The 4K Fuji X-T2 is here

[BTM_Pix]

7 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@BTM_Pix + @Inazuma + @j-oc

Thank you for answering! Now a last question: I use for such extreme low light (and low contrast) scenarios the D750 - it "can see" and focus in the dark (for stills)...
Some weeks ago, I had the D500 of a buddy of mine in my hands and was very impressed concerning the focusing ability (exceptional) in the dark (for stills)...

So is someone out there who owns the D750/D500 and could say something about a focusing comparison with a X-T2?

BTW: The A6500 with a 35mm 1.8 lens fails in many of my tests very often, when comparing to the focusing abilities (in the dark) of the D750/D500. Please consider, we are not talking about IQ or FF vs APS-C, but only about focusing ability in low light/low contrast for moving subjects when taking photos.

Thank you!

I have a D500 and XT-2 on my desk right now.

Let me turn the lights off and get back to you 

[Arikhan]

@j-oc

Quote

I used to own a D750. In terms of pure extreme low-light and low-contrast focusing ability it is better than the X-series cameras. With that said, even though I am a professional performing arts photographer and really appreciate the power to focus in the dark, I still prefer the Fuji.

Yeah, the D750 is (in its price range) an exceptional camera for focusing in low light and very low contrast. But in these situations it's hard to get "art stills", because of the dark. Photography is all about light and not darkness...;-)

But it's still very useful for some situations to rely on an AF capable to "see in the dark"....The D750 beats (when talking AF in the dark) even the 5D m3. Only the 6D can hold up with it (and only with the center cross)...

I like the Fuji too...not from the beginning on because of my false post production (RAW). When using Adobe, it's hard to get the best out of the RAWs. After beginning to use Photo Ninja, things got MUCH better...So now I'm considering to buy one with the additional grip and some lenses. But when holding it  in my hands, I didn't have the time to test it in low light...

@BTM_Pix

Quote

 

I have a D500 and XT-2 on my desk right now.

Let me turn the lights off and get back to you 

 

It would be a great help....Thank you very much!

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, Arikhan said:

 

@BTM_Pix

It would be a great help....Thank you very much!

OK, I've done a basic little test.

Its tricky to do it exactly equivalent because of lens variances etc and my range of X mount lenses is limited compared to my Nikons but anyway.

The test 'scene' was a bedroom with a tiny fragment of outside light, an empty clear mineral water bottle stood on a beige duvet cover with a plain light coloured wall behind. 

So it was low light and not much for the AF to grab hold of as the more distinct contrast points were the creases on the duvet cover!

The illumination level at the bottle was 2 lux according to my Sekonic.

Exposure for the cameras was ISO 12800, f3.2, 1/50th.

On the D500 I used a Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED FX and on the XT-2 the closest thing I've got to that which is the XF18-55 f2.8-4.

Not doing the Fuji any favours really by putting a mid-range kit lens against one of Nikon's holy trinity but I'm guessing you'd sooner have a less than ideal case scenario anyway.

Also, I've used the Nikon 24-70 for years in every permutation of light and environment you can imagine so I'm comfortable with using it as the benchmark in this instance.

The test was to manually set lenses to infinity (so they had to do some work), switch AF on and then swing around to the bottle in centre frame and fire.

The results were that there wasn't a massive amount of difference to be honest.

Both of them locked in as short a period of time as to leave me comfortable that if I was ever in a scenario where I had to shoot an empty water bottle in a virtually dark room that I wouldn't miss a second of the action.

Neither of them hunted particularly. The majority of the time you could hear the motors had only gone in one direction without overshooting and coming back. Very occasionally they'd go back again but they both did it and never more than one overshoot. 

Where the Fuji scored big though of course is with the EVF you could actually see what it was you were shooting whereas of course with the OVF of the D500 you're virtually blind in that scenario.

Changing lenses out on the Fuji to the 35mm f1.4 and the 50-230 f5.6 was a different issue though.

The 35mm was the worse of the two and would almost always overshoot at least once whereas the 50-230 would generally just do it once.

So, all in all, even with the right lens, its marginally slower than the D500 and even with the wrong lens it will get you there without too many overshoots if you happen to find yourself shooting in conditions where, to be fair, you might want to re-think whether its a video camera you need or a thermal imaging one.

How this test would have gone if the water bottle had decided to get up and run around and which one would track the better I don't know.

But from the actual real jobs I've been doing with the XT-2 the past couple of weeks, I wouldn't be massively concerned about that either.

[Django]

ex-D750 owner, current 5D3/XT2 user. out of the three, 5D3 is by far my favorite stills cam for overall AF performance. D750 might have the edge in low-light situations but I use speed lights with AF assist anyways for those cases (D750 does rock in shadow recovery).  XT2 is far far behind in AF and flash options. I'd never use it in any kind of demanding situation. In fact I've been kinda disappointed in it for photography vs DSLR FF but that's a different story.. I'm using it mainly for video. Am looking forward to all the AF enhancements the new firmware should bring..

[Stathman]

12 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

I was going to do another one today about a couple of lenses on different formats but fuck that.

First of all, thanks for taking the time to do the comparison between the lenses and for posting the results here!

This is what about the forum exists. 

Don't be discouraged or disappointed by the different point of view of other people.

Some others do really appreciate what is kindly offering here.

PS. Sorry for my terrible english, i hope you can get the point. 

[Trek of Joy]

17 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

What the fuck?

You never get statements like that?

I tell you what I never get mate.

I never get people who don't read exactly what has been written, especially when all of the differences were clearly qualified, before they toddle off to Grandma's with an egg sucking tutorial.

I should go and shoot a basketball game or indoor/night sport??

Hahaha

Did you see the part where it said I couldn't use it for my day job?

Did you see my other post literally two posts earlier about the 50-140 ?!?

The one that contained the ISO5000 1/2000th f2.8 photograph that I'd taken 3000 metres up in the Sierra Nevadas at -5 degrees at the FIS World Championships?

My day job is a professional editorial sports photographer so, rest assured, I'm fairly au fait with the whole light/aperture/shutter speed thingy and because I shoot in all weathers and all environments I'm also acutely aware of why things that can perform under all those circumstances and withstand that punishment cost a few quid more.

What I'm also acutely aware of is that not everyone needs that and not everyone can afford it either so I thought I'd do a quick comparison because I had both to hand so that people who needed some reach could see what could be had for a much smaller outlay if they could live with the compromises that I'd clearly listed.

I was going to do another one today about a couple of lenses on different formats but fuck that.

\

I didn't see your other post. Given your response, I won't bother. Enjoy your camera.

Cheers

[j-oc]

15 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

OK, I've done a basic little test.

Its tricky to do it exactly equivalent because of lens variances etc and my range of X mount lenses is limited compared to my Nikons but anyway.

The test 'scene' was a bedroom with a tiny fragment of outside light, an empty clear mineral water bottle stood on a beige duvet cover with a plain light coloured wall behind. 

So it was low light and not much for the AF to grab hold of as the more distinct contrast points were the creases on the duvet cover!

The illumination level at the bottle was 2 lux according to my Sekonic.

Exposure for the cameras was ISO 12800, f3.2, 1/50th.

On the D500 I used a Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED FX and on the XT-2 the closest thing I've got to that which is the XF18-55 f2.8-4.

Not doing the Fuji any favours really by putting a mid-range kit lens against one of Nikon's holy trinity but I'm guessing you'd sooner have a less than ideal case scenario anyway.

Also, I've used the Nikon 24-70 for years in every permutation of light and environment you can imagine so I'm comfortable with using it as the benchmark in this instance.

The test was to manually set lenses to infinity (so they had to do some work), switch AF on and then swing around to the bottle in centre frame and fire.

The results were that there wasn't a massive amount of difference to be honest.

Both of them locked in as short a period of time as to leave me comfortable that if I was ever in a scenario where I had to shoot an empty water bottle in a virtually dark room that I wouldn't miss a second of the action.

Neither of them hunted particularly. The majority of the time you could hear the motors had only gone in one direction without overshooting and coming back. Very occasionally they'd go back again but they both did it and never more than one overshoot. 

Where the Fuji scored big though of course is with the EVF you could actually see what it was you were shooting whereas of course with the OVF of the D500 you're virtually blind in that scenario.

Changing lenses out on the Fuji to the 35mm f1.4 and the 50-230 f5.6 was a different issue though.

The 35mm was the worse of the two and would almost always overshoot at least once whereas the 50-230 would generally just do it once.

So, all in all, even with the right lens, its marginally slower than the D500 and even with the wrong lens it will get you there without too many overshoots if you happen to find yourself shooting in conditions where, to be fair, you might want to re-think whether its a video camera you need or a thermal imaging one.

How this test would have gone if the water bottle had decided to get up and run around and which one would track the better I don't know.

But from the actual real jobs I've been doing with the XT-2 the past couple of weeks, I wouldn't be massively concerned about that either.

Thanks for actually taking the time to do this. Kudos to you to for providing some real world data.

I don't have my D750 anymore and didn't do any side by side testing by my impressions were that at the very darkest light levels it would track movement better than the Fuji, but as BTM points out we are basically talking about complete darkness at this point so unless you are photographing there all the time either would probably suit you. Rent them and try?

8 hours ago, Django said:

ex-D750 owner, current 5D3/XT2 user. out of the three, 5D3 is by far my favorite stills cam for overall AF performance. D750 might have the edge in low-light situations but I use speed lights with AF assist anyways for those cases (D750 does rock in shadow recovery).  XT2 is far far behind in AF and flash options. I'd never use it in any kind of demanding situation. In fact I've been kinda disappointed in it for photography vs DSLR FF but that's a different story.. I'm using it mainly for video. Am looking forward to all the AF enhancements the new firmware should bring..

I could never get on with the 5Ds autofocus system. It's not that it's not powerful, but I found it very inconsistent. Sometimes not locking at all, sometimes giving false confirmation. That lack of predictability did not inspire confidence, but many many people love it so I'm willing to accept I might be partially to blame here.

[Arikhan]

@BTM_Pix

Thank you very much for your efforts! Quintessence (as I understand your experience): There is not much difference between the D500 and the X-T2 concerning focusing in very low light on not fast moving subjects.

@Django

Quote

XT2 is far far behind in AF and flash options. I'd never use it in any kind of demanding situation.

Thank you for sharing your experience concerning the difference between D750 and the X-T2! 

Quote

In fact I've been kinda disappointed in it for photography vs DSLR FF but that's a different story.

Yep...Technology moved on during the past years, but there is still a big difference between APS-C and FF in many aspects...shooting moving subjects in poor light conditions is only one aspect of the story....

@j-oc

Quote

It's not that it's not powerful, but I found it very inconsistent.

That's why (+ the poor shadow recovery and poor DR) I switched - for stills - to Nikon. The 5D m3 is a great camera (I sold all my Canon cameras - 1D line, 5D x line - except my first Canon camera 400d and the 7D, keeping these because of nostalgy) but for my needs the D750 is much more better (AF constancy, DR, etc.). The 5D m3 had (not only for me) a minimum of double as many misfocused shots as the D750 (not only in low light) when shooting moving subjects on location with high requiremets in detail.

Some buddys told me, the 5D m4 would be much more consistant when talking AF and DR, but finally the Canon photo game is over for me.

[Inazuma]

@Arikhan ive never used the d500/d750 but i did some testing of the xt2 last night in my back garden. With the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 it was able to lock focus on things i could barely see. With the 18-55 it wasnt nearly as successful. When i had the 23mm f2 wr, it was even a bit faster to lock on to low light subjects than the 1.4. 

[Arikhan]

@Inazuma

Quote

ive never used the d500/d750 but i did some testing of the xt2 last night in my back garden. With the 24 1.4 and 35 1.4 it was able to lock focus on things i could barely see. With the 18-55 it wasnt nearly as successful. When i had the 23mm f2 wr, it was even a bit faster to lock on to low light subjects than the 1.4. 

Stills or video? Or both? Thank you for sharing your experience!

[Inazuma]

43 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@Inazuma

Stills or video? Or both? Thank you for sharing your experience!

You're welcome. Was only testing stills but video is usually pretty equal

[Django]

13 hours ago, j-oc said:

I could never get on with the 5Ds autofocus system. It's not that it's not powerful, but I found it very inconsistent. Sometimes not locking at all, sometimes giving false confirmation. That lack of predictability did not inspire confidence, but many many people love it so I'm willing to accept I might be partially to blame here.

AF system preference can be somewhat subjective depending on what/how you shoot. I use single point / back-button focus methods so the 5D3's joystick, wider AF point spread and it's much higher number of cross-type points (41 vs 15 on the D750) gives me a lower miss-focus rate. also love the quick toggle from single to continuous via DoF button. This specific configuration and shooting style gives me great confidence and results on stressful and unpredictable scenarios like weddings, kids, events etc..

One of the things I hate most about XT2 ergonomics is the 3-way AF mode front switch. I'm always fumbling around for it and ending up in the wrong mode. I'd rather just a 2-way switch and manual override on the lens like Canikon. YMMV.

[j-oc]

1 hour ago, Django said:

AF system preference can be somewhat subjective depending on what/how you shoot. I use single point / back-button focus methods so the 5D3's joystick, wider AF point spread and it's much higher number of cross-type points (41 vs 15 on the D750) gives me a lower miss-focus rate. also love the quick toggle from single to continuous via DoF button. This specific configuration and shooting style gives me great confidence and results on stressful and unpredictable scenarios like weddings, kids, events etc..

One of the things I hate most about XT2 ergonomics is the 3-way AF mode front switch. I'm always fumbling around for it and ending up in the wrong mode. I'd rather just a 2-way switch and manual override on the lens like Canikon. YMMV.

It sounds like you and I have completely different ergonomic brains! I used to use the 5D in continuous focus via the shutter half press and could never get it to behave predictably. By contrast with the D750, cross points or no, once I figured out how the AF worked it was really easy to adapt camera movements, triggering the AF, timing of the shutter release etc to get what I was after.

And I love that 3 way selector! It feels natural to me to have single farthest away from me, manual closest and continuous a click in either direction.

Its cool how we both love the thing that drives the other crazy. Moral of the story: rent before you buy.

[Trek of Joy]

12 hours ago, Django said:

One of the things I hate most about XT2 ergonomics is the 3-way AF mode front switch. I'm always fumbling around for it and ending up in the wrong mode. I'd rather just a 2-way switch and manual override on the lens like Canikon. YMMV.

The new FW update might help with that a bit since Fuji is enabling refocus while recoding. Looks like we'll be able to replicate what I did the with A7rII - use the BB AF to refocus while recording - with the added bonus of being able to move the AF point a lot easier. Face detection with PADF should (*fingers crossed*) be a boost as well.

[Phil A]

I have seen some videos shot in ClassicChrome by Michael Evans and that must have been some of the best colors I've seen ever. Skin tones were

a thing of art. Amount of blown highlights was a thing of horrors though.

Makes me wonder how ClassicChrome with highlight and shadow reduction might be as a base for grading? Obviously less DR than F-Log / ProN all -5 / SLog but the colors on those shots were gorgeous.

But then no IBIS and no OIS with the lenses I like and I have really shaky hands.

 

[jonpais]

24 minutes ago, Phil A said:

I have seen some videos shot in ClassicChrome by Michael Evans and that must have been some of the best colors I've seen ever. Skin tones were

a thing of art. Amount of blown highlights was a thing of horrors though.

Makes me wonder how ClassicChrome with highlight and shadow reduction might be as a base for grading? Obviously less DR than F-Log / ProN all -5 / SLog but the colors on those shots were gorgeous.

But then no IBIS and no OIS with the lenses I like and I have really shaky hands.

 

Kind of non-photography. Anyhow, Classic Chrome with highlights -2 and shadows -2 gives you a pretty nice flat image to work with, maybe not like Panasonic Natural with everything dialed down to -5, but it's definitely gradeable. I shake like the devil too, so I never take the X-T2 out without either a gimbal or a sturdy tripod. 

[Phil A]

6 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Kind of non-photography. 

?

[jonpais]

@Phil A Here are a couple screen grabs straight out of the camera, Classic Chrome H -2, S -2.

[BTM_Pix]

Anyone used the battery grip with the X-t2?

I didn't bother getting it for my initial trial shoots as I wanted to see what the camera could do on its own and the whole point for me is to reduce size so didn't want to end up with it being as big as my D5 etc. Plus, well, you know...£300!!

Anyway, as I'm keeping the system (and the battery life is poor for what I'm doing) I've been softening on the idea.

And as luck would have it, I'm at the airport and for once the tax free shop has an actual saving (it's "only" £250) so I've took the plunge.

I'll test it tomorrow and see if the promised AF improvements are significant.

As per previous tests, this will be done in the dark obviously

[jonpais]

25 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Anyone used the battery grip with the X-t2?

I didn't bother getting it for my initial trial shoots as I wanted to see what the camera could do on its own and the whole point for me is to reduce size so didn't want to end up with it being as big as my D5 etc. Plus, well, you know...£300!!

Anyway, as I'm keeping the system (and the battery life is poor for what I'm doing) I've been softening on the idea.

And as luck would have it, I'm at the airport and for once the tax free shop has an actual saving (it's "only" £250) so I've took the plunge.

I'll test it tomorrow and see if the promised AF improvements are significant.

As per previous tests, this will be done in the dark obviously

I purchased the VPB with the camera, and I think it's great - plus, there's more to hold on to. I think it's kind of necessary for video work. 

I found this over at FujiRumors:

Fujinon XF 50mm F2 WR Vs. XF 56mm F1.2

Jordan just shared his XF50mmF2 Vs. XF56mmF1.2 comparison at admiringlight here:

“both are very good lenses. The 56mm f/1.2 is sharper at similar apertures over most of the frame, though the 50mm f/2 is a touch sharper at the edges at f/2. Bokeh is a fairly close race, and as both are quite sharp, and both have nice renderings, I’d consider the other factors when choosing between the two.”

Which is absolute BS. Check out the charts from lenstip.com (note: performance is slightly better on the X-T2. These are with the X-E1)