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

[Django]

44 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Sorry, @Django, but while Eterna may certainly reduce the work involved in post (which BTW, I already said), Eterna was meant for greater creative flexibility when grading. It does not eliminate the need for grading. And unless you absolutely must have quick turnaround, a graded image will almost always be superior to an ungraded one. 

well that depends on one's grading skills, actual footage & what you're trying to achieve. there is not one single general rule to follow on this topic.. 

as for Eterna,  Fuji says it themselves: The film simulation "ETERNA" is designed to achieve the "Cinema Look" in one take.

I've tried it and it can absolutely render a deliverable SOOC image. it has the added benefit of allowing greater flexibility in post than the other sims, again, if one should need it. But it's not what it was designed for primarily. It was to give a more suitable cinematic film sim for video. It's basically a LUT. You'll want to shoot F-Log if you want the greatest flexibility in post.

[jonpais]

6 minutes ago, Django said:

well that depends on one's grading skills, actual footage & what you're trying to achieve. there is not one single general rule to follow on this topic.. 

as for Eterna,  Fuji says it themselves: The film simulation "ETERNA" is designed to achieve the "Cinema Look" in one take.

I've tried it and it can absolutely render a deliverable SOOC image. it has the added benefit of allowing greater flexibility in post than the other sims, again, if one should need it. But it's not what it was designed for primarily. It was to give a more suitable cinematic film sim for video. It's basically a LUT. You'll want to shoot F-Log if you want the greatest flexibility in post.

Eterna is a LUT? I think you are confused. There is a LUT, but we were talking about the film emulation.

[Django]

well the Eterna LUT for F-Log basically gives you the same result as the Eterna film simulation. So the film simulation can be viewed as an in-cam LUT.

anyways, just look up at the real world example of the music video project posted by @brianwahl for another take on the subject:

Quote

I shot it in Eterna, and honestly I did very little to the image. Just a tweak with white balance and contrast/saturation to taste. With my Sony cameras, this would have required 4-5 nodes using a LUT, color manipulation to lows/mids/highs, skin tone isolation/correction, etc.

 

Eterna doesn't require much of anything to deliver..

[BTM_Pix]

32 minutes ago, Django said:

 

@BTM_Pix My short experience with the X-H1 IBIS was that it was really solid when holding still or doing pans, walking is when you might notice some micro-adjustments but imo all IBIS systems somewhat fail when you start walking. it's what gimbals are made for. XH1 IBIS is still miles ahead of Sony FF imo..

I'm more concerned with the rolling shutter on XH1. it seemed to me worst than XT2 (borderling A6xxx). But maybe i'm wrong. Perhaps @frontfocus or someone could compare/measure it and report back to us on that.

The A7iii looked abysmal in one side by side I saw so, yeah, even accounting for the different sensor size the Fuji fares well in comparison.

I just don't like what I'm seeing it doing when it does hiccup though in that its almost like an entire frame has skipped. I mean, obviously it hasn't but its a similarly jarring thing.

There are a whole lot of things wrong with this Cameralabs test (not least the shutter speed) but watch for example from 18 seconds onwards at the blue wall on the left.

I've pulled out a sequence of frames here and there is a fair degree of sliding and warping in the image that troubles me and when I saw it in motion it looked like an unnatural jump between frames 2 and 3.

Yes, its not something I would do with it myself but I've seen quite a few examples of it doing this on less extreme motion.

I'm going to have to try one myself and see what its like.

[Django]

Yeah that warping is weird, i didn't experience anything like that. wonder if Gordon used warp stabilization in post or could that even be rolling shutter distortion?!

BTW, interestingly, the first comment in that video has to do with the previous subject matter:

Quote

Can we all just take a moment to appreciate how wonderful the Eterna film simulation is? Might make me use an X-H1 to shoot any projects that require quick turnaround and no time for grading. Also, you're the man Gordon! Jordan @ TCSTV

 

 

[BTM_Pix]

3 minutes ago, Django said:

Yeah that warping is weird, i didn't experience anything like that. wonder if Gordon used warp stabilization in post or could that even be rolling shutter distortion?!

 

 

All of his stuff is straight out of the camera so I think IBIS, rolling shutter and lens correction got together and had a party.

[Vladimir]

here is video that made my mind about x-h1 ibis:

and a comparsion with a7r3 where's a difference pronounced even more: 

 

I have seen someone saying there's only 40mbit/s for 120fps.

please can someone who already own x-h1 at hand confirm this? I wonder if this is a case for in-camera slowed down footage ( and then its kinda make a sense: 40 * (120/24) = 200)

[frontfocus]

4 hours ago, Django said:

I'm more concerned with the rolling shutter on XH1. it seemed to me worst than XT2 (borderling A6xxx). But maybe i'm wrong. Perhaps @frontfocus or someone could compare/measure it and report back to us on that.

I don‘t have a way to meassure it, but I can directly compare it to the X-T2. I‘ll probably do it tomorrow and report back

34 minutes ago, Vladimir said:

I have seen someone saying there's only 40mbit/s for 120fps.

please can someone who already own x-h1 at hand confirm this? I wonder if this is a case for in-camera slowed down footage ( and then its kinda make a sense: 40 * (120/24) = 200)

it records in 200Mbit/s. Depending on what recording frame rate as well as playbackframerate you choose, it reports back differently.

120fps shooting to 24fps (5 times slowmo) shows 40mbit/s (200/5)

if you record 120fps to 60fps it will show 100mbit/s and so on

[Matthew Hartman]

2 hours ago, Django said:

Yeah that warping is weird, i didn't experience anything like that. wonder if Gordon used warp stabilization in post or could that even be rolling shutter distortion?!

BTW, interestingly, the first comment in that video has to do with the previous subject matter:

 

It looks like good ole fashioned RS to me. WS does other weird crap when it confuses movement for scale. This is my eyes looks like a delay in the line reading. That being said, I've seen much worse on my NX1 and some Sony models. 

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, Vladimir said:

here is video that made my mind about x-h1 ibis:

and a comparsion with a7r3 where's a difference pronounced even more: 

 

I have seen someone saying there's only 40mbit/s for 120fps.

please can someone who already own x-h1 at hand confirm this? I wonder if this is a case for in-camera slowed down footage ( and then its kinda make a sense: 40 * (120/24) = 200)

Yeah, the second one was one of the ones I saw where I thought "Have you actually got IBIS enabled on the A7iii ?" and looking at the comments, I wasn't the only one !

In the first video though, whilst it obviously canes the A7iii again, I can still see the same sort of coarse changes.

If you look at between 2:07 and 2:10 just as an example, the water pipe does an abrupt move to the left from one frame to another.

I've pulled three frames here and done a difference overlay to show how it is transitioning from the first two frames (where nothing much but the bush is moving) to the one where it has to do some work and makes the jump. In the brickwork, there is slewing as might be expected but also some scaling changes that all adds up to a bit of a mess that I think is what is making it so jarring.

I'm not some mad pixel peeper as a rule but some of these transitions I'm seeing are very rough as are the less than subtle scaling changes even when its not being taxed too much.

 

21 minutes ago, Matthew Hartman said:

It looks like good ole fashioned RS to me. WS does other weird crap when it confuses movement for scale. This is my eyes looks like a delay in the line reading. That being said, I've seen much worse on my NX1 and some Sony models. 

Its like a Scooby Doo transition at times though

 

[Matthew Hartman]

8 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Yeah, the second one was one of the ones I saw where I thought "Have you actually got IBIS enabled on the A7iii ?" and looking at the comments, I wasn't the only one !

In the first video though, whilst it obviously canes the A7iii again, I can still see the same sort of coarse changes.

If you look at between 2:07 and 2:10 just as an example, the water pipe does an abrupt move to the left from one frame to another.

I've pulled three frames here and done a difference overlay to show how it is transitioning from the first two frames (where nothing much but the bush is moving) to the one where it has to do some work and makes the jump. In the brickwork, there is slewing as might be expected but also some scaling changes that all adds up to a bit of a mess that I think is what is making it so jarring.

I'm not some mad pixel peeper as a rule but some of these transitions I'm seeing are very rough as are the less than subtle scaling changes even when its not being taxed too much.

 

Its like a Scooby Doo transition at times though

 

That is good man.

[Attila Bakos]

@BTM_Pix I noticed this in many X-H1 IBIS videos, I believe the only solution is to hold it as steady as you can (ninja walking, no running) or use an additional gimbal, otherwise you will have these sudden corrections when the IBIS has no more room to hold the image in a fixed position. It's still better than IBIS on full frame.

[BTM_Pix]

37 minutes ago, Attila Bakos said:

@BTM_Pix I noticed this in many X-H1 IBIS videos, I believe the only solution is to hold it as steady as you can (ninja walking, no running) or use an additional gimbal, otherwise you will have these sudden corrections when the IBIS has no more room to hold the image in a fixed position. It's still better than IBIS on full frame.

Indeed. 

I wasn't expecting miracles from it but I suppose the rule of thumb is if you can see it working then its not really working as you need it to and its just too jarring for me.

The IBIS has gone from a deal maker to a deal breaker for me when it comes to switching from my X-T2 as it was really the single most compelling reason.

Still, its Fuji so it ain't over til the firmware fairy has been!

[Kisaha]

6 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Indeed. 

I wasn't expecting miracles from it but I suppose the rule of thumb is if you can see it working then its not really working as you need it to and its just too jarring for me.

The IBIS has gone from a deal maker to a deal breaker for me when it comes to switching from my X-T2 as it was really the single most compelling reason.

Still, its Fuji so it ain't over til the firmware fairy has been!

I know exactly 3 pros that own Fuji. Everybody is expecting the XT-3.

One of the biggest issues they have, among others, is batteries. They have to change a lot per day (and they never owned Sony I guess!).

My impression is that XT-3 will be a much nicer camera ready to compete at the higher end, while this one seems like an after-thought.

[Inazuma]

They may need to add settings to tone down the IBIS so that it doesn't make as many abrupt movements. I think other cameras with IBIS would benefit from this too.

[BTM_Pix]

3 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I know exactly 3 pros that own Fuji. Everybody is expecting the XT-3.

One of the biggest issues they have, among others, is batteries. They have to change a lot per day (and they never owned Sony I guess!).

My impression is that XT-3 will be a much nicer camera ready to compete at the higher end, while this one seems like an after-thought.

It certainly enjoys consuming batteries when its in boost mode thats for sure.

The good thing about the grip though is being able to power it externally if needs be.

6 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

They may need to add settings to tone down the IBIS so that it doesn't make as many abrupt movements. I think other cameras with IBIS would benefit from this too.

They make the AF pretty tuneable so hopefully they might do the same with the IBIS but there is a danger with that much tweakability you can end up in a bigger mess so I could understand why they wouldn't. 

[webrunner5]

8 hours ago, frontfocus said:

I have heard of it and I do know, that ISO has absolutely nothing to do with exposure. It's just gain. If you increase ISO for ETTR you are not exposing to the right, you are increasing gain to get brightness. Different things. And it's the other way round, what you loose in the highlight you can't get back, in the shadows you can get back a lot. That's just the way digital sensors work. Film was different and that's why many still talk about highlight roll off of film

 

 

Who said Anything about you have to use ISO for ETTR. I never said it. You seem to be the one who is confused. ETTR was devised by the founder of Luminous Landscape, Michael Reichmann, a Digital Camera web site, on How to expose digital cameras to get the best out of them. Has not a damn thing to do with film.

 

[jonpais]

ETTR means adjusting the iris and is most effective at base ISO. So no, you wouldn’t want to mess with your ISO settings.

[webrunner5]

I will admit that ETTR is Easier with photo mode than video Mode. You can't change your shutter speed to help with it. So that makes it harder. But you still need to push to over expose not under expose. It is really hard to get the best out of a Digital camera in Video mode. Plus if you are shooting Log you have to raise the ISO like it or not. My A7s is 3200 ISO min for S Log 2. Ouch.

[mercer]

ETTR means Expose To The Right. We have 3 in camera tools to do that... aperture, shutter speed and ISO. Since most filmmakers follow the 180 Degree rule, we have two ways... aperture and ISO.

Sure in a perfect world, you would keep the ISO as low as possible... or as close to the base ISO as possible and you would use lights or bounce boards to aid in your exposure... But we aren’t professional filmmakers shooting Hollywood films, so to completely abandon ISO as an exposure tool, seems ridiculous to me.

ISO is the digital equivalent of ASA. High speed film was invented for lowlight shooting and always had more grain. Sometimes you need to make sacrifices to get the shot. Obviously, your specific camera will dictate how far you can push your ISO from its base, and the further away from the base ISO, the less dynamic range you will have, but if you need to shoot in lowlight, you usually won’t need as much dynamic range anyway.