I know. I don’t need it but I want one every time I see the files. And I can only open jpg right now. Once software updates to open raw files it’s so wild to see what you can do with the dynamic range
Looking at upgrading my GFX-100S and your video helped me make the decision. Definitely liking the skin tones you're getting out of the II. Looks like an improvement. Thanks for sharing. 👊🏼
Thanks bro. Yeah the price is coming down and getting close to full frame cameras. I never thought I would see the day that a new medium format camera would be this price. And they will still probably release a 50mp version of this and it will be even cheaper!
@@LeeZavitz I'd be curious to see how the files and look can match that of a Phase One IQ3 100MP Trichromatic or an IQ4 100MP and if the trouble of using the heavy, bulky and pricey Phase One XF system is still worth it or not for anyone else but still life and car photographers.
You made me pull the trigger in buying this camera. You are very inspirational and your presentation is great. My camera is arriving today. I cant wait to try it.
Great shots and great review! Great to see a medium format camera being that fast! Who would have thought that you could do medium format for action and sports one day....great time to live in :)
I’ll give it a try (rental of course) along with the 500mm and see if it can keep up with fast-paced events like Airshows and Motor Racing, but with an 7 fps burst, I am not that optimistic.
Yeah I don’t know if it’s the camera for that. But I really do think it comes down to the lens and what motors are driving all that glass. I found the 80mm to be a lot slower than the 32-64mm. I never tried the new 500mm but it does have Linear motors which is usually much faster
Nice work, I've been curious about the performance of the upgraded auto-focus with the slower stepping motor based lenses from Fuji, and you kind of indirectly pointed out the 80mm 1.7 might be slower as opposed to the Linear based 32-64mm. Would have been great to se you work with the 110mm, as that's my go to portrait lens, when I have the room.
I’m using an old Accsoon cineeye. It’s nice and compact with built in battery. It sends to my phone and I just screen record it. Much nicer than having an atomos ninja on the camera
One of these medium-format Fuji GFX cameras would be my dream camera, albeit with some caveats. I'm still only a beginner photographer on a limited budget, at least for the time being. I did manage to go full-frame from the start, with a Canon R8 and a couple of RF-mount lenses. I'm hoping to add some (used) EF-mount lenses to my collection soon, by using an EF-EOS R Mount Adapter. Although medium-format is tempting, even if I started making a profit off of photography, it might be hard to justify getting a GFX camera (and any lenses I would need) over a more-professional RF-mount body, such as an R6II, R5, R3, or (soon) R1. Honestly, I'm _extremely_ impressed with the low-light performance and dynamic range of my R8. Although the megapixel count is lower compared to something like an R5, a 24MP full-frame sensor is ideal for lower-light situations, and it's no slouch at high-ISO shooting, either. I can get perfectly usable shots at an ISO as high as 25,600. I'm pretty sure the R8 and R6II (as they share the same sensor) have some of the better high-ISO performance on the market for a FF body. The R6II and R3 also have the same MP count as my R8, and have similar low-light performance on a more professional body; unlike the R8, these bodies have dual card slots and IBIS, and much-better battery life. The main upside to a higher-megapixel camera like the R5 would be for higher-resolution when I might need to crop; 24MP is definitely more than sufficient for most print applications. Most people greatly overestimate the amount of megapixels they will need. One advantage in see in shooting medium format would be through having a larger pixel size on a high-megapixel sensor, for those occasions shooting in low-light where high resolution is needed; I wouldn't expect much improvement (if any at all) in low-light performance over a 24MP full-frame sensor. I'll mention that the RAW files from my R8 are already in the 40-50MB range, per photo. I often like to shoot both RAW and JPEG simultaneously, which puts me closer to the 50MB range for each photo I take. Sometimes the JPEG files look great straight out-of-camera; these JPEGs are usually more than sufficient for social media content. However, I often find myself doing edits, considering that not all photos I take will meet my aesthetic standards out-of-camera, so I can use those RAW files to get the most dynamic range and editing flexibility possible. The reason why I went full-frame from the start was for aesthetic purposes; I appreciate shallow depth-of-field and bokeh effects that are harder to achieve on APS-C and M43 crop sensors. For much the same reasons, I might find myself appreciating medium format, as that takes these effects up a notch when compared to full-frame. *_I'm particularly interested in fashion photography and portraiture, areas where medium format does find a niche._* You can definitely get great fashion and portrait photography on full-frame cameras; I already have a "nifty fifty" (albeit a budget lens, but it still takes great-quality photos), and I'm on the market for a fast 85mm prime. If I did want to go medium format in the future, Fujifilm makes the most accessible digital medium-format cameras on the market (price-wise), and definitely the best medium format for more "generalist" photographers (I like to shoot in a variety of settings; I'm not a controlled-setting person), so the choice for this would be clear. Not to mention, I might actually appreciate the more "creative" aspects of Fujifilm cameras. Since I'm not interested in shooting APS-C (considering my niches of interest), if I ever wanted a Fuji, I'd honestly be looking at the GFX series anyways.
Appreciate the insight on this camera!..maybe one day I would definetly love to try out a MF Fuji body like this..lol ..I really hope next years rumored "fixed lens GFX" body is real!..if it's anything like the GFX50R body but maybe slightly smaller..I am all for it!..
Seeing the autofocus at work sold me. I had finally saved up to the 100S and bought it just days before the 100S II was announced. 🤯 Returning it to get the 100S II after seeing this video!
Yeah there is a big difference. But still comes down to which lens you are using. Not all will be fast. Some are still slow depending on the motors used and how much glass elements there are
Have you tried comparing GFX 100II and GFX 100S II in the same field? I tested the two cameras in the showroom earlier and found that the focus of the GFX was a little worse than that of the GFX 100II. The GFX 100S II sometimes focused on the glasses, while the GFX 100II focused accurately on the eyeballs. I want to make sure it's my imagination or if it's true It still bothers me considering these two cameras🥺
Were they both using the same lens? Everyone has different experiences with Fuji cameras and the autofocus and it actually comes down to the lens. Some are way worse than others
@@LeeZavitz Both using gfx 55mm F1.7, same location and same people with the glasses, I didn't notice the problem at the time, I didn't find it until I went home and looked at the test photos in the showroom 🤔 So I wanted to make sure whether I need the gfx 100ii to have the best focus performance
I had a chance to tryout GFX100s2 last week, however, I could not get RAF format to be converted to jpg even I am using the Fujifilm X studio ver 1.25, the raw file open in the viewer, that was it, none of other buttons on the right side clicks including the Convert. Do you have any idea why?
portrait and landscape are two very different types of photography. But for versatility a standard zoom lens like a 24-70mm can get both jobs done. In terms of Fuji GFX lenses it would probably be the 32-64mm.
I see a lot of commentary that Fuji's official line is that "it's not the same sensor as in the 100 ii, but also not the same as in the 100s" - which begs the question, what sensor is it most similar to? Is it noticeably different in color science or performance aside from the increased burst FPS?
Colour science won’t change but the read out is slower than the gfx100ii which is why lower burst rate. And if you shoot electric shutter you will notice more rolling shutter.
@@LeeZavitz thanks! I'm surprised they didn't just choose to use the same sensor and instead went with an "almost not quite" version, is the product differentiation worth the cost in managing an extra different part and manufacturing/logistics for it...?
Currently shooting with a R6 and R5C and the R6 needs replacing this year, with the better AF i am actually tempted to give the Fuji it a try instead of buying a second R5/R5II, on the other hand i dont see why i should need more than the 45mpixel which pretty much feels like a sweet spot for my work. but it is kind of tempting.
In my experience, if you don’t know if you need it or not, then you don’t need it. But that doesn’t mean you aren’t allowed to want it and have it! Personally, I can see the gfx series giving me more flexibility, but my clients have never complained about a lack of resolution or quality of shots taken with the R5 and R5C. Most commercial shots are for digital, and even 3m billboards are LCD screens these days with a spec of 930px wide! 930px!! Web images are larger! It’s a changing world, less need for higher resolution. For me, the dynamic range is the difference not the resolution. The details in the darks and how clean they are when you bring them up in post just kills FF. But again, no client has ever complained that my shadows aren’t detailed or clean enough haha.
Hey, im thinking about getting a gfx. Im just not sure which one.The Gfx 100s is on a huge sale right now: its 3400 euro while the GFX 100s2 will be 5500 euro here in germany. I will use this mostly for commerical fashion shootings, potraits and fashion shows. So im not sure if the new improved Autofocus will be worth 2100 Euro. What are your thoughts?
In terms of image quality and dynamic range they will be very similar. The biggest different is speed and autofocus. It’s faster and more accurate. But most of the time unless the model is moving fast the gfx100s will be good
Thx for the fast reply :D. Aweseome Video btw. Yeah, im amazed by the picture quality of the gfx series. So for me its about colors and sharpness and also the medium format look (i think its just different then FF). Im also a slow shooter. I usually like to think a lot about composition. So i wouldnt mind that the 100s is a bit slower.
Nice. Amazing to see a camera company upgrading the sensor, EVF and body while LOWERING the price by $1,000. This just proves that they CAN do it, but are just price gouging everyone. This is a big reason I refuse to buy new cameras these days, they are all overpriced. Even more surprising its Fuji, who overprices everything. However, it is nice to see Fuji continuing to push "affordable" MF mirrorless. Would have liked to see more detailed beauty shots that really show the benefits of MF. These shots could have been taken on a M43 camera really, but they are good shots.. Honestly, I would suggest the good old Pentax 645D to someone looking to get into medium format. You can get the camera and a couple nice lenses for half what this costs.
I honestly don’t care too much about the “more shallow depth of field” from MF I think the biggest difference for me is the 16bit raw files. You get so much more latitude / dynamic range to push and pull the image. Obviously I can’t view the raw files from this camera yet but from my experience with other gfx cameras that’s the case
@@LeeZavitz is the "can't view the raw files" because it was an embargoed review copy, or because raw editors haven't rolled out updates supporting it yet?
In what way? Autofocus? I think xh2 autofocus will still be slightly better because of the lenses. There’s so much weight and glass in the big gf lenses it slows it down
Lots of brands want this. Commercial market loves their high res files. Fashion, food, products, billboards and now with the ai autofocus for animals it opens up a whole new world there
@@LeeZavitzdo you seriously consider these forced poses to be interesting? They say nothing about the personality of the subject being photographed! To me, photos have to entice the viewer to ask more questions about the scene, subject, interaction being shown on any image - involve the viewer to interact! Posed models - might as well be posed products - not interesting at all
Yeah, I hope he'll come up with a review and shoot outdoors with natural light and show unedited photos to compare. Nothing to see here, but Lee is the best photo CZcamsr out there in my opinion and by far my favorite one 😎. I'm curious to see if the autofocus is on par with the X-T5, for example, as I'm considering moving from X cameras to GFX without breaking the bank with the GFX 100 II. My goal is outdoor portrait photography with natural light and street photography.
I always retouch my portraits. Who doesn’t? It’s the same film simulation. It doesn’t change the fact that the images are 🔥 from the camera. That’s why I show the screen capture
Dunno why I'm watching this. I don't have money
😂😂😂😂
Same im broke AF seriously
Same 😂
Same :(
The model😋
Absolutely stunning work as always. Trying to be realistic about getting one. Do I need it? Hell no. Do I want it? Hell yes.
I know. I don’t need it but I want one every time I see the files. And I can only open jpg right now. Once software updates to open raw files it’s so wild to see what you can do with the dynamic range
Looking at upgrading my GFX-100S and your video helped me make the decision. Definitely liking the skin tones you're getting out of the II. Looks like an improvement. Thanks for sharing. 👊🏼
The photos are 🔥🔥🔥 This new GFX is a great step in the right direction from Fuji trying to bring small medium format to the masses/pros! 🙌🏻
Thanks bro. Yeah the price is coming down and getting close to full frame cameras. I never thought I would see the day that a new medium format camera would be this price. And they will still probably release a 50mp version of this and it will be even cheaper!
@@LeeZavitz I'd be curious to see how the files and look can match that of a Phase One IQ3 100MP Trichromatic or an IQ4 100MP and if the trouble of using the heavy, bulky and pricey Phase One XF system is still worth it or not for anyone else but still life and car photographers.
You made me pull the trigger in buying this camera. You are very inspirational and your presentation is great. My camera is arriving today. I cant wait to try it.
Awesome! You will love it
Amazing review! Thank you for the real world examples of shooting. I greatly appreciate your demonstration of the autofocus much appreciated.
The ones where she was on that low white chair with her face in the shadow would have looked really sick in B&W.
I agree
Great photos and modelling! The subtle smooth tones and gradients are incredible.
🙌🏼
A wild Cuckoo sighting! Love to see that you're into cameras as well!
Wow GF 32-64mm f1.7!! When that was released?
Lmao I think he was switching between the 80 and that 😂
The model is gorgeous too.
Great shots and great review! Great to see a medium format camera being that fast! Who would have thought that you could do medium format for action and sports one day....great time to live in :)
Big thumbs up best portrait session u did in a long time
I’ll give it a try (rental of course) along with the 500mm and see if it can keep up with fast-paced events like Airshows and Motor Racing, but with an 7 fps burst, I am not that optimistic.
Yeah I don’t know if it’s the camera for that. But I really do think it comes down to the lens and what motors are driving all that glass. I found the 80mm to be a lot slower than the 32-64mm. I never tried the new 500mm but it does have Linear motors which is usually much faster
Nice work, I've been curious about the performance of the upgraded auto-focus with the slower stepping motor based lenses from Fuji, and you kind of indirectly pointed out the 80mm 1.7 might be slower as opposed to the Linear based 32-64mm. Would have been great to se you work with the 110mm, as that's my go to portrait lens, when I have the room.
Hello Lee! Great video! what transmiter are you using so we can see the camera screen with autofocus boxes? thank you
I’m using an old Accsoon cineeye. It’s nice and compact with built in battery. It sends to my phone and I just screen record it. Much nicer than having an atomos ninja on the camera
@@LeeZavitzthank you very much
One of these medium-format Fuji GFX cameras would be my dream camera, albeit with some caveats.
I'm still only a beginner photographer on a limited budget, at least for the time being. I did manage to go full-frame from the start, with a Canon R8 and a couple of RF-mount lenses. I'm hoping to add some (used) EF-mount lenses to my collection soon, by using an EF-EOS R Mount Adapter.
Although medium-format is tempting, even if I started making a profit off of photography, it might be hard to justify getting a GFX camera (and any lenses I would need) over a more-professional RF-mount body, such as an R6II, R5, R3, or (soon) R1. Honestly, I'm _extremely_ impressed with the low-light performance and dynamic range of my R8. Although the megapixel count is lower compared to something like an R5, a 24MP full-frame sensor is ideal for lower-light situations, and it's no slouch at high-ISO shooting, either. I can get perfectly usable shots at an ISO as high as 25,600. I'm pretty sure the R8 and R6II (as they share the same sensor) have some of the better high-ISO performance on the market for a FF body.
The R6II and R3 also have the same MP count as my R8, and have similar low-light performance on a more professional body; unlike the R8, these bodies have dual card slots and IBIS, and much-better battery life. The main upside to a higher-megapixel camera like the R5 would be for higher-resolution when I might need to crop; 24MP is definitely more than sufficient for most print applications. Most people greatly overestimate the amount of megapixels they will need.
One advantage in see in shooting medium format would be through having a larger pixel size on a high-megapixel sensor, for those occasions shooting in low-light where high resolution is needed; I wouldn't expect much improvement (if any at all) in low-light performance over a 24MP full-frame sensor.
I'll mention that the RAW files from my R8 are already in the 40-50MB range, per photo. I often like to shoot both RAW and JPEG simultaneously, which puts me closer to the 50MB range for each photo I take. Sometimes the JPEG files look great straight out-of-camera; these JPEGs are usually more than sufficient for social media content. However, I often find myself doing edits, considering that not all photos I take will meet my aesthetic standards out-of-camera, so I can use those RAW files to get the most dynamic range and editing flexibility possible.
The reason why I went full-frame from the start was for aesthetic purposes; I appreciate shallow depth-of-field and bokeh effects that are harder to achieve on APS-C and M43 crop sensors. For much the same reasons, I might find myself appreciating medium format, as that takes these effects up a notch when compared to full-frame. *_I'm particularly interested in fashion photography and portraiture, areas where medium format does find a niche._* You can definitely get great fashion and portrait photography on full-frame cameras; I already have a "nifty fifty" (albeit a budget lens, but it still takes great-quality photos), and I'm on the market for a fast 85mm prime.
If I did want to go medium format in the future, Fujifilm makes the most accessible digital medium-format cameras on the market (price-wise), and definitely the best medium format for more "generalist" photographers (I like to shoot in a variety of settings; I'm not a controlled-setting person), so the choice for this would be clear. Not to mention, I might actually appreciate the more "creative" aspects of Fujifilm cameras. Since I'm not interested in shooting APS-C (considering my niches of interest), if I ever wanted a Fuji, I'd honestly be looking at the GFX series anyways.
Do you think the 55 1.7 would preform better than the 80 1.7 or are they about the same?
I want them to make a 50s m3 so bad for better AF and less megapixels. Or maybe have an option for 50mp or 45mp.
Personally I would definitely buy this for video!!! Medium format 4K for that price? Unbelievable
I just love this shooting 😂
And i watched the whole video without being interested in the cam but turned out i liked it
Appreciate the insight on this camera!..maybe one day I would definetly love to try out a MF Fuji body like this..lol ..I really hope next years rumored "fixed lens GFX" body is real!..if it's anything like the GFX50R body but maybe slightly smaller..I am all for it!..
This is killer. Great images.
Waiting for Fuji X-T50 review. Thanks !!!
Hopefully they send me one to review. 👍🏼
hassselblack or Fujifilm for you- thanks🤔
Hey, is any of the images that you taken edited or is just raw from the shots you taken on the camera?
All retouched but same film sim
Great shots man!
Seeing the autofocus at work sold me. I had finally saved up to the 100S and bought it just days before the 100S II was announced. 🤯 Returning it to get the 100S II after seeing this video!
Yeah there is a big difference. But still comes down to which lens you are using. Not all will be fast. Some are still slow depending on the motors used and how much glass elements there are
@@LeeZavitz I currently have 20-35mm, 63mm and 110mm, the 63mm is definitely the slowest of them all on the 100S.
Have you tried comparing GFX 100II and GFX 100S II in the same field?
I tested the two cameras in the showroom earlier and found that the focus of the GFX was a little worse than that of the GFX 100II. The GFX 100S II sometimes focused on the glasses, while the GFX 100II focused accurately on the eyeballs.
I want to make sure it's my imagination or if it's true
It still bothers me considering these two cameras🥺
Were they both using the same lens? Everyone has different experiences with Fuji cameras and the autofocus and it actually comes down to the lens. Some are way worse than others
@@LeeZavitz Both using gfx 55mm F1.7, same location and same people with the glasses, I didn't notice the problem at the time, I didn't find it until I went home and looked at the test photos in the showroom 🤔 So I wanted to make sure whether I need the gfx 100ii to have the best focus performance
Ok, love You work
Appreciate it. Thank you 🙏🏼
I had a chance to tryout GFX100s2 last week, however, I could not get RAF format to be converted to jpg even I am using the Fujifilm X studio ver 1.25, the raw file open in the viewer, that was it, none of other buttons on the right side clicks including the Convert. Do you have any idea why?
Ayy 🔥🙌
Always great working with you 🙌🏼
@@LeeZavitz Likewise 🙌
Im not knowledgeable about the type of lens that's best for portrait and landscape photography. What lens will you recommend?
portrait and landscape are two very different types of photography. But for versatility a standard zoom lens like a 24-70mm can get both jobs done. In terms of Fuji GFX lenses it would probably be the 32-64mm.
@@LeeZavitz thanks
Look at you getting it in :)
I see a lot of commentary that Fuji's official line is that "it's not the same sensor as in the 100 ii, but also not the same as in the 100s" - which begs the question, what sensor is it most similar to? Is it noticeably different in color science or performance aside from the increased burst FPS?
Colour science won’t change but the read out is slower than the gfx100ii which is why lower burst rate. And if you shoot electric shutter you will notice more rolling shutter.
@@LeeZavitz thanks! I'm surprised they didn't just choose to use the same sensor and instead went with an "almost not quite" version, is the product differentiation worth the cost in managing an extra different part and manufacturing/logistics for it...?
Currently shooting with a R6 and R5C and the R6 needs replacing this year, with the better AF i am actually tempted to give the Fuji it a try instead of buying a second R5/R5II, on the other hand i dont see why i should need more than the 45mpixel which pretty much feels like a sweet spot for my work. but it is kind of tempting.
Yeah 100mp is overkill for most people. But for the people that need it, this is a really good option
There are very little practical reasons to get gfx100 anything over r5 except for "I want it". And "I want it" is a very powerful thing :)
In my experience, if you don’t know if you need it or not, then you don’t need it. But that doesn’t mean you aren’t allowed to want it and have it! Personally, I can see the gfx series giving me more flexibility, but my clients have never complained about a lack of resolution or quality of shots taken with the R5 and R5C. Most commercial shots are for digital, and even 3m billboards are LCD screens these days with a spec of 930px wide! 930px!! Web images are larger! It’s a changing world, less need for higher resolution. For me, the dynamic range is the difference not the resolution. The details in the darks and how clean they are when you bring them up in post just kills FF. But again, no client has ever complained that my shadows aren’t detailed or clean enough haha.
nice seamster dude!
Please do reviews about Sony Xperia 1 VI..
I asked them if they could send me a review unit. So far no response. It looks amazing though
I don't think its a true 16bit sensor ,.. i thinkg its more 14.7 - 15.3 upscale to 16bit ,. I hope they clear this.
Hey, im thinking about getting a gfx. Im just not sure which one.The Gfx 100s is on a huge sale right now: its 3400 euro while the GFX 100s2 will be 5500 euro here in germany. I will use this mostly for commerical fashion shootings, potraits and fashion shows. So im not sure if the new improved Autofocus will be worth 2100 Euro. What are your thoughts?
In terms of image quality and dynamic range they will be very similar. The biggest different is speed and autofocus. It’s faster and more accurate. But most of the time unless the model is moving fast the gfx100s will be good
Thx for the fast reply :D. Aweseome Video btw.
Yeah, im amazed by the picture quality of the gfx series. So for me its about colors and sharpness and also the medium format look (i think its just different then FF).
Im also a slow shooter. I usually like to think a lot about composition. So i wouldnt mind that the 100s is a bit slower.
Test of gh7 lumix
Nice. Amazing to see a camera company upgrading the sensor, EVF and body while LOWERING the price by $1,000. This just proves that they CAN do it, but are just price gouging everyone. This is a big reason I refuse to buy new cameras these days, they are all overpriced. Even more surprising its Fuji, who overprices everything. However, it is nice to see Fuji continuing to push "affordable" MF mirrorless. Would have liked to see more detailed beauty shots that really show the benefits of MF. These shots could have been taken on a M43 camera really, but they are good shots.. Honestly, I would suggest the good old Pentax 645D to someone looking to get into medium format. You can get the camera and a couple nice lenses for half what this costs.
I honestly don’t care too much about the “more shallow depth of field” from MF I think the biggest difference for me is the 16bit raw files. You get so much more latitude / dynamic range to push and pull the image. Obviously I can’t view the raw files from this camera yet but from my experience with other gfx cameras that’s the case
@@LeeZavitz that is a good point and it doesn’t necessarily translate well over a CZcams video anyways.
@@LeeZavitz is the "can't view the raw files" because it was an embargoed review copy, or because raw editors haven't rolled out updates supporting it yet?
Have you tried the EF to GFX fringer adapter with Canon lenses?
Never on gfx but I have on X mount. Works ok. Better to get native Fuji lenses for best performance
How is the Af with the Gf 80/1.7 on the new GFX?
I think it’s the motors in the lens and how much weight in glass it has to move. The camera is capable of fast af the lens isn’t
How does this compare to the Fuji XH2?
In what way? Autofocus? I think xh2 autofocus will still be slightly better because of the lenses. There’s so much weight and glass in the big gf lenses it slows it down
@@LeeZavitz detail wise a medium format has a lot more. But does the XH2 come anywhere near what this thing puts out?
This guy is saying I’m going fast now 7 fps lol I’m bugging great content tho luv it
Well compared to the previous model that is fast lol. It was only doing like 3-5fps before
@@LeeZavitz lol I know I’m just 🧌 😅
if someone is complaining about that buffer for portraiture sort of photography then they need to go learn to take photos.
ОТСТОЙ🤑
New video TODAY TODAY we have 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮
🤮
@@LeeZavitz 🤮🤮
@@LeeZavitz 🤮🤮🤮
WTF does anyone need or want 102 mp.
Lots of brands want this. Commercial market loves their high res files. Fashion, food, products, billboards and now with the ai autofocus for animals it opens up a whole new world there
Ok.., i don’t get the appeal of model shots at all… literally nobody uses these poses as their own natural ones… forced poses are… boring!
weird take on modeling and editorial photography, but to each their own
@@LeeZavitzdo you seriously consider these forced poses to be interesting? They say nothing about the personality of the subject being photographed! To me, photos have to entice the viewer to ask more questions about the scene, subject, interaction being shown on any image - involve the viewer to interact! Posed models - might as well be posed products - not interesting at all
@@Mortenthorpe-DK Lmao, clearly a fashion photography expert... XD
All edited
Yeah, I hope he'll come up with a review and shoot outdoors with natural light and show unedited photos to compare.
Nothing to see here, but Lee is the best photo CZcamsr out there in my opinion and by far my favorite one 😎. I'm curious to see if the autofocus is on par with the X-T5, for example, as I'm considering moving from X cameras to GFX without breaking the bank with the GFX 100 II. My goal is outdoor portrait photography with natural light and street photography.
I always retouch my portraits. Who doesn’t? It’s the same film simulation. It doesn’t change the fact that the images are 🔥 from the camera. That’s why I show the screen capture