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

[anonim]

6 hours ago, Emanuel said:

@anonim@jonpais without mention more than an opinion their superior color science is a solid fact to everyone except those crippled by mother nature when only protanopia does them be unable to see...

 

Yes, very significant opinion... maybe just looks like little bit vulgar and achromatopsic.

[Emanuel]

Is this unique?

Is this the best Fuji?

Sure not.

As Don @webrunner5 wisely pointed out even though he forgets to apply the same criteria on his RAW love : D almost anything can be mimicked with talent and effort. The other perspective on their superior approach is how easy this is able to be reached or how close and far the failure or loss is straight out the box.

Art has no need to be complex. Certain vulgar or simple stuff as you wish works out more fluently lots of times LOL ;-)

[Matthew Hartman]

15 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

"The sensor readout of this raw Bayer frame is provided as uncompressed, 12 bit log ARRIRAW data" From Alexa website.

I think that Is the secret of Arri, Red, a Blackmagic camera is 12 bit, 14 bit Raw plain and simple. Look how good a ML 5D mk III is. It is the Raw, and at a higher bit rate to boot. And it is not sensor size either, look how good a BMPCC looks. When we get 12,14 bit Raw in one of these 3000 dollar or less DSLR's or Mirrorless cameras than I guess we really may have a mini Alexa for cheap. Now for Color Science in one, well you know and I know that is baked in each manufacturers camera, but with Raw we have a bit more latitude to alter it. And yes we do have cheap Raw, ProRes BM cameras, but not a Sony, or a Panny, or even this Fuji.

None of the above cameras, at least to me, are Razor sharp, they have smooth roll offs and soft edges in a good way, and somewhat muted colors. More Pastel than Kodachrome like.

Now Technicolor was over the top movie film wise. But a little bit of that went a long ways to me. I was more of a B&W movie guy to be honest.

I think you've come a lot closer to unpacking it in words than me. Great breakdown, much appreciated. 

Quote

None of the above cameras, at least to me, are Razor sharp, they have smooth roll offs and soft edges in a good way, and somewhat muted colors. More Pastel than Kodachrome like.

I do some 3D modeling, rendering, animation, etc. There's a parallel to what you just described in rendering as well. When you're going for hyper realism, you employ things like ambient occlusion, global lighting, soft raytraced shadows, etc. These properties give the model a more atmospheric/muted look and feel, smooth gradients, smooth rolloffs, etc. In fact, you often have to crank up your specular highlights for reflective/refractive surfaces with AO.  

Top render is without AO/ Bottom with:

 

[bigfried]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnV-fo8Wuk0

Is it me or is there a heck of a lot of moire throughpout this clip, and considerring this is a pro produced marketing hype they must have minimised it.

hair at 0.23

bag at 0.28

camera lens at 0.38

etc etc

[Matthew Hartman]

21 minutes ago, bigfried said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnV-fo8Wuk0

Is it me or is there a heck of a lot of moire throughpout this clip, and considerring this is a pro produced marketing hype they must have minimised it.

hair at 0.23

bag at 0.28

camera lens at 0.38

etc etc

The video looked really good playing in a condensed window. Once I went full screen, it was pretty soft with some considerable macroblocking. I can play other compressed 1080 videos/footage full screen on my 2k/10bit monitor and my 8bit 55" UHD 4K television from other cameras and it still holds up.

I'm thinking the h.264/200 Mbit is really crippling the image in this camera. I hope Fuji can address this is a firmware update. 8bit 4:2:0 in h.264 @ 200 Mbits (in 2018 no less) is not going to cut it for larger grades, they should have totally gone with HEVC @ 200 Mbit. Good thing the camera has good color, I would just shoot with the baked in colors. 

Wow, I'm surprised it looks so muddy in 1080. Reminds me of Canon before they went 4k. But man, those colors though. So rich. 

[Matthew Hartman]

22 hours ago, jonpais said:

Have you guys seen examples of stabilized footage yet? The IBIS is without question in a league of its own.

There were parts in the DP Review video that straight up looked like they put the camera on sticks. It was super impressive. 

[Attila Bakos]

1 hour ago, bigfried said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnV-fo8Wuk0

Is it me or is there a heck of a lot of moire throughpout this clip, and considerring this is a pro produced marketing hype they must have minimised it.

hair at 0.23

bag at 0.28

camera lens at 0.38

etc etc

I believe that's the new 120p mode, it looks very bad. I saw the same thing in all the 120p X-H1 videos I could find. There is a reason they left this out from the X-T2 which has the same processor. They kinda had to include it in the X-H1, but it's seems there's a price to it.

[Matthew Hartman]

Just now, Attila Bakos said:

I believe that's the new 120p mode, it looks very bad. I saw the same thing in all the 120p X-H1 videos I could find. There is a reason they left this out from the X-T2 which has the same processor. They kinda had to include it in the X-H1, but it's seems there's a price to it.

I can't wait to see the soon to be announced Samsung S9+ record 120 in UHD HEVC. In good light, it could actually be usable in certain situations. 

[Attila Bakos]

1 minute ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I can't wait to see the soon to be announced Samsung S9+ record 120 in UHD HEVC. In good light, it could actually be usable in certain situations. 

Don't want to hijack this thread, but holy shit, 120 in UHD HEVC, is this for real? The S8 maxes out at 30.

[Tim Sewell]

Fuji X Photographer Jonas Rask's somewhat, er, idiosyncratic X-H1 test vid: 

 

[Attila Bakos]

X-H1 F-Log test:

 

[Andrew Reid]

Nope, still not impressed with F-LOG.

A bunch of mashed oranges and blues.

None of this early footage has any punch to it.

[kidzrevil]

As far as color science is concerned, each camera is like its own film stock. Pick one with the colors and characteristics you like ! Oh & learn how to grade...even in 8 bit you have a decent amount of wiggle room to correct individual colors. As far as the data rate is concerned 200 mbps is more than sufficient. Thats like 5x the amount of data you need to stream 4K without compression artifacts. I think the X-H1 and any other camera made after 2016 is a great camera. Technology is advanced now and its only our creativity that needs to catch up.

[Attila Bakos]

F-Log out of the box is not that pleasing (not to everyone at least), it has a green tint when compared to the in-camera profiles. I used the X-T2 + BM Video Assist 4K to create LUTs for F-Log that emulate the film simulations of the camera (at -2 shadows, -2 highlights, -4 color). I don't know how my LUTs will work with the X-H1, but I've found one of the sources that was used in the Slashcam test, and applied my LUTs to it. Although I can't tell you how accurate they are, I can see that we'll have some room to grade before the footage breaks.

Original F-Log frame

F-Log + Provia LUT

F-Log + Velvia LUT

F-Log + Astia LUT

F-Log + Classic Chrome LUT

F-Log + Pro Neg Hi LUT

F-Log + Pro Neg Std LUT

Since I emulate the flattest in-camera settings, you need to apply some contrast and maybe saturation.

 

[anonim]

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nope, still not impressed with F-LOG.

A bunch of mashed oranges and blues.

None of this early footage has any punch to it.

Yes, but as I learned from this topic, what you called mashed oranges and blues is highly esteemed image and make huge impression to some masters who are not "crippled by mother nature" - to quote courteous Mr Emanuel. Very interesting experience: trying to express some doubts about Fuji color strategy - judging from these examples - results here as hardest blasphemy!

[deezid]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nope, still not impressed with F-LOG.

A bunch of mashed oranges and blues.

None of this early footage has any punch to it.

The outdoor shots look great to me. The indoor shots need some grading though.
Nice colors, dynamic range and no crazy overprocessing (like my GH5)

[Django]

On 2/18/2018 at 11:59 AM, Matthew Hartman said:

Am I off in saying I really don't care about a camera's particular color cast? I always grade my footage, always have. I started my career some 25 years ago in print as a graphic designer. I'm used to playing with color and I know color theory like the back of my hand. I just take care of it in post.

Isn't that what you all do as well? 

1

No. Personally, i find tricky shooting log on small 8-bit cameras with 3" displays and no proper exposure tools. Also certain types of jobs (interviews, run & gun etc) just don't warrant the time/budget or even necessity for extensive color grading. Not to mention not everyone has got years of color grading skills/experience despite the tools basically being free today..

This is when great color science, white balance, highlight roll-off and Fuji's film simulations & image settings come in useful for getting deliverable SOOC footage.

 

On 2/18/2018 at 11:53 AM, Matthew Hartman said:

But I think the issue is far more than just the sharpening algorithm in these cameras. Something in the quality of the motion. It's subtle, but there. Andrew Reid alluded to it earlier, I think it's difficult to put in words. I'd probably would have had to built the image sensor to be able to but that's way past my pay grade. I almost see a slight "flickering" (and no I'm not referring to LED/shutter speed) with these sub-$3000 cameras, regardless of brand. 

Also, images tend to look very "thin" or almost graphical and 2D/flat. There's a quality of depth/dimension in cameras like Ari, RED, BMD, etc. (even the pocket cinema camera) that these sub-$3000 cams just do not resolve most of the time. This has nothing to do with sharpness.

I want the God of knowledge and words to strike me right now! 

3

Do keep in mind people shooting on ARRI, RED, BMDs etc most often have expensive cine glass, lighting and DOP skills than the sub-$3K camera shooters.

Then you gotta factor in shooting Raw or ProRes on an optimized Super35 sensor at ideal base range ISOs.

Having intra-frame compression vs inter like on most sub-$3K cameras also helps leagues in motion. This is where 1DC,1DX2,5D4 shine imo.

 

 

[anonim]

2 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

As far as color science is concerned, each camera is like its own film stock. Pick one with the colors and characteristics you like ! Oh & learn how to grade...even in 8 bit you have a decent amount of wiggle room to correct individual colors. As far as the data rate is concerned 200 mbps is more than sufficient. Thats like 5x the amount of data you need to stream 4K without compression artifacts. I think the X-H1 and any other camera made after 2016 is a great camera. Technology is advanced now and its only our creativity that needs to catch up.

Indeed - but I think that about every sentence you wrote we all here have consensus... or not?

Where my question begin is: I'm trying to understand/learn what "camera film stock" is best suited for concrete task.

Soon I have to shoоt one short movie, about 30 min long or more and I'm willing to jump to Fuji x h1 if I find it has advances for my need. But, besides ergonomic question, I've so far found that concept of color usage of this camera is very interesting, attractive, suggestive and likable at first 1000 glances, but - after some time, color concept alone becomes the main actor in my eyes - too noticable, i. e. as we are not naturally involved in scene, but being aware that we are obviously in reproduction of scene. Something in reproduction starts to call attention to itself.

"Arguments" in form of statements that Fuji color science is universally recognized as good, and some others not - or, as @kidzrevil in quotes generously/tutorially suggest, that today all are equally good and - just we have to learn to pick and use them - doesn't help too much.

My simple conclusion so far regarding buying advice - if I have to shoot, say, music or presentation video, or fast informative documentary - this camera may suit for these purposes par excellence. For longer narative I'd rather choose camera with more neutral or "muted" color approach. Leaving aside questions of battery, codecs etc. - and question of post processing adaptability.

[mkabi]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Nope, still not impressed with F-LOG.

A bunch of mashed oranges and blues.

None of this early footage has any punch to it.

I really want to see you review this thing against other cams... don’t let these videos discourage you in anyway or form from doing a review on the x-h1.

May be it’s just F-log... who knows.... 

I mean... you didn’t like S-log either... bypassed it and went straight to HLG. May be it’s the same... you might not like the eterna profile either?

I know you called the X-T20 a beast (and that had a 10 min recording limit in UHD).... so you may like this cam too? Perhaps, in the other profiles? May be... let’s see?

let me remind you that you were bashing the 1DC too, when it first came out... mainly due to price.... but when it came down in price and you were able to really afford one through the used market... it’s become the baseline for 4K IQ...

Well... can’t say the same for the x-h1... but since it has pretty much the same hardware and then some additions (like IBIS, touch LCD, shoulder display, etc.) and way more video specs than the X-Pro2, X-T2, X-T20... I figure it has to be better than the X-T20, which you called a beast.

But, I need you to say it... It could be the Beast of beasts... lol

[jonpais]

@anonim Is there a Fuji dealer where you live?