so-so. Definitely not best-suited for action. The old single-point technique will be your friend.
• Speaking of autofocus, the GFX100RF finally puts the focus mode selection switch in a saner place; on the back! (Unfortunately, this does not seem to be a prospectively permanent design choice. The newly-announced X-E5 features this switch in the usual obscure left-edge location.)

New sensibly-located focus mode switch!

• The Fujinon 35mm Aspherical ƒ/4 lens (28mm field of view in 35mm terms) is quite good, as you'd expect. It's sharp but can sometimes seem softish in the corners. I have not noticed significant falloff in the corners at ƒ/4. It has good contrast, good definition, and good flare resistance. I don’t think you’ll find much to complain about here.
• As a personal nitpick, the controls feel somewhat stiff to my hands. The dials feel just a bit hard to turn with my thumb and the joystick feels stiff and sharp to the touch. My thumb actually felt raw after a day of shooting. Your impression might be different.
• The GFX100RF, like Fuji’s other cameras, is designed to make the JPEG shooter feel right at home. A dedicated aspect ratio dial on the body's top-center edge, functionless when shooting raw, stands as a prime testament to that. As does the easily-accessed digital teleconverter lever that enables switching between various focal length frame crops. Fuji imagines that you're going to use a $5,000 medium-format camera to capture pre-cropped and pre-seasoned JPEG images. That's just fine of course. There's a great deal to recommend this shortened workflow for most avocational and personal work. But I wonder how many buyers plan to do that. It also seems somewhat at odds with the Capture One trial coupon included in the box.

Aspect ratio dial—only active during JPEG shooting

GFX100RF digital telephoto lever

So does the GFX100RF make sense?

Short answer: Not nearly as much as it could.

Fuji’s GFX100RF is a lovely camera that really wants to be your buddy in the same style as the X100 cameras. The in-hand feeling and control layouts of the cameras are largely the same. It’s thoughtfully designed, well-built and very consistent with Fuji’s other well-established, very successful camera models. There’s absolutely no question that a great many GFX100RF owners will be thrilled and use the camera productively for years. I heartily salute Fujifilms’s continuing design initiatives. They are true practical innovators who have persistently expanded and redefined photography for decades.

Unfortunately, to be honest—and I own all these cameras—the GFX100RF falls a bit short in value when measured against the small but established field of fixed-prime lens digital cameras. Yes, its 100-MP sensor gathers a great deal of data from that wide lens that can be severely cropped while retaining sufficient resolution for social media. (I call it "gillnet photography.") Maybe that represents value to you? But when the light gets low you're going to find it harder to capture sharp images with no IBIS and an ƒ/4 lens. A 100-MP medium-format sensor can be brutally honest and unforgiving of shake. Judged against alternatives, these shortcomings seem like miscalculations for a new camera aimed at the advanced amateur semi-pro market.

Frankly, for $5,000, and much less, there are better alternatives that can provide much stronger fixed-prime lens companion camera values. The first and best alternative that comes to my mind (from within Fujifilm's own stable) is the almighty X100 series of cameras. An X100 V or VI will give you the same retro gestalt, albeit at 40 MP, with a brighter (ƒ/2) lens, IBIS, tilting screen, same Fuji-style controls, etc. for a much lower price, even if inflated due to scarcity.

But if you’re already willing to spend $5,000 and really want the best image quality from a fixed-prime lens camera, why not spend just a bit more for a Leica Q3? It’s about the same size and weight as the GFX100RF and features a 60-MP full-frame sensor. With its excellent simple control system, IBIS, and a perhaps the best 28mm lens ever made (the 28mm ƒ/1.7 Summilux lens with a physical optical macro shift ring), the Q3 simply blows past the GFX100RF. Yes, a new Q3 will set you back over $6,700. But used, like-new Q3s are available at MPB and KEH for $5–6,000. It’s also worth noting that Leica cameras, in general, retain substantially higher resale values than more popular consumer brands. I believe I paid $5,900 for my Q3 when it was first introduced by Leica. Today I know I could sell it for nearly that same price on eBay. So, after all factors are considered, a Leica Q3 may very well be the stronger long-term value proposition for such a camera today.

Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF

So should you consider buying the GFX100RF? It’s a seductive gadget with undeniable charms found only in the kinds of "classic" camera designs that Fujifilm has become well known for. It’s not really an exciting camera, but it can grow on you…like a companion. But it's also expensive. If you're in the market for a fixed-prime lens camera I highly suggest renting one for a week or two, if possible, before placing an order.

Ken Tanaka

Cameras mentioned in this post:

Fujifilm GFX100RF (currently out of stock)
Fujifilm X100 VI (currently out of stock) (Amazon)
Fujifilm X-T5 (back-ordered) (Amazon)
Fujifilm GFX100s II (back-ordered)
Fujifilm X-E5 (available for pre-order)
Leica Q3 (or Leica Q3 43)

Original contents copyright 2025 by Kenneth Tanaka. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Henry White: "Amused. The 'Veblen' Leica Q3 smoothly passes the non-Veblen medium-format Fuji GFX100RF for overall usability, quality, etc. And VALUE over time. With possibly the best 28mm lens in the world...

"From Ken: '... and a perhaps the best 28mm lens ever made (the 28mm ƒ/1.7 Summilux lens with a physical optical macro shift ring), the Q3 simply blows past the GFX100RF.' I think Ken got this all just right. I'm still on the Q2 and find it to be nearly perfect for wide angle (and 35mm) users. Value indeed."

Oharritz: "My impressions after two months' use:

"I got the GFX100RF one week after it was available. Before I bought it, I researched all available info on the net, watched all the (hyped) launch reviews, and checked all discussion forums I could find. For me, there were three things shaping my decision:

1. Size and weight: I usually bring two cameras on a trip. One ILC (GFX50sII or Nikon Z7II) in a backpack with several lenses. And one smaller camera in a small shoulder bag. The size and weight of the GFX100RF fits this purpose perfectly, and so far I have been very happy with this setup.
2. 28mm equivalent lens: I bought the GFX100RF mainly for landscapes. In the past five years, I have found that 28mm is my sweet spot for general landscape photography. And so far it has been perfect for this purpose. I found the lens on my copy is tack sharp, also in the corners, and even at ƒ/4. Could it be sharper? I don't know. But it's definitively sharp enough for me. Second use was for street photography. I also tend to like 28mm more and more for street. Additionally, the GFX100RF allows (extensive) cropping when shooting from the hip, in the cases where you're not getting the framing perfect.
3. 100-MP GFX quality ‘medium’ format sensor: With my GFX50sII as a reference, I knew that it would have impressive image quality.  So far, it has lived up to my expectations. And again, now in a small compact body with a great lens attached.

"My main complaint when using the GFX100RF for street is the false-positive Face/Eye detection. It will find the face/eye in the scene very quickly, but the recorded image is often sharp elsewhere (i.e., behind the person). I will say I have 30–40% false positives. This is in AFS mode. I have not yet tried to see if the success rate increases by using other modes.

"I also have a Nikon Z7II. In several cases, when I compared pictures, I preferred the image from GFX50sII, and now the GFX100RF. At times and in certain light conditions (i.e., sunsets) the GFX takes an image which is rendered with a remarkable tonality, something I do not see as impressively with the Nikon."

Comments

[William Lewis]

Thank you Ken. Your hands on experience is really appreciated in this case. I always get excited by new Fuji models but something always seems to be not quite there for me. Your description seems to show that this is holding true again.

For me, I think a used Q2 or Q3 is probably a much better fixed lens choice, especially after the time I've spent behind other Leica cameras over the years. Your review helps me understand that better.

I'm not especially likely to even get one of them, given how happy I am with my Leica M 240, Pentax K3 and Nikon S4 Rangefinder at present but who knows, I might win the lotto tomorrow. Of course, I'd have to actually buy a ticket first ... 😉

[G Dan Mitchell]

In all honesty, photographers using these cameras in the most likely manner (handheld shooting for things like street photography) can get beautiful and high quality images from the X100vi in a smaller and less expensive and well-designed package.

The miniMF format has some real value for certain kinds of work — especially tripod-based photography with ILC cameras that can be printed at very large sizes. Yes, this is a lovely (though flawed) piece of photographic technology that isn’t like any other current camera. But for handheld photography with a fixed lens, the added value just isn’t there.

[Carlos Quijano A.]

Thank you for calming down my GAS on the 100RF...

[Ian McKenzie]

A month or so ago, I participated in a Fujifilm-sponsored street photography workshop. We all had use of a GFX100RF for the two days. I enjoyed the experience of using it, and the quality of the files was top-notch. However, as you say, very expensive. I'm a hobbyist, and really can't justify the price. One nitpick for me was the location of the digital telephoto lever. I had the camera on a strap and frequently, as I grabbed the grip to bring the camera up, I tapped the lever and changed the digital zoom. It took a while to figure out what was going on and pay more attention to my hand position. It's not a problem with RAW files, but I had some unintended compositions as we were using JPEGS for the workshop.

[Trevor Johnson]

I would have preferred that Fuji had developed a successor to the GFX 50R, which I had on free loan for a few days, with the 32-64mm lens. A very nice package. A resolution bump up to 100Mb and IBIS and it would have been be my everyday 'on the move' camera, covering environmental, landscape and reportage.

[Robert]

A good review, and though I do not have your hands-on experience, from what I can gather from other peoples’ reports, I fully agree with both your praise and qualifications.

For whatever reasons - much larger investment in the format, or something just inherently optimal - FF cameras really do seem to offer more. I agree, given the choice between this and the Q3, I wouldn’t hesitate to pay the extra and go for the Q3. As it is, I’ll stick to my Leica M246 and a choice of great lenses, or my Sony A7rIV, or when ultimate quality is not essential and I’m willing to settle for ‘only’ excellent IQ, the Fuji X100 VI.

[Hans Muus]

As to the battery charger not being included with this $5000 camera, couldn’t it just be that Fuji is thinking along the same lines as the Council of the European Union in its regulations, and striving explicitly towards unflooding & unpolluting the world with often unnecessary chargers by using identical batteries, ports etc. for different devices wherever possible ?

[Christer Almqvist]

What is an "advanced amateur"? Seems it means (here) somebody who can cough up $ 5,000 for a camera. And a camera that is heavy, clumsy and with no eye focus, continuous focus and IS, just to mention a few essentials.

[Earl Dunbar]

I’ve been eyeing the Q2 M for a few weeks now, but along came the 100RF and I started thinking about the larger sensor and the capability to shoot the occasional colour photo.

The lack of IBIS and the maximum aperture of f4 are a deal killer, however, even if the 100RF was really only just a passing thought.

[Eric]

I hope I don’t sound pedantic and I suspect you already know this but momentarily misspoke, the Leica Q3 doesn’t have IBIS, it has OIS.

[Chris Kern]

This review helped conform my impression, which I formed without yet having had the opportunity to get my hands on a GFX100RF (although I still may rent one when Lensrentals has them available), that my Leica Q3 was still probably a better fit for me. It would be difficult for me to part with the Q3 in any event—it’s just so pleasant to shoot with—and even more difficult to justify owning two fixed-lens cameras in that price range. If I’m going to invest in another Fuji body, it will probably be an X-E5, since I already have a good set of lenses for the X-Trans cameras.

[Robert]

“ In all honesty, photographers using these cameras in the most likely manner (handheld shooting for things like street photography) can get beautiful and high quality images from the X100vi in a smaller and less expensive and well-designed package.‘

That would be my expectation too.

[Tex Andrews]

So, several thoughts. The f4 lens is I think equivalent to around f3.2 in FF terms, so 1.5 stops slower than the Leica. Yes, slower, but not hugely so.

The Leica with its lens is deeper than the 100RF; not much wider, but shorter.

Against the Hassy, sure, the Hassy is not much bigger....but I kind of see it like an extended bed quad cab pickup is not that much bigger than a standard extended bed pickup---but it's bigger enough that parking starts to become a pain, as it's bigger than a single parking space by a good deal. As a former owner and city dweller of a quad cab pickup with a standard bed, which is about the same length as a standard cab extended bed, I have a good sense of this. I know that my 100RF will fit in a blazer pocket (w/o the adapter and hood, which don't need to be used, fyi), but anything larger would not---and that probably includes the Leica because of its depth. It takes up very little space in my day-bag for work, or carry-on.

Some may say "that's silly", but I don't think so: the whole point of this camera from Fuji was smallest possible size for an MF camera. And that was the biggest thing for me as well---I've already got a great MF camera, the 645Z. It's not small! Yeah, I want that "companion" camera, but I want it in medium format, not FF. I've waited a decade for a camera like this, this size.

For me, the negatives are all about the menus---as always!

[Tom Burke]

Not at all relevant to me, Mike: I could not even persuade myself that it would be worth spending £5000 or more on a camera; and I shudder to think of my wife's reaction. We could re-do the bathroom for that amount, pretty much.