Fuji X-T3 and X-T4 discussion

[androidlad]

7 minutes ago, Attila Bakos said:

Just did a very non scientific power bank test with the X-T3. I fully charged the battery inside the camera with the factory charger, and I wanted to see how much time it takes until 1 unit on the camera display's battery level indicator is lost when using 4K60 recording (and boost mode turned on) with a power bank attached:

Anker 20000 PD: 25 mins until heat warning, I decided to stop the test there, indicator still showed full battery
Asus ZenPower 10050 (no PD on this one, just a regular power bank): 17 mins
No power bank attached: 13 mins

It seems it's a good idea to get a power bank with PD support. Actually this is what Fuji recommends as well.

Scientific tests from Fujifilm website:

[mercer]

I prefer Atilla’s real world test. 

[bsalisbury]

1 hour ago, Attila Bakos said:

I only tried 10bit 4K25 files from my X-T3, but they play just fine in Resolve.

Do you mean Davinci Resolve Studio. The 10 bit files don't play in the (my) free version which is not unexpected.

[DBounce]

2 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Y'all are needlessly confusing yourselves.

These lenses are listed in their actual focal lengths. These numbers are a property of the optical system, independent of whatever camera they're being used on.

The field of view these lenses give IS affected by the sensor size of the camera they're mounted to, but that does not change the focal length of the lens--only the effective field of view.

Also, no one in the cinema world "translates" their focal lengths to full frame. 18-55 is 18-55. 

I think FOV would be a better indicator. 

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Y'all are needlessly confusing yourselves.

These lenses are listed in their actual focal lengths. These numbers are a property of the optical system, independent of whatever camera they're being used on.

The field of view these lenses give IS affected by the sensor size of the camera they're mounted to, but that does not change the focal length of the lens--only the effective field of view.

Also, no one in the cinema world "translates" their focal lengths to full frame. 18-55 is 18-55. 

Exactly. 

I reckon the average person should just ignore the entire concept (even though it is a simple one! But then again I've got a degree in math, and optics) of "crop factor"! As clearly this concept seems to do more harm than good. 

 

[Emanuel]

7 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But then again I've got a degree in math, and optics

What a combo, man... Slide like it's butter : -D

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

I think FOV would be a better indicator. 

Why print that on a lens? As it would constantly change, depending on what camera you put the lens on. 

At least focal lengths stay constant, as they're an inherent trait of the lens itself. 

 

5 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

What a combo, man... Slide like it's butter : -D

Mostly it seems pretty useless, as 99.9% of the time I never use anything from it. But just sometimes sometimes it comes in handy, as my math/physics background does make it fairly effortless to understand many technical concepts. 

 

[Attila Bakos]

6 hours ago, bsalisbury said:

Do you mean Davinci Resolve Studio. The 10 bit files don't play in the (my) free version which is not unexpected.

Oh yes I'm using the Studio version.

[DBounce]

I think I might be becoming a Fuji fan. The XT3 is the first Fuji camera I have owned,  and I'm left wondering how they kept under my radar for so long. It's honestly one of the most fun to shoot cameras I have ever used. So much so that I don't care about any of the upcoming cameras... they don't excite me.  That might change as more details come out, but for now I'm curious what the XH2 will bring,  while the new medium format beast... the GFX-100 sounds very interesting also. 

I heard recently that Fuji have become the number two mirrorless brand worldwide. After seeing how aggressive they are with the advancements in this newest offering,  I can't say I'm surprised. 

[frontfocus]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

It's honestly one of the most fun to shoot cameras I have ever used.

If you think the X-T3 is fun. don't get a X100, that one is addictive! (but for video)

[eyesuncloudedphoto]

10 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

That lens is absolutely nuts. I got mine a few months ago (16-55mm F2.8) and initially used it on the X-H1. It has sharpness like a Cooke S4i. Yet it's a zoom, for a consumer camera. I don't know what Fuji did here but that's some seriously impressive optics. Sharper than the Sigma 18-35mm and smaller, lighter. The AF is practically instantaneous not to mention silent, it's been flawless on the X-T3 so far.

Review is half way done for the X-T3 but having an EOS R and Z7 to compare it to has slowed things down. Still, should have it done by early next week.

I wouldn't say the 16-55 is sharper than the Sigma in "absolute" terms; have used both the Nikon and Canon versions on Fuji cameras, as well as the GH5. both with speedboosters and dummy adapters. The point is, the 16-55 is perfectly matched to the X-Trans sensor, can't put my finger on it, could be micro contrast, color rendering or whatever. The end result is, it produces a magnificent image, both for video and stills.

Speaking of the AF, hell yes, it's bloody instant. This is true of other linear motor Fujinons also. I tested the X-T3 with the lowly 15-45 yesterday, a lens you can pick-up for 150 euros new, in some places, and it's tiny and feather-weight. It has an electronic focus ring that provides a smooth zooming action, and AF is so fast that it fools you into thinking it's parfocal. 

I'm preparing a review of the X-T3 for (probably) the next 10 days or so; although I fried the X-H1 in a previous review, I think the X-T3 is the bomb. Shame Fujifilm couldn't hold on and release the X-H1 with these exact same specs, instead of hurrying it to the market and having to face the marketing onslaught of the a7iii.

 

10 hours ago, Attila Bakos said:

Just did a very non scientific power bank test with the X-T3. I fully charged the battery inside the camera with the factory charger, and I wanted to see how much time it takes until 1 unit on the camera display's battery level indicator is lost when using 4K60 recording (and boost mode turned on) with a power bank attached:

Anker 20000 PD: 25 mins until heat warning, I decided to stop the test there, indicator still showed full battery
Asus ZenPower 10050 (no PD on this one, just a regular power bank): 17 mins
No power bank attached: 13 mins

It seems it's a good idea to get a power bank with PD support. Actually this is what Fuji recommends as well.

Thank you for that! Great info!

Speaking of batteries, I did a quick test of the 126S on the X-T3, and findings were surprising. 

In the X-T2 and X-H1, the battery lasted somewhere between 40 and 50 minutes in video. The X-T3 managed one hour, 20 minutes continuous recording (here is a screenshot of the last frame of my test video). This was 4K 100mbps recording, completely static (so no AF), and, although it's far from the ~2.5 hours on the GH5, it's still much better than the previous situation. They probably did some magic with the power circuit in this camera. Worthy of note that the battery indicator was very accurate; in fact it remained on red for more than 20 minutes (whereas in previous cameras it would turn red and after a couple of minutes die suddenly). Have also to note that the camera started overheating (not to an alarming degree though, and no protection circuit kicking in). 

[androidlad]

48 minutes ago, eyesuncloudedphoto said:

I wouldn't say the 16-55 is sharper than the Sigma in "absolute" terms; have used both the Nikon and Canon versions on Fuji cameras, as well as the GH5. both with speedboosters and dummy adapters. The point is, the 16-55 is perfectly matched to the X-Trans sensor, can't put my finger on it, could be micro contrast, color rendering or whatever. The end result is, it produces a magnificent image, both for video and stills.

Speaking of the AF, hell yes, it's bloody instant. This is true of other linear motor Fujinons also. I tested the X-T3 with the lowly 15-45 yesterday, a lens you can pick-up for 150 euros new, in some places, and it's tiny and feather-weight. It has an electronic focus ring that provides a smooth zooming action, and AF is so fast that it fools you into thinking it's parfocal. 

I'm preparing a review of the X-T3 for (probably) the next 10 days or so; although I fried the X-H1 in a previous review, I think the X-T3 is the bomb. Shame Fujifilm couldn't hold on and release the X-H1 with these exact same specs, instead of hurrying it to the market and having to face the marketing onslaught of the a7iii.

 

Thank you for that! Great info!

Speaking of batteries, I did a quick test of the 126S on the X-T3, and findings were surprising. 

In the X-T2 and X-H1, the battery lasted somewhere between 40 and 50 minutes in video. The X-T3 managed one hour, 20 minutes continuous recording (here is a screenshot of the last frame of my test video). This was 4K 100mbps recording, completely static (so no AF), and, although it's far from the ~2.5 hours on the GH5, it's still much better than the previous situation. They probably did some magic with the power circuit in this camera. Worthy of note that the battery indicator was very accurate; in fact it remained on red for more than 20 minutes (whereas in previous cameras it would turn red and after a couple of minutes die suddenly). Have also to note that the camera started overheating (not to an alarming degree though, and no protection circuit kicking in).

X-T3 has many power management optimisations. One of the key aspect is the IMX571 sensor has significantly reduced power consumption, compared to the 24MP IMX271.

[eyesuncloudedphoto]

1 hour ago, androidlad said:

X-T3 has many power management optimisations. One of the key aspect is the IMX571 sensor has significantly reduced power consumption, compared to the 24MP IMX271.

That makes sense. It's also refreshing to see battery power displayed accurately at last. 

[Kisaha]

13 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

That lens is absolutely nuts. I got mine a few months ago (16-55mm F2.8) and initially used it on the X-H1. It has sharpness like a Cooke S4i. Yet it's a zoom, for a consumer camera. I don't know what Fuji did here but that's some seriously impressive optics. Sharper than the Sigma 18-35mm and smaller, lighter. The AF is practically instantaneous not to mention silent, it's been flawless on the X-T3 so far.

Review is half way done for the X-T3 but having an EOS R and Z7 to compare it to has slowed things down. Still, should have it done by early next week.

@Andrew Reid what about the Samsung 16-50mm S lens vs the Fuji? I have been spoiled with the 2-2.8f range and the very good IS of that lens, and I believe it is even smaller and lighter (and since I already own it, free!) than the 16-55mm.

Still undecided to upgrade my hybrid system, maybe I am going to wait it out a couple more years and purchase a video camera before do that.

[Jimmy]

14 hours ago, DBounce said:

From a quick play... salivating makes total sense. This lens is ever bit as good as you have heard. 

Out of interest, do you have the XF 18-55 or 16-55? Would be very interesting to see a shoot out to see just how much the glass adds to that filmic look. 

[frontfocus]

59 minutes ago, eyesuncloudedphoto said:

That makes sense. It's also refreshing to see battery power displayed accurately at last. 

it's been accurate for me since the X-Pro2, which introduced both, 5 bars as well as percentage view. I have been switching between 5 and 2% and never had a problem in the last 2.5 years

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, Jimmy said:

Out of interest, do you have the XF 18-55 or 16-55? Would be very interesting to see a shoot out to see just how much the glass adds to that filmic look. 

I went primes for photo lenses. They are generally faster. Also,  I wanted parfocal for video and minimal breathing. Some of the Fuji photo lenses have noticeable focus breathing.  It becomes apparent when the subject is seated,  but rocking back and forth while speaking.  The MKX lenses do not suffer from this problem. The MKX will see duty with my Tilta Nucleus M. When using a manual lens the Tilta can auto calibrate. Which is a serious time saver. 

I'm certain the 16-55 is a solid choice. But for me I wanted a bit more speed.  At T2.9 it's roughly equivalent to a 2.1 f-stop. I can tell right off the bat that this lens possesses the illusive quality we call "mojo".

4 hours ago, frontfocus said:

If you think the X-T3 is fun. don't get a X100, that one is addictive! (but for video)

?

[Walter H]

@Attila Bakos @eyesuncloudedphoto I'm wondering about video usage and hot pixels - pretty terrible when I've bouncing between photo and video during an event with my X-T2: after some amount of 4k shooting, I will start having numerous hot pixels in my RAW files, which only become worse as the event goes on. I've not heard that complaint from folks with the X=H1.

Also, everyone, sorry if there are already links earlier in this thread, but...

Could anyone share some 4k H.265 clips (preferably Flog but Eterna is great too) in the 20 - 60 second range? 24p or 60p. Higher bitrates would be great. Dropbox link?

I'd love to get a feel for some of the footage but mostly curious about editing performance of the H.265 with my system, the possible need to transcode, etc. 

Thank-you!

[eyesuncloudedphoto]

41 minutes ago, Walter H said:

@Attila Bakos @eyesuncloudedphoto I'm wondering about video usage and hot pixels - pretty terrible when I've bouncing between photo and video during an event with my X-T2: after some amount of 4k shooting, I will start having numerous hot pixels in my RAW files, which only become worse as the event goes on. I've not heard that complaint from folks with the X=H1.

Also, everyone, sorry if there are already links earlier in this thread, but...

Could anyone share some 4k H.265 clips (preferably Flog but Eterna is great too) in the 20 - 60 second range? 24p or 60p. Higher bitrates would be great. Dropbox link?

I'd love to get a feel for some of the footage but mostly curious about editing performance of the H.265 with my system, the possible need to transcode, etc. 

Thank-you!

I haven't noticed hot pixels in either the X-T2 or the X-H1, but, to be fair, I only did smaller clips with both, because of the length limitations.

I'm heading to an athletic event later today, and will also be shooting tomorrow, and will make sure I'll share some short unedited footage, since also members on FB groups I administer have asked about it. Probably Monday. ?

[Walter H]

4 minutes ago, eyesuncloudedphoto said:

I haven't noticed hot pixels in either the X-T2 or the X-H1, but, to be fair, I only did smaller clips with both, because of the length limitations.

I'm heading to an athletic event later today, and will also be shooting tomorrow, and will make sure I'll share some short unedited footage, since also members on FB groups I administer have asked about it. Probably Monday. ?

Brilliant! Thanks much.