CHURCH AT TULLY
TODAY I EXPLORED TULLY PARK AND ESPECIALLY THE OLD CHURCH [THE AREA IS CHANGING AT AN AMAZING RATE]
You may have noticed that I am in the process of upgrading or upgrading my equipment and am now tending towards using lighter fixed lens cameras. Today I decided to visit Tully Park and test my Fuji GFX100RF medium format camera. The area in general is changing at an amazing rate.
Tully's Enduring Sanctity: From Ancient Ecclesiastical Centre to Modern Public Amenity
I. Introduction: The Enduring Presence of Tully and its Evolving Landscape
The ancient site of Tully Church, its attendant graveyard, and two historic high crosses, located in Laughanstown, County Dublin, stand as National Monuments of considerable historical and archaeological significance. For centuries, these remnants bore witness to shifting tides of faith, power, and community. However, recent years have ushered in a profound transformation of their immediate setting and broader context, driven by the large-scale Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone (SDZ). This ambitious urbanisation project has culminated in the creation of Tully Park, a modern public green space into which these venerable monuments have been carefully integrated. This report seeks to explore the rich history of Tully's sacred complex and, crucially, to analyse how its contemporary role has been redefined, becoming, as it were, one vital element within a diverse collection of public spaces.
The deliberate incorporation of these ancient monuments as the "very heart" of a new flagship park is indicative of a contemporary approach to urban planning and heritage management. This philosophy moves beyond merely preserving such sites in isolation, which can sometimes lead to them becoming detached or inaccessible relics. Instead, it actively curates them as central, accessible features intended for public engagement and appreciation. This integration signals a shift whereby heritage is not only safeguarded but is also woven into the fabric of new communities, offering a tangible connection to the past amidst modern development. The placement of Tully Church and its associated monuments within Tully Park suggests an understanding of their value that transcends their purely historical or archaeological importance. In a new, rapidly developing urban area projected to house a significant population , these heritage assets can serve as powerful anchors of cultural identity and contribute to a unique sense of place. They are envisioned not as passive remnants of a bygone era, but as active components in the life of the emerging community, enriching its landscape and contributing to the well-being of its residents by embedding deep historical roots within a contemporary environment.
II. Echoes of the Past: The Rich History of Tully Church and its Sacred Precincts
A. Tulach na nEpscop: The Early Ecclesiastical Origins and Significance
The historical importance of Tully is deeply rooted in Ireland's early Christian period. The site was known anciently as Tulach na nEpscop, meaning 'the Hill of the Bishops', a title recorded in early Irish literature, including the 9th-century Martyrology of Óengus (with later annotations) and the late 15th-century Book of Lismore, which drew on earlier, now-lost manuscripts. This designation is highly significant; it implies a status considerably elevated above that of a simple local church. The presence of bishops, potentially as early as the 8th century , suggests that Tully functioned as a recognised centre for episcopal activity, a place of assembly, decision-making, and ecclesiastical authority within the early Irish church structure, long before the profound changes brought by the Hiberno-Norse and Normans. Legends further connect the site with St. Brigid of Kildare, recounting that seven bishops departed from Tully to visit her, these figures sometimes being referred to as the "Seven Bishops of Cabinteely". Such associations, even if legendary, underscore the site's perceived standing in the wider ecclesiastical landscape of the time. The original church structure is considered to have been founded between the 6th and 9th centuries AD, a period when it was known as Telach-na-nun ecspop. It was also during this era, specifically the 8th century, that the site became associated with the seven bishops.
Archaeological evidence, such as the identification of two subsurface ditched enclosures surrounding the church, further supports its early origins, as such features are characteristic of early medieval ecclesiastical sites in Ireland. The continuity of sacred or significant use of the Tully locale is particularly noteworthy. The high crosses, for instance, are believed to predate the stone church , and some grave slabs also point to an earlier period of reverence. This layering suggests that the site was not chosen at random in the 6th to 9th centuries for the establishment of a Christian centre , but likely built upon an existing tradition or perceived spiritual significance of the place. This is a common pattern in the establishment of enduring sacred sites, where new forms of worship or commemoration are overlaid upon locations already imbued with meaning. This deepens the historical resonance of Tully, extending its importance beyond the visible ruins and connecting it to a much longer timeline of human activity and reverence in the landscape.
B. Architectural Development: From Early Structures to Norman Imprint
The physical fabric of Tully Church tells a story of architectural evolution, reflecting broader cultural and ecclesiastical transformations in Ireland. While the current stone ruins are the most visible testament to its past, archaeological surveys suggest the possibility of an earlier church constructed from wood or clay and wattle, materials common in early Irish ecclesiastical architecture, predating the more permanent stone structure. This potential earlier wooden or wattle church would align with the 6th to 9th-century foundation period.
The dating of the extant stone elements indicates several phases of construction. The nave, the main body of the church, is thought to date to the latter part of the 11th century , though some sources suggest a 13th-century construction. During the 11th century, the lands of Tully were granted to Christ Church by Sitric Mac Turcaill. A particularly significant later addition is the chancel, located at the eastern end of the church. This structure, unusually wider than the nave, is considered a late 12th or early 13th-century addition, a period corresponding with the consolidation of Norman influence in Ireland. The chancel features a finely executed wide Romanesque arch opening from the nave, a notable architectural element , and two rounded-headed east windows. This architectural sequence – from potential native Irish timber construction to an 11th-century stone nave, and culminating in a larger, more elaborate Norman-era chancel – physically embodies the major cultural and ecclesiastical shifts experienced in Ireland. The Norman chancel, often larger and more architecturally distinct than earlier naves, typically signifies the imposition of a new ecclesiastical order, reformed liturgical practices, and connections to the wider European Romanesque architectural tradition. The nave itself is alternatively dated to the 13th century, with the chancel addition being completed in this period as well.
The strategic importance and development of Tully were also shaped by grants of its lands to powerful ecclesiastical bodies. The lands of Tully were granted by Sitric Mac Turcaill, a Hiberno-Norse ruler, to the Holy Trinity (Christ Church Cathedral) in Dublin. Later, in 1179, following the Norman intervention, the church was granted to the Priory of The Holy Spirit. Such grants were not merely administrative; they brought patronage, resources, and influence. The connection to major ecclesiastical centres like Christ Church in Dublin likely ensured Tully's continued importance and provided the means for architectural developments, such as the substantial Norman chancel. This patronage, however, also intrinsically linked Tully's fate to these larger, often distant, institutions.
C. Centuries of Worship, Community, and Eventual Abandonment
Tully Church served as a place of worship and a focal point for the local community for several centuries. It remained in use until approximately 1615, operating under the authority of Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin, which was responsible for supplying clergy to maintain its functions. An inspection carried out in 1615 reported the church to be in good condition, suggesting ongoing use and maintenance at that time. However, its fortunes changed dramatically shortly thereafter. A report from 1630 described the church as having been badly damaged in recent storms and consequently falling into a ruinous state. Following this damage, the church was abandoned and gradually decayed into the ruin seen today. Some accounts note that after 1641 the church was no longer in use.
The relatively swift decline of Tully Church, from being in "good condition" in 1615 to "ruinous" by 1630 , suggests that the storm damage occurred within a challenging socio-political and religious environment. The early 17th century in Ireland was a period of significant upheaval, marked by the aftermath of the Reformation, the Nine Years' War, the beginnings of large-scale plantations, and ongoing political instability. In such a context, the resources or the impetus for repairing churches, particularly those with pre-Reformation associations or those tied to older Gaelic or Hiberno-Norman ecclesiastical structures, may have been severely diminished. New authorities and patrons might not have prioritised the restoration of such a building, leading to its abandonment rather than repair.
The abandonment of Tully Church around the 1630s is not an isolated incident but reflects a broader pattern of decline and ruin for many older Gaelic and Hiberno-Norman ecclesiastical sites across Ireland during the tumultuous 17th century. As power structures shifted, land ownership changed, and religious affiliations were contested, many ancient places of worship fell into disuse. Tully's story is thus a microcosm of these larger historical processes that reshaped the religious and cultural landscape of Ireland. Despite the church's ruin, the site retained significance, notably as the traditional burial ground for the Walshes of Carrickmines Castle, one of the dominant local families following the Norman intervention.
D. The Historic Graveyard: Testimonies in Stone
The graveyard surrounding the ruins of Tully Church is a historical record in itself, with layers of burials attesting to its long-standing sanctity and continuous use by the local community. Significantly, some of the grave slabs found within the church grounds predate the 12th-century stone structure, indicating that the area was recognised as a burial place even before the construction of the Norman-era church. This aligns with the early burials noted from the 6th to 9th centuries AD. The use of the graveyard persisted long after the church itself fell into ruin, with headstones present that date up to the late 19th century. This continuous use, spanning potentially more than seven centuries after the church was abandoned around 1630, underscores the enduring sacred importance of the burial ground to the local populace, a reverence that transcended the functional life of the church building itself. Such longevity is common for ancient burial grounds, which often retain their communal significance for generations.
Among the most archaeologically significant discoveries are four grave slabs of the Rathdown-type, dating to the 10th/12th centuries. These slabs feature distinctive designs that find parallels on artefacts uncovered in the Viking-age excavations in Dublin. It is suggested that they may have served as grave markers for Christianised Hiberno-Norse settlers. The presence of these grave slabs at an early Christian site like Tully is particularly illuminating. They are not merely burial markers but cultural artefacts that highlight the complex interactions, cultural fusion, and processes of assimilation that occurred between the Gaelic Irish and the Hiberno-Norse populations in the South Dublin region. Tully, in this context, appears to have served as a nexus for these communities, a place where individuals from different, yet increasingly intertwined, cultural backgrounds were laid to rest. As noted, the graveyard also became the traditional burial ground for the influential Walsh family of nearby Carrickmines Castle in the 12th century. Today, the historic graveyard, alongside the church and high cross, is recognised as one of the three National Monuments carefully incorporated into the design of Tully Park.
E. The Lehaunstown High Crosses: Ancient Markers of Faith and Artistry
The sacred complex at Tully is further distinguished by the presence of two notable historic high crosses, ancient symbols of faith and remarkable examples of early Irish Christian artistry. These crosses, though differing in age and historical circumstance, contribute significantly to the archaeological and cultural importance of the site. They are believed to have been erected before the 12th-century stone church, placing their origins in the 6th to 9th-century period or shortly thereafter.
One of these crosses, a 12th-century monument, stands in the immediate vicinity of the church ruins. It is particularly notable for featuring a relief carving of a bearded bishop, a detail that reinforces the site's ancient ecclesiastical connections and its name, Tulach na nEpscop. It has been suggested that this cross may be standing on what was the western perimeter of an outer enclosure of the early ecclesiastical site.
The second significant cross is an earlier, 10th-century ringed-High Cross. This cross has a well-documented history of preservation. It was repositioned along the adjacent laneway in the 19th century through the efforts of a local man named James Crehan (or Grehan). Mr. Crehan intervened to save the cross from being discarded or damaged when the level of the local road was being adjusted in the late 1800s. He had the cross placed on a plinth, designed to replicate the soil removed, thereby maintaining the cross at its original standing height. This monument is sometimes referred to as "Crehan's Cross" in acknowledgement of his crucial intervention. Worn steps on one side of the plinth allow for closer inspection of the cross. Another account mentions a possibly older cross, with only three of its four arms remaining, located in a field adjacent to or opposite the church ; this appears to be the same 10th-century cross after its repositioning by Crehan. A photograph from circa 1910 shows this cross largely submerged underground before its more recent presentation.
The distinct histories of these two principal high crosses illuminate different facets of heritage survival. The 12th-century bishop cross likely endured due to its continuous association with the sacred church site. In contrast, the 10th-century ringed cross owes its preservation to a specific, proactive intervention against the threat of destruction or neglect arising from infrastructure changes. This highlights that the survival of heritage is not uniform; it can depend on its original context and perceived importance, or on later individual or community actions. James Crehan's rescue of the high cross in the late 19th century is a noteworthy example of local heritage activism, predating more formalised state-led conservation efforts. His actions underscore a pre-existing local valuation and appreciation of these ancient monuments long before the current large-scale development and the formal creation of Tully Park. This local initiative laid a foundation, in a sense, for the more systematic preservation efforts seen today. The collective heritage of the crosses is now recognised, with "Tully High Cross" (referring to the site encompassing these monuments) designated as a National Monument and integrated within Tully Park, which opened in May 2023.
III. The Pre-Development Context: Tully in its More Recent Historical Setting
Before the transformative impact of the Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone, Tully Church and its sacred precincts existed in a markedly different setting. The site was described in 2013 as an "interesting little hidden spot" , nestled in the landscape between the M50 motorway at Cabinteely and the expanding suburbs of Dublin city. From the elevated position of the burial ground, panoramic views over the city could be obtained, a testament to the strategic siting that likely contributed to its early importance. This description evokes an atmosphere of relative seclusion and perhaps a degree of obscurity for those not intimately familiar with the local area or specifically seeking out its historical treasures.
Access to elements of the site, such as the second high cross (Crehan's Cross, after its repositioning), was less formalised than it is today. Prior to the park's development, this cross, located in a field opposite or adjacent to the church, was reportedly accessible via a low wooden fence. This suggests a landscape that, while not untouched by modernity, retained a more rural or semi-rural character, certainly less formally managed and less intensely developed than its current iteration within a structured urban park. The area was known as Laughanstown or Lehaunstown, names that still resonate in the locality and in the historical records pertaining to the church and its environs.
This pre-development characterisation of Tully as a "hidden spot" implies that public engagement with the site was likely more limited, perhaps confined to local residents, historical enthusiasts, or those who made a deliberate effort to find it. This contrasts sharply with its present status as a highly visible, signposted, and managed heritage attraction within a major public park designed for broad community use. This shift in accessibility and visibility inevitably impacts the nature of public interaction with the monuments. The previous, somewhat secluded nature of the site might have offered a more contemplative, perhaps even "romantic" ruin experience for some visitors, an atmosphere of quiet discovery amidst a less manicured environment. This type of encounter is now inevitably altered by its integration into a structured, amenity-rich public park, which, while offering new opportunities for engagement, presents a different kind of "genius loci" – the spirit of the place – shaped by its new, more public and recreational context.
IV. A New Horizon: The Cherrywood Development and the Reimagining of Tully
The recent history of Tully Church and its surroundings is dominated by the advent of the Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone (SDZ), a project of immense scale that has fundamentally reshaped the landscape and, with it, the context of these ancient monuments.
A. The Cherrywood SDZ: Scale and Vision of Urban Transformation
The Cherrywood SDZ represents one of Ireland's most ambitious urban development projects. Situated in Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County, between the N11 and M50 transport corridors, the overall SDZ is planned to deliver circa 8,800 new homes, catering for a population in the region of 26,000 people. The development encompasses a new mixed-use Town Centre, three smaller Village Centres, residential neighbourhoods, schools, and extensive green infrastructure, including three major public parks – Tully, Beckett, and Ticknick – covering over 60 hectares. One of the key developers, Hines, is responsible for a 360-hectare landholding within the SDZ, projected to include over 8,000 new homes. The overarching vision is to create a "compact, mixed-use and rail-based community" , transforming what was a less densely populated area into a significant new suburban hub.
The designation of Cherrywood as a Strategic Development Zone by governmental authorities was the primary catalyst for this rapid and large-scale transformation. An SDZ is a state-level planning instrument designed to fast-track the development of areas deemed of strategic importance, often for housing or economic growth. This framework mandates a planned, holistic approach to development, including the provision of necessary infrastructure such as roads, public transport links, and community amenities like parks. It was within this overarching strategic plan that the context of Tully Church was so comprehensively redefined, with the creation of Tully Park ensuring that the ancient monuments were not simply by-passed by development but actively incorporated into the new urban fabric.
The Cherrywood SDZ exemplifies a contemporary global trend in urban planning: the development of large, master-planned new suburban "towns" or "villages" complete with integrated amenities. Developers like Quintain, responsible for "Cherrywood Village," aim to create highly connected and diverse new communities with a strong emphasis on sustainable development and the protection of existing heritage sites. In such schemes, existing heritage assets, if present, are often identified and repurposed as cultural anchors, unique selling propositions, or focal points for community identity, lending character and historical depth to otherwise new environments. The explicit and central inclusion of Tully's National Monuments within the flagship Tully Park aligns perfectly with this model, leveraging the site's ancient legacy to enrich the new urban landscape.
B. Archaeological Oversight and Heritage Management Amidst Development
Given the rich archaeological potential of the Cherrywood area, extensive archaeological oversight and heritage management strategies were integral to the development process. IAC Archaeology was appointed by Hines Ireland to undertake comprehensive pre-planning and pre-construction phase archaeological services for their substantial landholding. This work was multifaceted, involving detailed consultations with statutory bodies including the National Monuments Service (NMS), the Office of Public Works (OPW), and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council (DLRCC) to agree upon standardised approaches to archaeological risk management across numerous planning applications.
The archaeological investigations themselves were extensive, encompassing impact assessments, geophysical surveys, built heritage surveys, archaeological test trenching, continuous monitoring of ground disturbances during construction, and the full excavation of any archaeological remains discovered, followed by post-excavation analysis and reporting. These systematic interventions demonstrate a formal recognition of the archaeological sensitivity of the wider Cherrywood landscape, moving beyond reactive, ad-hoc discoveries to a more proactive, albeit development-led, methodology for heritage management. The landscape around Tully is known to be rich, with investigations uncovering features from the Neolithic to the post-medieval period, including Bronze Age wedge tombs, evidence of an 18th-century military camp (Lehaunstown Camp), and remains associated with former demesne landscapes.
Specific attention was paid to the National Monuments. For Tully Church, pre-planning field inspections were carried out to assess its setting, and for the Tully High Cross, protective fencing was erected during the construction of Tully Park. Crucially, Archaeological Management Plans were prepared for the preservation in-situ of archaeological remains identified within both Ticknick Park and Tully Park. While "preservation in-situ" is a key conservation strategy that prevents the destruction of archaeological features, its implementation within newly designed public parks means that such remains become part of a managed, landscaped environment. This can involve landscaping over features or creating specific pathways around them, which, while ensuring their physical survival, inherently alters their original context and could potentially limit or complicate future research access compared to if they had remained in a less disturbed, undeveloped setting.
Several stakeholders played key roles and voiced perspectives during this process. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council (DLRCC), as the local planning authority, was responsible for the implementation of the SDZ, including public infrastructure and park development. Their objectives included delivering the Cherrywood SDZ's housing and amenity goals, creating high-quality public parks, and integrating heritage. They granted planning permissions, commissioned and now manage Tully Park, secured Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF) funding for park development, and commissioned archaeological assessments for the Green Network.
The National Monuments Service (NMS), the statutory body for archaeological heritage, aimed to ensure the protection of National Monuments like Tully Church, its graveyard, the High Cross, and nearby Wedge Tombs, and adherence to heritage legislation. They were consulted on all archaeological aspects, licensed archaeological works, and agreed on mitigation strategies such as preservation in-situ and protective fencing. The Office of Public Works (OPW), responsible for some National Monuments, was also consulted regarding development near sites like Tully Church and Lehaunstown Castle, with their interest being the protection and appropriate management of these monuments.
An Taisce (The National Trust for Ireland), a non-governmental heritage organisation, advocated for heritage protection. They emphasised the importance of respecting historic relationships between sites, such as Tully Church and Lehaunstown Castle, and called for appropriate development in sensitive landscapes. They submitted observations and concerns regarding development plans, pushing for a holistic consideration of heritage.
Developers, such as Hines Ireland and Quintain, as landowners, were responsible for constructing housing, commercial spaces, and infrastructure. Their objectives were to deliver commercially viable developments within the SDZ framework, create attractive communities, and meet planning conditions related to heritage. They appointed archaeological consultants like IAC Archaeology, funded investigations and mitigation measures, and were involved in the design and initial building phases of the parks.
IAC Archaeology (and other archaeological consultancies) provided professional archaeological services. Their role was to conduct assessments, investigations, and mitigation works to professional standards and in compliance with NMS requirements. They carried out impact assessments, surveys, test trenching, monitoring, excavation, reporting, and prepared Archaeological Management Plans for preservation in-situ.
Finally, the Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF), a government funding initiative under Project Ireland 2040, supported urban regeneration projects aligned with national strategic objectives. They provided significant funding for Phase 2 of Tully Park, enabling its completion and enhancement as a key public amenity.
Heritage bodies such as An Taisce (The National Trust for Ireland) also voiced perspectives on the development. An Taisce highlighted the importance of fully respecting the historic relationship between Tully Church and the nearby Lehaunstown Castle (the remains of which are encased within Lehaunstown Park House) in any ongoing development. This concern underscores a broader "heritage landscape" concept, where the significance of a site like Tully Church is amplified by its connections to other nearby heritage assets. The development's focus on Tully Church as a centrepiece within Tully Park, while positive for its visibility, carries a potential risk of inadvertently overshadowing or de-emphasising these crucial interconnections with other elements of the historic landscape if these broader narratives are not carefully interpreted and signposted within the new public realm.
C. The Creation of Tully Park: A Modern Green Space Embracing Ancient Monuments
Tully Park, officially opened in May 2023, stands as the 9-hectare flagship public park at the very heart of the Cherrywood development. Its creation represents a significant investment in public green infrastructure, designed to serve the recreational and amenity needs of the new and growing community. The park's design philosophy explicitly centred on the integration of the area's rich heritage. The three National Monuments – Tully Church, its historic graveyard, and the Tully High Cross (encompassing the site's crosses) – are not merely adjacent to the park but form a "distinctive heritage area" at its core. This approach suggests an intention to achieve a sensitive integration, framing the monuments and making them accessible rather than simply building around them. However, this also means that the monuments are now experienced as part of a consciously "designed" landscape, which shapes the visitor's encounter with them.
The park offers a wide array of modern amenities, including outdoor fitness equipment, play and ecological trails, active and passive recreational areas, a children's playground, and a café (though the café was not yet open at the time of some reports). It has been designed with universal access in mind, featuring nine universal access points and numerous seating and rest areas throughout, ensuring it is a welcoming space for visitors of all abilities. The development of Tully Park was undertaken in two phases, with funding for the second phase significantly supported by the Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF), an initiative under the Irish government's Project Ireland 2040 framework. This substantial state investment underscores a national-level policy recognition of the value of high-quality green infrastructure, with integrated heritage elements, as a catalyst for successful urban regeneration and the creation of attractive, liveable new communities.
The design concept for Tully Park, as articulated by MOLA Architecture who were involved in its masterplanning and completion for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council , aimed to create high-quality spaces with a range of facilities appropriate to its different segments. The park is conceived in four distinct zones, each with a different but complementary character, drawing inspiration from existing site features such as topography, hedgerows, and tree lines. This considered approach seeks to weave the new park elements into the existing landscape fabric, including the historic setting of the monuments.
The Tully Church ruin, previously described as a partially overgrown "hidden spot" , is now a central feature of the "distinctive heritage area" within Tully Park. Pathways provide access around and potentially within parts of the ruin, and interpretative signage is assumed to be present. New park amenities in its proximity include a playground, café, open recreational lawns, ecological trails, and seating areas.
The Tully Graveyard, a historic burial ground surrounding the church with headstones dating up to the 19th century and some areas likely overgrown before development , is now enclosed or delineated as part of the heritage area. It is accessible via pathways, features a maintained landscape, and is also assumed to have interpretative signage. It adjoins the church ruin and is close to the playground, café, and other recreational areas.
The Tully High Cross site, which includes two main crosses (one near the church, and the second, Crehan's Cross, previously by a roadside on a plinth and accessed via a field fence ), now sees both crosses situated within the formal park landscape as part of the heritage area. They are accessible via pathways, and Crehan's Cross is no longer isolated by the roadside or field. These crosses are integrated within the park's network of paths and landscaped areas, near other recreational and ecological features.
V. Tully Transformed: Heritage as a Public Amenity in the 21st Century
The integration of Tully Church, its graveyard, and high crosses into Tully Park marks a profound shift in their public role and perception. Once relatively secluded, these ancient monuments are now central, highly accessible features within a bustling modern public space, bringing both opportunities and challenges for their long-term preservation and appreciation.
A. From Relative Isolation to a Central Feature: The New Public Role
The journey of Tully's heritage assets from being a "hidden spot" or accessed somewhat informally via a field to their current status as prominent, easily reachable attractions within a major public park signifies a dramatic change in their public profile. This transformation can be seen as a form of "democratisation" of access to heritage. The monuments are no longer primarily the preserve of specialists, local historians, or particularly determined visitors. Instead, they are readily available for engagement by the general public, including the thousands of new residents of Cherrywood, local families using the playground, individuals on fitness trails, and potentially school groups visiting the park's amenities (as is envisioned for Beckett Park's sports facilities, a principle extendable to Tully for heritage education).
This vastly increased visibility and accessibility brings with it immense potential for enhanced public awareness, education, and appreciation of local history and archaeology. However, this heightened exposure also necessitates more robust and proactive management and interpretation strategies. While the "democratisation" of access is a positive development for public engagement, it must be carefully balanced with measures to protect the physical fabric and the inherent significance of the monuments from the pressures of significantly higher footfall and diverse park uses.
The new role of Tully's heritage assets as integral components of a public leisure and recreation space could also subtly influence public perception. For many visitors, the ancient ruins and crosses will now be encountered alongside playgrounds, cafés, and sports facilities. This juxtaposition may lead to a shift where these monuments are viewed not only as sacred or purely historical sites but also as part of the backdrop to everyday leisure activities. While this can foster a sense of familiarity and integration, it might, for some, alter the perceived solemnity or distinctiveness of the heritage elements if their unique character and historical depth are not effectively communicated and respected within the park's overall design and management.
B. Assessing the Impact: Opportunities, Challenges, and Perceptual Shifts
The transformation of Tully's setting presents a complex interplay of opportunities and challenges. On the positive side, the integration into Tully Park offers significant opportunities for enhanced public appreciation and understanding of this important heritage site. The increased visibility can foster a stronger connection between the new Cherrywood community and the deep history of the land upon which it is built. Educational programmes, informative signage, and digital interpretation can leverage this accessibility to bring the stories of Tulach na nEpscop, the Norman church, and the ancient crosses to a wider audience. Furthermore, a crucial practical benefit is that the site's physical maintenance and security are now part of the ongoing responsibilities of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, which manages the park. This structured approach to upkeep, funded through public resources, offers a degree of long-term stability for the monuments that might have been less certain in their previous, more isolated context, where they could have been more vulnerable to neglect or vandalism.
However, challenges also arise. Increased visitor numbers inherently bring a greater risk of wear and tear to fragile historic structures and archaeological features. While the high visibility within a managed park may deter deliberate vandalism, accidental damage or erosion from foot traffic are potential concerns that require ongoing monitoring and management. There is also the challenge of potential decontextualisation. If the interpretation is weak or insufficient, the monuments might be perceived merely as picturesque ruins or landscape features, their profound historical, ecclesiastical, and cultural significance diminished or lost on the casual visitor. An Taisce's concern about respecting the broader historical relationships, such as that between Tully Church and Lehaunstown Castle , highlights this risk; the intense focus on the park-bound monuments could inadvertently obscure their connections to the wider historic landscape if these are not actively articulated. Finally, the process of "manicuring" a ruin to fit within a formal park setting – clearing vegetation, stabilising structures, laying paths – while necessary for safety and access, can alter its aesthetic character and the sense of "authentic" decay that some might associate with ancient ruins. The shift is from a quiet, perhaps overgrown and evocative ruin to a more managed, interpreted, and accessible heritage attraction.
The ultimate success of Tully's transformation as a heritage amenity will therefore heavily depend on the quality, depth, and dynamism of the interpretative strategies employed. Effective on-site signage, engaging digital resources (such as apps or augmented reality), and potentially guided tours or community archaeology initiatives will be crucial. Without robust and thoughtful interpretation, the monuments risk becoming, for many, little more than "scenery" within the park, their complex narratives and deep significance failing to resonate fully with the diverse audience that now has access to them.
C. The Church, Graveyard, and Crosses: Integrated Elements within a Modern Public Space
The current reality for Tully Church, its graveyard, and the high crosses is that they are, as the initial query observed, undeniably "one element within a collection of public spaces." Their meaning and the experience of encountering them are now inextricably intertwined with the park's myriad other functions: recreation, socialising, fitness, play, and nature appreciation. This represents a significant layering of meaning onto a site already rich with historical and spiritual significance. The ancient sacredness of Tulach na nEpscop now coexists with the secular leisure pursuits of 21st-century park-goers. The monuments share their "stage" with playgrounds, fitness trails, ecological walks, and picnic spots.
This integration means that the Tully monuments are now part of a dynamic, multi-layered landscape of meaning. For some visitors, the historical ruins and crosses will remain the primary draw, a destination for historical inquiry or quiet reflection. For many others, particularly local residents engaging in daily recreational activities, the heritage elements might form an atmospheric backdrop to their run, their children's play, or a family outing. This does not necessarily diminish the monuments' intrinsic value but rather embeds them within a wider spectrum of contemporary social and recreational values ascribed to the park by its diverse users. The site now simultaneously embodies ancient history, enduring sanctity, and modern community life.
The Tully Park model, if it proves successful in the long term at balancing the integrity of the heritage assets with the demands and expectations of a popular public amenity, could serve as a valuable exemplar. It demonstrates a potential pathway for how other historic sites located in rapidly urbanising areas can be preserved, interpreted, and made relevant to new and expanding communities. This approach offers an alternative to such sites being either swept away by development, left as isolated and neglected relics surrounded by new construction, or becoming exclusively academic preserves. The Cherrywood approach, by making heritage central to new public green space, is a proactive conservation and urban planning strategy.
VI. Conclusion: Continuity, Change, and the Future of Tully's Legacy
The journey of Tully Church, its ancient graveyard, and venerable high crosses is a compelling narrative of continuity and profound transformation. From its origins as Tulach na nEpscop, an important early Irish ecclesiastical centre, through centuries of worship, Norman influence, eventual abandonment to ruin, and a period of relative obscurity as a "hidden spot," the site has now emerged into a new era. Its current incarnation as a central, highly visible, and managed heritage feature within the modern, bustling environment of Tully Park in the Cherrywood SDZ marks the most dramatic contextual shift in its long history.
This transformation illustrates a delicate, and ongoing, balancing act between facilitating necessary urban growth and ensuring the meaningful preservation, interpretation, and appreciation of irreplaceable heritage. The integration of National Monuments into a public park designed for intensive community use is a bold strategy, one that brings both considerable benefits in terms of accessibility, public engagement, and secured maintenance, alongside inherent challenges related to potential wear, perceptual shifts, and the complexities of interpreting deep history within a recreational setting.
The future of Tully's rich legacy is now inextricably linked to the lifecycle, management, and community embrace of Tully Park and the wider Cherrywood development. Its continued preservation and the effective communication of its significance will depend not solely on its intrinsic historical and archaeological value, but critically on its perceived value to the new community it serves and the sustained commitment of the local authority, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, to its care and interpretation. The story of Tully is no longer just its own; it is now woven into the narrative of Cherrywood.
Ultimately, the reimagining of Tully within its new urban park context reflects a broader paradigm shift in heritage conservation. In an increasingly urbanised world, adaptation and thoughtful integration within new landscapes are progressively seen as viable, and at times essential, strategies for ensuring the survival and continued relevance of ancient monuments. The alternative might too often be their marginalisation or loss. However, the ultimate success of such an approach, as will be judged at Tully in the decades to come, hinges on an unwavering, long-term commitment to high-quality, engaging interpretation that honours the inherent dignity of the heritage asset, and a management regime that safeguards its physical fabric amidst its new, vibrant public role. Tully's stones have witnessed many ages; their capacity to speak to future generations now depends on the stewardship of the present.
THE HALFPENNY BRIDGE
THE HALFPENNY BRIDGE [5 MAY 2025]
Few structures capture the essence of Dublin quite like the Ha'penny Bridge. Gracefully arching over the River Liffey, this elegant cast-iron footbridge is more than just a crossing; it is an enduring symbol of the city, instantly recognisable and deeply cherished by Dubliners and visitors alike. Officially named the Liffey Bridge (or Droichead na Life in Irish), its popular moniker, the Ha'penny Bridge, speaks volumes about its history and its place in the everyday life of the city for over two centuries.
Serving as a vital gateway between Dublin's Northside and the bustling Temple Bar district on the south bank , the bridge holds the distinction of being the city's first dedicated pedestrian crossing over the Liffey and Ireland's very first iron bridge. Its delicate structure, romantic associations, and sheer persistence have cemented its status as an iconic landmark.
The enduring preference for the name "Ha'penny Bridge" over the official "Liffey Bridge" or the earlier "Wellington Bridge" underscores how public experience and collective memory often shape a landmark's identity more profoundly than official designations or political commemorations. The nickname, rooted in the tangible act of paying the halfpenny toll, connects the bridge directly to the social history and daily routines of generations of Dubliners, giving it a resonance that purely descriptive or commemorative names could not achieve.
FUJI GFX100RF
THE WILLIAM DARGAN BRIDGE IN DUNDRUM [5 MAY 2025]
People find the William Dargan Bridge in Dundrum to be an attractive structure for several reasons:
Architectural Design:
Cable-stayed design: This modern design, where the bridge deck is supported by cables running directly to a central tower (pylon), is inherently visually striking. The clean lines of the cables and the imposing pylon create a sense of elegance and engineering prowess.
Asymmetrical form: The bridge's asymmetrical cable arrangement and the single, inverted-Y shaped pylon contribute to its unique and eye-catching silhouette. This distinguishes it from more conventional bridge designs.
Slender deck: The slim, elegantly curved, prestressed concrete deck, only 1.325 meters deep, adds to the bridge's refined appearance.
Landmark Status and Visibility:
Prominent feature: In an area with predominantly low-rise buildings, the 50-meter-high pylon and the overall structure stand out, making it a significant and recognisable landmark in Dundrum and the surrounding areas.
Wide visibility: The bridge is visible from a distance, including from the Dublin Mountains, making it a notable feature on the landscape.
Visual Aesthetics:
Scenic backdrop: The view of the sun setting behind the bridge, with the Dublin Mountains in the background, is considered particularly beautiful.
Integration with surroundings: Some find that the modern design of the bridge complements the ongoing development in the Dundrum area.
Symbolism and Recognition:
Named after a significant figure: The bridge is named after William Dargan, a highly important 19th-century Irish railway engineer. This historical connection adds a layer of significance.
Symbol of regeneration: The bridge represents the regeneration of a former railway corridor for modern public transport, symbolizing progress and development.
Awards:
The bridge has received awards such as the ACEI President's Award for Excellence and the Irish Concrete Society Award, recognizing its design and construction quality.
While some minor criticisms exist, such as the presence of antennas or occasional lack of cleanliness, the overwhelming sentiment is that the William Dargan Bridge is an attractive and architecturally significant structure that enhances the Dundrum landscape.
FUJI GFX100RF
EXPECTED WITHIN DAYS MY NEW FUJI GFX100RF [A MEDIUM FORMAT CAMERA IN A COMPACT BODY]
When I last visited Belfast I had a bad fall and my Sony A7RIV has given many problems since then as it was damaged due making contact with a concrete bollard. Myself, I was out of action for a day because of bruised ribs.
I had considered buying the A7RV when it became available but after trying it for a week I decided to wait for the next version and to consider getting a Leica Q3 but the price was not to my liking so I decided not to purchase anything during 2024. In January I decided to purchase the Leica Q3 43 in May or June. But today I was given the opportunity to obtain a Fuji GFX100RF at a good price withe a delivery date of the first week in May 2025 so I have decided to forget about the Leica for now. I will revisit Leica options in 2026 or 2027.
Fuji GFX100RF vs. Leica Q3: A Comparative Analysis for Street Photography.
The digital camera market continues to evolve, offering photographers an array of choices tailored to various needs and preferences. Among the latest entrants and established players in the high-end, fixed-lens segment are the Fuji GFX100RF and the Leica Q3 series (comprising the Q3 and Q3 43).
The Fuji GFX100RF marks a significant step for Fujifilm, bringing its renowned medium format sensor technology into a more compact, rangefinder-inspired body. This development suggests an ambition to cater to photographers seeking the pinnacle of image quality in a more portable form factor, potentially drawing those familiar with Fujifilm's X100 series but desiring higher resolution.
Conversely, Leica's Q series has carved a strong reputation in the full-frame, fixed-lens market, known for its exceptional image quality, premium build, and a distinct photographic experience.4 The introduction of the Leica Q3 43, featuring a different focal length than the original Q3, indicates Leica's responsiveness to user feedback and a strategic move to broaden the appeal of its fixed-lens offerings by providing greater versatility in perspective.
This blog post aims to provide a detailed comparative analysis of the Fuji GFX100RF and the Leica Q3/Q3 43, with a specific focus on their suitability for street photography.
By examining their technical specifications, inherent advantages and disadvantages, notable similarities and differences, current availability challenges, summarised user and professional reviews, and RAW file processing compatibility, this analysis intends to offer a comprehensive overview for photographers considering these high-caliber cameras for their street photography endeavors.
Fuji GFX100RF: A Street Photography Perspective
The Fuji GFX100RF is engineered around a substantial 43.8mm x 32.9mm GFX 102MP CMOS II sensor, incorporating a primary colour filter. This exceptionally high resolution offers a significant advantage for street photographers who might want to refine their composition through cropping after capturing a scene. Despite featuring a fixed FUJINON GF 35mm f/4 lens, which provides a 28mm equivalent field of view on a full-frame camera, the immense resolution of the sensor allows users to effectively simulate different focal lengths by cropping into the image. This fixed focal length encourages a more deliberate and thoughtful approach to street photography, prompting photographers to carefully consider their framing and perspective.1For capturing the dynamic and often fleeting moments inherent in street photography, the GFX100RF is equipped with an Intelligent Hybrid AF system.
This system combines TTL contrast detection AF with TTL phase detection AF, also incorporating AI-assisted subject recognition capable of identifying animals, vehicles, birds, and aircraft. Furthermore, it features face and eye detection, enhancing its capabilities for street portraits. The phase detection AF offers low-light performance down to -3.0EV, which is crucial for focusing in the varied lighting conditions often encountered in urban environments.2In terms of physical attributes, the GFX100RF measures 133.5 x 90.4 x 76.5 mm and weighs 735g with the battery and memory card inserted.
While not as diminutive as some APS-C or full-frame compact cameras, its weight and size are notably manageable for a medium format system. This relative portability makes it a viable option for photographers who spend extended periods walking and shooting on the streets.
The image quality delivered by the GFX100RF is a significant draw, offering 16-bit RAW files, a wide dynamic range, and low noise performance starting from a base ISO of 80. Fujifilm's signature set of 20 Film Simulations provides photographers with a range of aesthetic options directly in-camera, which can be particularly appealing for street photographers who prefer to minimise post-processing.
Additionally, the built-in 4-stop ND filter allows for greater creative control over exposure, especially in bright daylight conditions.1The camera offers continuous shooting capabilities up to 6 frames per second when using the mechanical shutter (with a buffer of 296 JPEG frames or 40 Compressed RAW frames) and up to 3 frames per second with the electronic shutter (boasting a much larger buffer of 1000+ JPEG frames or 508 Compressed RAW frames). While these speeds are adequate for capturing sequences in street photography, the RAW buffer depth might be a consideration for photographers who frequently shoot long bursts.
Beyond these core features, the GFX100RF incorporates an Aspect Ratio Dial, allowing for quick and direct selection between nine different aspect ratios, which can be a valuable tool for in-camera composition favoured by some street photographers. It also features a Digital Teleconverter, offering 45mm, 63mm, and 80mm equivalent focal lengths, providing a degree of versatility despite the fixed lens, albeit with a corresponding reduction in image resolution.
The inclusion of a leaf shutter enables flash synchronisation at speeds up to 1/4000s, offering creative lighting possibilities for street portraits.1For street photography, the GFX100RF presents several compelling advantages. Its 102MP medium format sensor stands out, providing exceptional detail and significant cropping flexibility for refining composition. The camera's size and weight, while not the smallest, are surprisingly manageable for a medium format system, potentially making it suitable for all-day use. The 28mm equivalent lens is a widely favoured focal length for capturing the context of street scenes.
The built-in 4-stop ND filter offers creative control over exposure in bright conditions, and the unique Aspect Ratio Dial allows for in-camera compositional choices. The leaf shutter facilitates high-speed flash synchronisation, and Fujifilm's renowned Film Simulations provide appealing out-of-camera JPEGs.
The improved autofocus system with subject recognition is also a benefit for capturing dynamic street scenes.2However, the GFX100RF also has potential drawbacks for street photography. The fixed 35mm f/4 lens (28mm equivalent) might not suit all street photography styles, particularly those favouring longer focal lengths or a shallower depth of field.10 The f/4 aperture might also limit performance in low-light conditions and the ability to achieve significant background blur compared to lenses with wider apertures.10 The absence of in-body image stabilisation (IBIS) could make handheld shooting at slower shutter speeds challenging, especially given the high resolution sensor which can amplify any camera shake.
The electronic shutter's potential for image distortion with fast movement is another consideration. Some users might find the thumb placement awkward or desire a built-in grip for enhanced handling comfort.
Finally, the GFX100RF occupies a premium price point, which might be a barrier for some photographers.
Leica Q3 and Q3 43: A Street Photography PerspectiveThe Leica Q3 series centres around a 60MP Full-Frame BSI CMOS Sensor that incorporates Triple Resolution Technology, allowing users to select between 60MP, 36MP, or 18MP output. This full-frame sensor provides excellent image quality and strong low-light performance, while the Triple Resolution Technology offers flexibility in managing file sizes. The Leica Q3 is equipped with a fixed Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH. lens, which includes an integrated macro mode.
The very fast f/1.7 aperture is a significant advantage for street photography, enabling shooting in dim lighting conditions and producing a shallow depth of field for subject isolation.4 The 28mm focal length is a classic choice for capturing the broader context of street scenes.In contrast, the Leica Q3 43 features a fixed APO-Summicron 43mm f/2 ASPH. lens, also with an integrated macro mode. The 43mm focal length, approximating a 35mm equivalent on full-frame, provides a more natural perspective that many street photographers prefer.
The f/2 aperture still offers good low-light capabilities and some degree of background separation.6 The APO designation of the lens signifies exceptional optical quality.Both Q3 models utilise a Hybrid Autofocus System that combines Phase Detection AF, Contrast AF, Depth from Defocus, and AI, including Face/Eye/Body Detection and Animal Detection. This advanced autofocus system aims to deliver fast and accurate focusing performance, crucial for capturing spontaneous moments in street photography.
Leica has made significant improvements to the autofocus in the Q3 series compared to its predecessors, making it a more competitive option for capturing dynamic street scenes.The dimensions and weight of the two Leica Q3 models are similar. The Leica Q3 measures 130 x 80.3 x 92.6 mm and weighs 743g with the battery 5, while the Leica Q3 43 is slightly larger at 130 x 80.3 x 97.6 mm and heavier at 772g with the battery.21 Both cameras are relatively compact and lightweight for full-frame systems, making them well-suited for carrying during extended street photography sessions. Their size and weight offer a good balance between portability and a substantial feel in hand.
The Leica Q3 series is renowned for its exceptional image quality, delivering rich detail and accurate colour rendition. Both models offer in-camera digital zoom/cropping capabilities. The Q3 provides equivalent focal lengths of 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, and 90mm, while the Q3 43 offers 60mm, 75mm, 90mm, 120mm, and 150mm equivalents. This feature provides some compositional flexibility without the need for lens changes.Both cameras boast a high continuous shooting speed of up to 15 frames per second. This rapid capture rate is advantageous for street photographers looking to capture fast-paced action or subtle changes in expression.Other notable features of the Leica Q3 series include a tiltable 3" display, a high-resolution 5.67MP OLED viewfinder, IP52-rated ingress protection against dust and moisture, USB-C and HDMI ports, and the option for wireless charging with an optional handgrip. The tilting screen enhances versatility for shooting from various angles, a common requirement in street photography.
The high-resolution viewfinder offers a clear and detailed view for composition. Weather sealing adds durability for shooting in less than ideal conditions.For street photography, the Leica Q3 and Q3 43 offer several notable advantages. Their excellent image quality, stemming from the full-frame sensor and high-caliber lenses, is a primary draw. The fast maximum apertures (f/1.7 for the Q3 and f/2 for the Q3 43) are particularly beneficial for low-light shooting and creating shallow depth of field.4 Their relatively compact and lightweight designs make them suitable for extended periods of carrying and shooting. The improved hybrid autofocus system offers fast and generally accurate performance. The tiltable rear screen provides versatility for shooting from various perspectives, and the high continuous shooting speed is useful for capturing action.
The IP52 weather sealing adds a layer of protection for shooting in diverse environments.4However, the Leica Q3 series also has potential drawbacks for street photography. The very high price point is a significant consideration for most photographers. Some users report that the ergonomics can be challenging, with the body being somewhat slippery and potentially requiring the purchase of an optional grip for comfortable handling. While the autofocus has been improved, some reviews still note occasional inconsistencies in its performance.
The limitation to a fixed lens (either 28mm or 43mm) might not suit photographers who prefer the flexibility of interchangeable lenses or a wider range of focal lengths. The mechanical shutter's maximum speed of 1/2000s can be limiting in very bright conditions, potentially necessitating the use of the electronic shutter, which can introduce rolling shutter effects.
Finally, the battery life, with a CIPA rating of approximately 350 shots, is relatively low compared to the Fuji GFX100RF.
Head-to-Head Comparison for Street Photography
The Fuji GFX100RF distinguishes itself with a significantly larger, higher-resolution sensor compared to the full-frame sensors of the Leica Q3 series. This difference can translate to greater detail and more extensive cropping capabilities. However, the Leica Q3 and Q3 43 offer faster lenses, which are advantageous for low-light performance and achieving a shallower depth of field, a characteristic often sought after in street photography.
While all three cameras feature advanced autofocus systems, real-world performance and consistency can vary. The Leica Q3 series incorporates optical image stabilisation, a feature absent in the GFX100RF, which can be beneficial for handheld shooting, especially at slower shutter speeds.
The size and weight of all three cameras are relatively similar, making them manageable for street photography. A significant differentiator is the price point, with the Leica Q3 models being notably more expensive than the Fuji GFX100RF. The choice between the 28mm lens of the Q3 and the 43mm lens of the Q3 43 depends on the photographer's preferred perspective for street photography.
The Fuji GFX100RF Availability Challenge in the USA
Recent reports indicate that Fujifilm has suspended pre-orders for the GFX100RF in the United States. This development suggests that obtaining the camera within the next few months might be challenging for those in the US. The rumoured primary reason behind this suspension is the anticipation of new US tariffs on electronics imported from Japan.39 Tariffs can significantly increase the cost of imported goods, potentially affecting the retail price and overall availability.
Discussions in online forums reveal various perspectives on this situation. Some speculate that units already within the US might not be subject to the new tariffs, and Fujifilm could be holding back to assess the pricing implications. Others believe that the tariffs, having gone into effect before the camera's official release date, should logically apply to all new shipments, potentially leading to a price increase across the board. There is also the possibility that no units have yet been shipped to the US.
Beyond the GFX100RF, other Fujifilm cameras manufactured in China, such as the X100VI and X-M5 (black version), are also reportedly facing order suspensions in the US due to even higher tariffs on goods from China. This broader issue highlights the potential impact of changing trade policies on the availability and pricing of photographic equipment from various manufacturers.
For the user in the US, this situation necessitates being aware of potential delays and the possibility of price fluctuations for the Fuji GFX100RF.
Review Insights and User Sentiment
Professional reviews of the Fuji GFX100RF consistently praise its compact size and lightweight design, especially considering its medium format sensor. The exceptional 102MP sensor and the resulting image quality are also frequently highlighted as key strengths. The 28mm equivalent lens is generally considered suitable for street photography, and features like the Aspect Ratio Dial and Fujifilm's Film Simulations are appreciated for the creative control they offer.
However, the f/4 aperture and the lack of in-body image stabilisation are often mentioned as potential limitations, particularly in low-light scenarios. Some reviewers have drawn favourable comparisons between the GFX100RF's shooting experience and that of the Leica Q series.
Reviews of the Leica Q3 and Q3 43 consistently commend their excellent image quality and the fast apertures of their lenses. The addition of a tilting screen in the Q3 series is seen as a significant advantage for street photography. The build quality and handling are generally well-received, although some users find that an optional grip is necessary for optimal comfort. While the autofocus system is considered good, some reviews point out occasional inconsistencies.
The high price is a recurring point of discussion, often cited as a major drawback. The Q3 43's 43mm lens is often praised for offering a more natural perspective preferred by many photographers.
Initial user feedback on the Fuji GFX100RF highlights its smaller-than-expected size and impressive image quality. Some users have noted minor quirks, such as the disappearance of aspect ratio options when shooting in RAW-only mode. The depth of field achievable at f/4 on the medium format sensor is surprisingly pleasing to many early users.
Leica Q3 and Q3 43 users often emphasise the exceptional image quality and the overall premium experience of using a Leica camera. The 28mm lens of the Q3 is viewed as a versatile option for various types of photography, including travel and everyday shooting, while the 43mm lens of the Q3 43 is favoured by those who prefer a slightly tighter, more natural field of view. The high cost is frequently acknowledged but often considered justifiable by the image quality and the prestige associated with the Leica brand. Some users have reported occasional issues with autofocus consistency and the ergonomics of the camera body.
Based on the available reviews, there isn't a definitive tendency to favour one camera over the others. The choice appears to be highly subjective and contingent on individual priorities. The GFX100RF appeals to photographers who prioritise ultimate resolution and the unique aesthetic of a medium format sensor in a relatively portable package, potentially at a more accessible price point than other medium format options. The Leica Q3 series attracts those who value the Leica brand, exceptional full-frame image quality, faster lenses for enhanced low-light capabilities and bokeh, and are willing to invest a premium for these attributes.
The decision between the Q3 and Q3 43 within the Leica lineup further depends on the photographer's preference for a wider (28mm) or a more standard (43mm) focal length.
RAW File Processing Compatibility
Adobe Lightroom fully supports RAW files (.RAF) from the Fuji GFX100RF. The latest versions of Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw are compatible with these files. Fujifilm also provides Tether Shooting Plug-ins for Lightroom Classic, including a PRO version specifically designed for GFX series cameras. These plug-ins offer enhanced tethered shooting capabilities for GFX users within the Lightroom environment.
While there have been past discussions regarding Lightroom's handling of RAW files from Fujifilm cameras utilising X-Trans sensors, these concerns are less relevant for the GFX100RF, which employs a standard Bayer sensor.
Information regarding the compatibility of Fuji GFX100RF RAW files with DXO PhotoRaw is somewhat limited based on the provided material. However, one source indicates that support for the Fujifilm GFX100RF in both DxO PhotoLab and DxO PureRAW is expected to be available in July 2025. DXO PhotoLab already supports RAW files from other GFX cameras, such as the GFX100 II, GFX100S, and the original GFX100. Given this existing support for other GFX models with similar sensors, it is probable that compatibility for the GFX100RF will be added in due course.
DXO PureRAW 5 includes enhanced processing capabilities for both Bayer and X-Trans sensors, demonstrating DXO's ongoing commitment to supporting Fujifilm cameras.
Conclusion and Recommendation
In summary, the Fuji GFX100RF offers the unique advantage of a high-resolution medium format sensor in a relatively compact body, making it a compelling option for photographers seeking exceptional detail and cropping flexibility. Its 28mm equivalent lens is well-suited for street photography, and features like the built-in ND filter and Aspect Ratio Dial enhance creative control. However, its f/4 aperture and lack of IBIS might be limitations in certain situations.
The Leica Q3 and Q3 43 provide excellent full-frame image quality with faster lenses, offering better low-light performance and shallower depth of field. Their more compact size and the inclusion of optical image stabilisation are also beneficial for street photography. The choice between the Q3's 28mm lens and the Q3 43's 43mm lens depends on the photographer's preferred perspective. A significant factor is the price, with the Leica Q3 series being considerably more expensive than the GFX100RF.
Additionally, potential US tariffs are currently impacting the availability of the Fuji GFX100RF in the USA.For users who prioritise ultimate image resolution, cropping flexibility, and the distinctive look of a medium format sensor at a relatively lower price point (compared to other medium format options), the Fuji GFX100RF could be an attractive choice, provided they are comfortable with a fixed 28mm equivalent lens and the absence of IBIS. They should also be aware of the current uncertainty surrounding its availability in the US market.
Photographers who prioritise exceptional low-light performance, shallower depth of field, and the prestige of the Leica brand might find the Leica Q3 (with its 28mm f/1.7 lens) to be an excellent option. Those who prefer a more natural, "normal" perspective while still benefiting from Leica's image quality and a fast lens would likely favour the Leica Q3 43 (with its 43mm f/2 lens).Ultimately, the optimal choice depends on the individual photographer's budget, preferred focal length, shooting style, and tolerance for potential availability issues. It is recommended that the user consider these factors carefully and, if possible, try out the cameras in person to assess their handling and ergonomics before making a final decision.
Commercial Disclosure
You will find links to buy products from Amazon, Google and other partners. If you click on these links, you’ll find that the URL includes a small extra piece of text which identifies that the click came from my websites. This text is an affiliate code, and it means that I get a small percentage of the money you spend if you choose to buy that product, or, in some cases, other products from the site soon after. These affiliate links help pay the costs of producing my websites and ensure that the content is free to you.