Attila Bakos

AF test with older primes compared to X-T2. X-T3 focuses faster with less hunting, also continuous AF seems to be more confident, however the transition between close and far subjects is not butter smooth. Might be better with newer lenses.

I didn't find any so I decided to do my own test. I downloaded two freely available Fuji RAF files and exported a 3840x2160 area as 16bit TIFF. Then I used these files to create 1 sec movies using FFMPEG. I created 3 versions of each: 8bit 4:2:0, 8bit 4:2:2, 10bit 4:2:0. I used H.264 encoding, the files should be playable in the latest Resolve/Premiere. All are 200Mbps. You can check the files in MediaInfo to verify encoding parameters. Download the test from here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SbeLZJTN7jWLC2XStb-EU4QWIsCQRDyD For some reason the TIFF has slightly different colors, ignore that. What matters is the transition of colors. Try to pull keys in the first test, or break the sky gradient in the second test with a high contrast. Tell me if you see a huge difference, because I don't. Of course my test can be flawed, I'm no expert in encoding.

But then how is it possible that my old i7-3770 with a GTX 1080 plays the 400Mbps jellyfish sample smoothly? I downloaded the sample from here: http://jell.yfish.us/ I used MPC-HC to play the files. 10% GPU usage and around 15% CPU. Do NLE's handle these files differently?

I'd be interested too as both Cinema5D's and Dpreview's initial comparison shows slightly more DR on the X-T3.

The lockup issues are still here though. Just saw a video where the guy had three lockups in a day with Fujifilm recommended SD cards. Only battery pull helped. The camera was the final version. He said he will write an article with details. The video only shows the camera in a locked up state so I'm not linking it.

No nothing official I'm afraid, but here's a research paper you can check: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=7254155 And a user test you might find interesting: http://wp.xin.at/archives/3465 Obviously a lot depends on encoding parameters, but if all done properly, the differences seem to fade away way earlier than 200Mbps, so I think you won't find any difference even if you try to break the footage in post.

No, 1.5 x 1.18 = 1.77 I'm not sure if H.265 has a visible advantage at 200Mbps.

It's 200Mbps (and Long-GOP) in 4K60. See here: https://***URL not allowed***/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/pic_05.jpg And it's not equivalent to 400Mbps H.264 at these high bitrates. The advantage of HEVC only shows at low bitrates. Dpreview says there is an extra 1.18x crop applied in 4K60, but not in 4K30.

Well I just created another tool, which does exactly that, it can combine/merge 3DLUTs: http://colorizer.net/index.php?op=lut_combiner It's in beta testing state, please tell me if you find any errors.

It's not a good idea to judge banding by youtube footage. If I apply more contrast to the youtube frame to show banding, this is what I get: Now if I go to vimeo and download the original ungraded version, and apply about the same contrast, this is what I get: And the original ungraded version uploaded to vimeo is still 8bit! In 10bit you will have even less banding.

It's still a great feature. But I remember reading that the X-T3 can do eye AF in video mode as well. We'll see about that when the AF tests pop up.

Gordon Laing's short touch AF test, transition is not smooth here: Also check the eye AF at 10:00 here, it seems to be much slower than the A7III:

Something wrong with your quote, that wasn't me But I agree completely.

Blowing the sun is not the problem, he tried to recover too much highlight detail, which creates a distracting, harsh edge around the blown-out parts.

While it's true that H.265 can have the same quality as H.264 with approx. 50% of the bitrate, it's only at low bitrates, like streaming. As far as I remember at such high bitrates like 400Mbps the difference would be almost non existent, but I can't show you any test at the moment that proves this, maybe someone else can.

4K 24p ProRes HQ = 754Mbps 4K 24p ProRes = 503Mbps 4K 24p ProRes LT = 350Mbps

According to the press release 4K60 is maxed at 200Mbps. This is from Slashcam, it explains everything pretty well:

[DCI 4K (4096 x 2160) ] 　59.94p/50p/29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p 400Mbps/200Mbps/100Mbps 59.94p/50p: up to approx. 20min. 29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p: up to approx. 30min [4K (3840 x 2160) ] 　59.94p/50p/29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p 400Mbps/200Mbps/100Mbps 59.94p/50p: up to approx. 20min. 29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p: up to approx. 30min [Full HD (2048 x 1080) ] 　59.94p/50p/29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p 200Mbps/100Mbps/50Mbps up to approx. 30min. [Full HD (1920 x 1080) ] 　59.94p/50p/29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p 200Mbps/100Mbps/50Mbps up to approx. 30min. [Full HD (1920 x 1080) High speed rec.] 120p / 100p 200Mbps(recording) up to approx. 6min. Recording movies in 400Mbps can be done with DCI4K/4K 29.97p/25p/24p/23.98p. DCI4K 59.94p/50p is not available when H.264 is selected.

To me it seems like 4K60 10bit 4:2:0 internal, and 4:2:2 external.

Thanks for mentioning QCTools, I didn't know about it and it seems to be an awesome tool for analyzing video.

No not RAW, I wanted to know if the Z6's 10bit 4:2:2 N-LOG over HDMI has these corrections.

Does anyone know if the in-body lens corrections (distortion, CA, vignetting) are applied to the HDMI feed as well?

Thanks a lot! I don't have a Fuji body at the moment, but I have some savings for the X-T3. If it turns out to be good then I'll make new LUTs. Until then visit my experimental project: http://colorizer.net/index.php?op=lut_contrast With this tool you can remove the contrast curve of a 3D LUT. With the method I use the curve of the Eterna LUT can't be removed without distortion of the RGB transformation, but you won't necessarily see it in real-life footage. Maybe try 50% strength or less.

Is it true that you can't use face detection when an external monitor is plugged in? Can anyone confirm?

Make sure you check the article as well, it has tons of comparison images and information.