Leaderboard

I mostly lurk here but I got the X-H2S about a month ago. Because I got it together with the Tascam XLR adapter, my order was delayed significantly so I missed the chance to use it on most of the gigs I had lined-up originally. The one time I've used it for video, it was the Wide of a three-camera interview setup (with R5Cs as the CUs) feeding an ATEM Mini ISO. Lens was the XF 23mm f/2 (set to f/4) with AF-C / Face Detect-on. The R5Cs were set to 4K/S35 mode and one had an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II (set to f/4) while the other had an RF 24-105mm f/4. The Good: Color: The X-H2S was set to Astia and the R5Cs were set to EOS Standard Profile and their footage was relatively interchangeable (this I already knew from my previous experience mixing Canon and Fujifilm cameras). Video autofocus: The X-H2S autofocus is significantly better than my previous X-T3 -I didn't notice any focus hunting during the multi-hour shoot which is something I can't say for my previous X-series bodies in similar setups. Keeps going: It records for longer than 29.99 minutes! That's all I want in my hybrid cameras since my main moneymaker is long form documentary. Formats: ProRes! h.265! h.264! I've always appreciated the level of control Fujifilm gives the operator over file output. Anyone who's used a BMPCC will know the frustration of being format-limited by resolution and vice-versa. CF-Express -as much as I hate that I'm back to cameras that have non-matched dual card slots, at least they're the same type as what I use in my R5Cs. And GB for GB, CF-Express is cheaper than SDXC UHS-II. But holy hell do they get hot. The Bad: The button and dial layout is significantly different from my other X-series cameras and it drives me nuts. One of the main reasons I skipped the X-T4 was specifically because they altered the layout and this has the same problem. I can re-map some of the functionality to standardize with my other X-series bodies but there are wholly deleted buttons and switches (the drive-mode and exposure-mode are two glaring examples) that is going to force me to change mindset whenever using the X-H2S with another of my X-series cameras. I might have to sell all my older bodies and just get another X-H2S (or the 40MP model) so that I don't get annoyed. The fan works and I'm glad I have it. The problem is, as I type this... I can't remember where I put it. It can only be attached when you're using the camera, as it prevents the screen from closing/cannot remain attached permanently. It also has two sets of rubber covers that are easily lost if you're frequently attaching/detaching it. It's a very dumb implementation and is probably going to get lost and re-purchased. I wish they had just gone the route that Canon did and elegantly integrated into the body. No anamorphic view. I have three Sirui anamorphics for XF-mount and I still have to use my Atomos Ninja Inferno. No Waveform - I come from a "traditional" video production background so I was so excited to get these back into my workflow on my R5Cs when I don't want to attach a larger monitor. At least the Zebras on the X-H2S are still well implemented... HDMI frame stuttering -this is something that happens on my X-T3 frequently, and I haven't had a chance to really figure out why it happens (is it thermal? is it a framerate mismatch? etc...). I noticed it happening to the feed coming from X-H2S but, again, I've only used it once so I can't rule out user error here, either. The Jury is still out: Photos: My other money maker is photography. One of my main clients is a symphony and so I'm constantly shooting in fast-moving, high contrast scenarios using electronic shutter. The X-series cameras I own (T2, H1, T3) have been as-good-as the R5C in all aspects except resolution, autofocus and extreme high-ISO. Previously, choosing a body has been a trade-off between auto-focus performance vs rolling shutter artifacts. I'm hoping that the X-H2S solves both those issues but I know there's a shadow recovery penalty with the new stacked sensor. The new season starts in about a month so only time will tell if it's actually going to be problematic. Video autofocus: I haven't had a real-world opportunity to test the X-H2S's video autofocus against the R5C's. Hopefully, it'll be as good as the R5C -which is a low standard :-). Honestly, I was surprised by how inferior the Canon cinema implementation of DPAF is compared to the non-cinema version. Tracking moves I could do with robotic automation on the 70D/80D/5D4 I wasn't able to do with the R5C. It's made food documentary and product video capture more... annoying than it should be. Conclusion: I'm still stuck in the value-conscious mindset I was in a few years ago -when it would definitely have been an either/or situation- so, I'm kind of torn on whether I wasted $3000 USD on the X-H2S or $5000 USD on the R5C. If only one or the other existed, I'd probably be happy but since they both exist and they both have respective strengths and weaknesses... it's weirdly still a toss-up. I am happy that I have enough work to justify owning both. After re-reading what I wrote above (and how non-committal I still am), I will say this: the X-H2S is what I wished the BMPCC 6K Pro would have been. It is definitely more expensive when kitted-out equivalently but it does almost everything better. If $5000 USD is within your budget and rolling-shutter isn't a big deal, the Canon R5C is the better tool versus the X-H2. But at $3000 USD (base+TASCAM audio unit) the X-H2S is the only hybrid camera that does all the things it does, and does them well. JP

Cmon. Go to the Vimeo site and download the original - it is 8K. The same 8K video was uploaded to YouTube. I have no control over what YouTube streams. I do not like being called a liar, particularly when I went out of my way to post on Vimeo so folks could download the un-recompressed 8K original. It is people like you that steer away posters.

The Canon RF lenses are a big turn off for me. On E-mount there is more choice of native lenses. Sigma to name just one. Similarly with L-mount there are many ways into the system. The native Canon RF lenses are almost all massively expensive and enormously heavy, and not a single one is really much better than the EF equivalent it replaces. In fact if it wasn't for the popularity and dominance of EF & some very good adapters, I dare say Canon wouldn't have sold quite so many camera bodies. However they have always been a lenses company first and foremost, it's where the big profit margins are. It's just that they prefer to line the pockets of their shareholders, through us, whereas Sigma prefer to focus on engineering better lenses than Canon at half the price. Different company philosophies.

Well I can say for example that for someone like me who has an R5-C and is actively looking to pick up one of those RF-EF adaptors that come with the drop-in ND filter, that the Meike and Kolari offerings are just better. And that's using every metric that matters, including price. So from that perspective I can see why Canon would not want this type of smoke from third party companies.

What exactly is the difference between third parties being able to make EF lenses but not RF ones? I mean, I understand it's because they really want to push their RF lenses, but were they OK with companies making EF lenses solely because of the age of the mount? And are the Viltrox's of the world REALLY a threat and cutting into their business THAT much?

< "no recompression" < uploads an 8K clip in 4K

Digital stabilization works better with higher shutter speed; cause you don't see the micro motion blur. For serious video production we can't use any shutter speed we like. But for YouTube, sure its good enough.

Vimeo version so that one can download the 8K original, not-recompressed original:

A lot of similar thought patterns going on here! Part of why I originally went Fuji was because everyone else was either Nikon on Canon in wedding world. So many colleagues laughed or sneered and so many ended up going down that same route. I find Sony boring. Always have and yes, I have had a number of Sony cameras but mainly the smaller/fixed lens type inc. RX10, RX100v, ZV1 and whilst they have been good at what they do, I just found no joy in using any of them. None. That would not put me off going fully Sony and I have contemplated it several times including within the last couple of weeks, but they just don't make anything that ticks enough boxes for me, so that coupled with the 'zero joy' factor makes them an also ran for me. I haven't quite pushed the trigger on it, but not for lack of trying (no stock, ANYWHERE, at least not without a massive 4 figure mark up) but I am going back to my roots and going back to Nikon. Z9 to be precise. Along with the Megadap adapter and Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8, plus a pair of OM-1's. The OM-1's are going to be doing static duration coverage with one of them also on gimbal duty. These are replacing my S5 and ZV1. I didn't much care for the mix, broke the side hinged screen off the S5 (third camera I have done this and hate the fucking things with a passion...even though the OM-1 has them, but is not being used in the same role so unlikely to get damaged) and the ZV1 has overheated 3x now. I threw the OM-1 in at the deep end this last weekend and despite me not having had enough playtime...such as not knowing how to switch it from AF to MF, it did a sterling job @ f2.8 tracking the right subjects all ceremony long! Plus, the log footage was an easy grade and very nice quality. The Z9 and lens combo...when I can find anything in stock (name down on numerous waiting lists!) is replacing: 2x S1R's 1x S1H 1x monopod 5x lenses OK, I lie, the Z9 will be getting a second lens option when it becomes available, probably next year, the just announced Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 which will be my 'indoor' lens that will book-end my wedding coverage, ie, for prep at the beginning and dancing at the end. The rest will be single body, single lens for the typical 6+ hours in between. It's a big/hefty unit in the hands, but it's a case of 1 camera + 2 lenses doing something better than 3 cameras + 5 lenses + monopod, so for my needs, that no-brainer folks talk about. Batman plus Robins after30+ jobs of literally wrestling with a system I have never quite got to work, will be a breath of fresh air and increase creativity as a result.

It seems quite a few of us were on Fuji for some time and then moved on. They are back to being that really niche company nobody is really hyped about. and that's kind of good in my book, I'd go as far as to say that even appeals to me. I hate having the same gear as everyone and Fuji has its own kind of visual imprint. The hardware too with the top dials & compact lenses. It's kind of like Leica, without the prestige & price tag. I'm not about to ditch Canon or Sony by the way. Too invested in them, and they do the job, I can operate them with my eyes shut. But that's also the problem, they're utilitarian, boring. Fuji is a breath of fresh air, even the idiosyncrasies make you work a little different. Long story short, I have humongous GAS for this XH2S. It really ticks the boxes as far as feature ratio/price. Adding a fourth system is a little nuts but my projects are really diversified and this would be my creative/experimental system for more artsy/fine art projects. @MrSMW What did you end up pulling trigger on?

Considered, especially having come from Fuji from the very beginning with their first mirrorless camera, the OG X100. Had that in 2011 when it first came out alongside a pair of Nikon D3S's paired with 24-70 and 70-200, all for stills and was using a D7000 for video. Went all in with the X Pro-1 when that came out and sold all the Nikon gear after 10+ years with them. Went through them all inc. XE1, XE2, XT1/2/3 and XH1. I didn't go past XT3 however which is where I finished with them after almost 10 years because they were no longer meeting my needs. They almost do again now. Almost... I have made a case as a business proposal for going back to Fuji, but it's not my best option. In fact it's not even my second best option, Canon is, but equal with my third choice, Sony. Pulled the trigger, but not with Fuji, though I could make it work as I could make any system work. Just not as well as well.

That depends heavily on how you shoot. Almost everything I do has it least 1-2 crew members, a client monitor, and something big onboard for operator/crew. In that environment, there's no real downside to making that onboard monitor a recorder. The wealth of mounting points on the camera would completely contradict the idea that the F3 wasn't meant to be rigged up, no? It's primarily a studio camera that needs some rigging to work its best, unlike the canon C-series that excelled as a stripped down all-in-one DSLR upgrade. Now THAT'S a camera I could see having a second life as prices plummet. Amazing codec, strong DR, and the siren song of global shutter...

Forum rules 1. If advertising your own LUTs, camera guides or similar paid stuff please get permission from the site owner first. (Direct message Andrew Reid here!) 2. Only long-standing trusted members are allowed to offer their kit for sale, this is to prevent abuse or fraud. If you're a new user and wish to do so, please DM the site owner. 3. If a user account is set up purely to direct traffic away from EOSHD or to advertise, it will be banned 4. Please be polite to other users and myself. 5. Please over time post your own work, opinions, video and tests, because a forum should not just be a link farm or library of YouTube clips Have fun!

Apparently they say it is usually the ribbon cable that goes bad. Probably not the easiest thing to replace.

Some of us knew its coming tho