Fuji X-H1. IBIS, Phase Detect 4K beast?

[Castorp]

I read the Andrew Smallman post and can not disagree more. I don’t understand why that perspective is relevant in a thread about Fujifilm cameras. If one doesn’t like these ergonomics there is almost literally every other manufacturer on the market. 

 Camera ergonomics are a subjective thing. Different people work best with different types of tools. 

The XH1 certainly pushes the envelope in that it is a fantastic photo camera firstly but also a fantastic video camera. The A7riii might be better but it’s in a different price class. Especially when factoring in lenses. 

The GH5 isn’t nearly as good a stills camera and the A6500 isn’t even close for lots of reasons. 

Olympus comes closest but again, not as good a photo camera in my mind. 

 

[anonim]

13 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:

Canon (or any other) can't sell you the camera you don't buy. 

Thanks for clarification - but as I already confessed, I'm, in fact and sadly, a boiled frog - but I know that there are around also strong human characters with resisting anti-frog capability

[Yurolov]

4 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I like the colors, they do look good,  but better suited for V loggers, Docs, Interviewers. But for a Cine look, just like a lot of cameras, it is too good. I can't say it looks no more Digital than a GH5, the A7r mk II does in 4k. I do think the GH5s is a bit better for some reason, more like the original Sony A7s. I have not seen a 1080p output on the new Fuji.

Like I have said, I just don't think hardly any of the cameras that are Not pure Cine cameras have a Filmic, Cine look to them in 4k. They look Digital. And I guess unless we are capable of spending 8 grand or more for a camera that shoots Raw, other than a ML Canon, or a BM camera in ProRes or Raw we are going to have to live with it. It seems now in this day and age Raw is the only way to get a good look in anything @ 2k or above. That is the way I see it as of this time.

But this new Fuji does seem like it is going to have some nice output for a lot of "Normal" people and most of the tools they will need, not all, but it will get the job done.  And since I am not Normal I am not buying it LoL.

I agree with this. I said it before and was attacked. It is hard grading anything to a professional standard that isn't shot in raw, or close to it. The codec is too weak even in the gh5 for a professional production that requires any kind of heavy duty grading or keying. That's not to say you can't shoot cinema on a gh5 but it wouldnt be most people's first choice as the footage isn't cinematic, and the Fuji in my eyes less so. For productions that require a more digital look and less severe grading and keying  it does fine and is a great camera with a robust codec and a good look. 

The industry standard is the Alexa and that's an expensive camera. If you are shooting digital that is more often than not what you are using if you are doing a serious narrative (see recent article on cameras used in Sundance). That's not to say other cameras can't be used but I think the Alexa most correctly emulates the look of film.

That's why I think canon strikes a nice balance so far for cameras that can be used at the next step down; that is, if they get 4k into their mirrorless range. The Fuji misses the mark on the autofocus and he IQ isn't quite as good as the canons its gh5s IMO. 

[jonpais]

In April of 2017, Veydra announced they would be releasing X-mounts for the Fuji system, but almost a year later, and we've yet to see any footage online shot with their Mini-Primes and a Fuji camera. So I went ahead and ordered a set of three five days ago. They still haven't shipped to the best of my knowledge. Curious just to see whether they really even exist! Anyhow, if and when they ever arrive, I'll try to do some tests and share. 

[Inazuma]

Most of the videos so far don't really show off Fuji's IQ I must admit. I think it's because most of the footage put out is from that Eterna profile, which is a not a very interesting or impressive profile.

However, having shot with many cameras under the $3000 range (from a Nikon d5200 to a Canon C100 II and many in between) I can attest to Fuji having the most pleasent image of them all. 

I mean just look at this. Shot with the XT2 with  35mm f1.4 and classic chrome

 

[Yurolov]

45 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

Most of the videos so far don't really show off Fuji's IQ I must admit. I think it's because most of the footage put out is from that Eterna profile, which is a not a very interesting or impressive profile.

However, having shot with many cameras under the $3000 range (from a Nikon d5200 to a Canon C100 II and many in between) I can attest to Fuji having the most pleasent image of them all. 

I mean just look at this. Shot with the XT2 with  35mm f1.4 and classic chrome

 

Ye, that looks good. It may well be the profile, you are right. But the motion is alos nicer and it has a nice creamy look to it (maybe from the lens?). I know the 35 1.4 is meant to have quite a bit of character. 

[mkabi]

I said it before and I will say it again…. Lets wait for the camera to get into more capable hands.

More than half the footage coming out… I don't know, may its user error, but they don't look right.

Including that Japanese footage.

With that said, this is the only one I saw with the 4K Eterna at 200mbps that looked half decent, and even then I don't think they pushed the image to any degree:

 

[mechanicalEYE]

 

 

 

[jonpais]

That was crazy good.

[mkabi]

2 minutes ago, jonpais said:

That was crazy good.

Hell yeah.... theCameraStoreTV really brought it this time. 

[webrunner5]

This sounds like Fuji did a half ass job on a lot of stuff they should not have done.

https://***URL removed***/reviews/fujifilm-x-h1-first-impressions-review/4

[jonpais]

Waving a hand in front of the EVF blacks out an external monitor unless you tilt the LCD. 

[DBounce]

35 minutes ago, mechanicalEYE said:

 

Watch this scene back to back with the scene from Collateral, you will be unimpressed. As a reproduction is lacks the dynamic of the original scene. They might have tried using a dolly, or slider. Also, the image looks too sharp and digital... lacks the organic look of the original. I do still like the camera, and I feel it was a great effort on the part of The Camera store, but the original work is head and shoulder beyond this. 

Just keeping it real.

[mkabi]

For anyone thats interested. TCSTV is having a live talk about the XH-1 here:

 

[webrunner5]

The Audio on the guy from Fuji just sucks ass. I could not stand listening to it. Who in the hell did they have to do audio, Buggs Bunny??

[jonpais]

i

[Django]

23 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Watch this scene back to back with the scene from Collateral, you will be unimpressed. As a reproduction is lacks the dynamic of the original scene. The might have tried using a dolly, or slider. Also, the image looks too sharp and digital... lacks the organic look of the original. I do still like the camera, and I feel it was a great effort on the part of The Camera store, but the original work is head and shoulder beyond this. 

Just keeping it real.

valid observations but let's keep in mind the original scene was shot on 35mm film using Panavision Primo primes costing around 6-digit figures.. vs. a $3K f2.9 zoom on a 4K sensor.. so apple & raisin bran imo

i think most interesting is to see here how this 8-bit 200mbps FLOG holds up in grading and like the colorist said how good the highlight roll-off is..

these are typically things you won't get from reading a specs sheet.

 

 

[jonpais]

Considering the original film cost $105,000,000, I’d say they did a good job.

[Prandi]

...

 

[Andrew Reid]

I'm not blown away with the first footage to come from this camera.

Considering the codec is 200Mbit, seems to look quite thin, with poor tonality. Not sure the motion cadence is right either. X-T2 had an issue there.

I wonder if people are driving it too flat for 8bit, maybe F-LOG and poor grading is to blame.

Fuji's colour usually impresses me a lot more.

People often say the NX1 has a weak codec.

When it came out, the criticism was justifiable. Now however... full 360 turn-around. NX1 H.265 is now hardware accelerated in MacOS High Sierra, playback is flawless even on a laptop. Spacebar to preview works in Finder and even the thumbnails. With the hack installed and H.265 set to 120Mbit, it's reliable as fuck to a decent SD card. Half the file sizes of H.264 or double the quality at the same bitrate as H.264. Effectively I am shooting with a 240Mbit codec, from 6K readout, on one of the most responsive and ergonomic cameras ever made.

Fuji are going to have to do better than the X-H1 to win me over fully... And nobody has mentioned the rolling shutter yet. If it is anything like the A6500 then that's a major advantage to the GH5! I will try one out though and do the review.

I get mixed results from Fuji in terms of colour and dynamic range. I prefer the colour of the Samsung NX1 to Fuji in fact, which is surprising. I do like classic chrome and the film simulations but the NX1 on standard colour just has a spark... very electric, Canon-like.