Fuji X-H2 - They can't decide whether to cancel it... Or?

[Andrew Reid]

Fuji did an interview with MapCamera in Japan.

Translation: https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-manager-talks-x-t4-and-more-we-want-to-make-fujifilm-x-h2-fujifilm-x-t3-firmware-update-under-consideration/

"The mere difference in design and operability does not make it possible for the X-H and X-T series to coexist. Fujifilm is currently studying these issues"

So this could explain the delay and rumours of cancellation.

It seems Fuji want to segment the lines more strongly.

They have also added so much video functionality into the X-T4, it makes their life harder when it comes to the X-H2. It would have to be borderline pro-camcorder now, to avoid 'coexisting' with the X-T series.

Which makes me think they will reinvent the concept? Like a XC10 type body? Or even as a pro video camera to challenge the FS5 II?

"Fujifilm would like to make the XH series a camera with a clearly different concept from the XT series"

"Fujifilm wants to continue with the concept of the XH series, which is different from the T series"

So they don't want to cancel, that is the good news.

But they don't want to give it the same specs as the X-T4 but a different design and 'operability'.

Finally some good news for X-T3 owners...

"Fujifilm X-T3 firmware update is under consideration"

"Certainly, it is physically possible to add new functions to X-T3, since the sensor and processor is the same of the X-T4"

[thebrothersthre3]

I am really hoping they go all out with the XH2, really make it standout from everything else. Even if it means a small price hike. Put it up there with like a C300 in terms of pro usability. 

[androidlad]

Corporate BS.

They wanted to put a new sensor in X-H2 but Sony Semicon, which is their "boss", is dragging them down.

Regarding X-T3 firmware, the code is easily transferable from X-T4 due to the same hardware (apart from IBIS). What they are really considering is how they should do it/which features to drop so they don't hurt X-T4 sale.

[Video Hummus]

5 hours ago, androidlad said:

They wanted to put a new sensor in X-H2 but Sony Semicon, which is their "boss", is dragging them down.

Maybe conceding sensor design and manufacture to a competitor with a competing camera line wasn’t very smart? What other companies do CMOS?

Fairchild Imaging (BAE Systems)

Samsung.

Sharp?

Maybe it’s time for them to go shopping somewhere else less they keeping sucking the toes of Sony.

[androidlad]

2 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

Maybe conceding sensor design and manufacture to a competitor with a competing camera line wasn’t very smart? What other companies do CMOS?

Fairchild Imaging (BAE Systems)

Samsung.

Sharp?

Maybe it’s time for them to go shopping somewhere else less they keeping sucking the toes of Sony.

Sony Semicon is years ahead of the others, and the only one capable of providing enough volume Fujifilm requires.

[Andrew Reid]

Yes light years ahead... But still no 10bit mirrorless camera!

[Kisaha]

What C300 guys? we still do not have a C100mkIII a bazillion years after the II. I do not need C300 size/weight/price, the C100 was our workhorse for so many years, C200 isn't even close.

Last 3 internet jobs we did we used a 5Diii that is available in the company for pictures, until recently we were using a C100mkII all the time, now, we did a few jobs with a C200, but the head of the office doesn't find it necessary to rent a C200 anymore, so they do not rent at all, while lights and sound have the same budget as before.

For years we are crying out loud for an XC body, even if it EOS - M that would brilliant, a few dead cheap M lenses and perfect EF adaptation.

If Fuji does make a video centric camera in ergonomics/desing/features, not only in description, I would go all in Fuji, now I am not very impressed with a lot of things (lenses, ergonomics/menu). Noone can really make a body with internal ND? Is that so complicated to achieve? This is mainly the only issue I have with smaller cameras, internal ND filter and a few sound ins/outs, are what we really need for our video cameras, and I do not need a C300 style camera, if I want a bigger camera I can rent, but a smaller one will be my everyday workhorse.

Fuji, do it already..and have some more videocentric lenses. 

I really respect the opinion of lenstip, and says for the 16-80mm, a lens a lot of us were waiting

https://www.lenstip.com/571.11-Lens_review-Fujifilm_Fujinon_XF_16-80_mm_f_4_R_OIS_WR_Summary.html

"We expected a lot and we got much less. We found out the Fujinon is optically a sensible lens with a universal focal range, fast and accurate autofocus and a very efficient image stabilization. Unfortunately there were some flaws and their number, taking into account the price tag of $800, we consider to be definitely too high.

To sum up I find it difficult to recommend this lens if its price doesn't drop fast by at least 25%. I hope it will happen soon and the fans of the X system will have more reasons to get interested in purchasing the tested Fujinon."

I will stay with my Olympus 12-100 for the moment as an all around lens, and my 16-50mm 2-2.8f NX. I do not shop only bodies, lenses have to be the right ones.

[androidlad]

11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yes light years ahead... But still no 10bit mirrorless camera!

Sony Semicon and Sony Alpha are completely different entities.

[Andrew Reid]

Yes still different entities.

But still no medium format Alpha to compete with the GFX 100!

😂

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

To sum up I find it difficult to recommend this lens if its price doesn't drop fast by at least 25%.

Does it then become a better lens or is it still the same lens, just cheaper?!

I kind of like it as a '24' and '120' equivalent, albeit at f4. I wish it was faster and I wish it zoomed internally but it is what it is, a decent enough 'do it all' lens for photo & video. My 'go to' for video (back when I used to have any work) is the 35mm f2, but sometimes I need wider and sometimes I need longer and would rather not have a bag full of lenses for those occasions so the zoom fills that role nicely.

Fuji have stated that there is not space for an XT4 and an XH2 to exist but I suspect that won't be the case. They also said IBIS would not fit or be coming to an XT3 successor and err...hello.

I don't think they need to reinvent the wheel here but make what the vast majority who want this thing and will actually buy it have been asking for and that is basically the XT4 spec in the XH1 body...but if they wish to differentiate, build in a battery grip and maybe upgrade a few video settings, et voila, different (enough) camera.

Meanwhile, of course they are not going to slap in the XT4 spec with a firmware update to the XT3 until the XT4 has been on sale for at least 3 months...which at the rate things are going, means Sep earliest I reckon.

And if you are reading Fuji, you can skip the Bleugh Bypass on mine when we get to that point. Thanks. Classic Neg = fab but this latest one, nah.

[IronFilm]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

What C300 guys? we still do not have a C100mkIII a bazillion years after the II. I do not need C300 size/weight/price, the C100 was our workhorse for so many years, C200 isn't even close.

Last 3 internet jobs we did we used a 5Diii that is available in the company for pictures, until recently we were using a C100mkII all the time, now, we did a few jobs with a C200, but the head of the office doesn't find it necessary to rent a C200 anymore, so they do not rent at all, while lights and sound have the same budget as before.

Why can't a C200 replace the usage of shoots where the C100mkII is being used??

Is it because C100 shoots can't justify the cost of using an "expensive" camera like the C200?

Perhaps if an "affordable" C300mk3 arrived which was priced not just below a C500mk2, but well under a FX9, even under cutting a FS7mk2 by a little. Say a C300mk3 for US$8K?

Then you discontinue the C300mk2 and C100mk2, and you slash the price of the C200 to US$4.5K, which is cheaper than the launch price of the C100mk2!

Canon could even consider bringing out instead a cheaper "C200C" version of the C200 (which already has a C200B variant), that could completely replace all existing C200 models. Would be a normal C200 but without the raw recording option, but sell it even cheaper, say US$3.5K? Such a camera would sell like hotcakes!

But I don't think Canon would dare to be so aggressive with their pricing, not even with a camera such as this, the "C200C"  would be an 8 bit only cinema camera released in 2020! Surely the only one of its kind.

  

4 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

But still no medium format Alpha to compete with the GFX 100!

Sony won't bother, they'll focus instead on their high volume a7R series as their competitive alternative to digital medium format. 

If they do decide to give medium format a spin, they'll test the waters first by releasing a Sony RX1 variant with a medium format sensor in it. 

[thebrothersthre3]

I wish Fuji didn't have their hands tied by Sony. Its a shame Samsung and Nikon aren't really doing anything great in the video department. I believe Nikon stills makes its own sensors or no?

[androidlad]

1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I wish Fuji didn't have their hands tied by Sony. Its a shame Samsung and Nikon aren't really doing anything great in the video department. I believe Nikon stills makes its own sensors or no?

Nikon (and Fuji) specify some of the design and Sony Semicon manufacture them.

[thebrothersthre3]

2 hours ago, androidlad said:

Nikon (and Fuji) specify some of the design and Sony Semicon manufacture them.

Is that only with Nikon mirrorless I assume? 

[Kisaha]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Why can't a C200 replace the usage of shoots where the C100mkII is being used??

Is it because C100 shoots can't justify the cost of using an "expensive" camera like the C200?

Perhaps if an "affordable" C300mk3 arrived which was priced not just below a C500mk2, but well under a FX9, even under cutting a FS7mk2 by a little. Say a C300mk3 for US$8K?

Then you discontinue the C300mk2 and C100mk2, and you slash the price of the C200 to US$4.5K, which is cheaper than the launch price of the C100mk2!

Canon could even consider bringing out instead a cheaper "C200C" version of the C200 (which already has a C200B variant), that could completely replace all existing C200 models. Would be a normal C200 but without the raw recording option, but sell it even cheaper, say US$3.5K? Such a camera would sell like hotcakes!

It is a matter of things, first of all it is a bit more expensive to rent than the C100mkII, the competition is very aggressive by very young people so the budget is undercut already, and finally they go, instead of rent at all, and waste some time to go pick up equipment and the such, let's use what we have in the office.

Also, the C200 is a bigger camera than the C100, fully build, it is like building a 3 level building, not very convenient, while we had the C100mkII almost always ready to shoot. To make a very competitive "smaller" video camera is easier today than 5 years ago, it is not by chance that so many voices on social media and forums talk for an XC10 type of cheap video camera. That is vey doable, and such a pity BlackMagic missed a strike by using such a weird design on their own Pocket cameras.

There are so many options these days, and I rather have something shooting 10bit for personal use. Braw is so nice and convenient of the P4K though, that is just so easy to shoot raw these days.In anyway, 10 bit is perect for most uses. I would buy anything else before the C200, even if it was 5.000.

C100 was out a thousand years ago, it is not the same as selling a 4500$ (which will be at least 5500$ in Europe anyway) camera with only a couple of 8bit options! 

 

[Mark Romero 2]

59 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Is that only with Nikon mirrorless I assume?

I am pretty certain that DSLR cameras like the D750 were using Sony sensors following Nikon's specs. 

[Video Hummus]

A C100mk3 with 10-bit internal, clog, a decent screen, and 14 stops of DR and DPAF in all modes would do so well. No fuss, beautiful colors straight out of camera.

I would rather have a solid 10-bit image than fuss around with 12-bit BRAW (good as it is) since most of the image content is consumed on compressed 8-bit streaming codecs over the Internet and viewer on phones, tablets, and laptop screens. 

[Kisaha]

5 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

A C100mk3 with 10-bit internal, clog, a decent screen, and 14 stops of DR and DPAF in all modes would do so well. No fuss, beautiful colors straight out of camera.

I would rather have a solid 10-bit image than fuss around with 12-bit BRAW (good as it is) since most of the image content is consumed on compressed 8-bit streaming codecs over the Internet and viewer on phones, tablets, and laptop screens. 

yes, such a camera could speed up our workflow significantly and still have some room to wiggle things. I do not know about the 14 stops thingy though, that seems a bit exaggerated, but I wouldn't mind if it was 13 or 12.5 or whatever!

Braw is great, but it isn't "instant delivery" as we used to do with C100mkII footage. We can keep our PK4K/6K for whenever we need Braw or a different flavor, or as a second camera, or as a cheap and indie "cinema" camera, but a C100mkIII could be our workhorse. 

It is not only small screens though, there is a huge increase on consuming media on smart tvs, tv boxes, Apple stuff, e.t.c The industry starts to move from 6" phones straight to 55-80" Qleds and OLEDS. Especially dynamic consumers 30-60 years old that usually got the money.

Pocket needs too many things to become a "workhorse", we all have loved the Canon simplicity at one point in the past.

[Andrew Reid]

5 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

A C100mk3 with 10-bit internal, clog, a decent screen, and 14 stops of DR and DPAF in all modes would do so well. No fuss, beautiful colors straight out of camera.

I would rather have a solid 10-bit image than fuss around with 12-bit BRAW (good as it is) since most of the image content is consumed on compressed 8-bit streaming codecs over the Internet and viewer on phones, tablets, and laptop screens. 

Back in the 1960's most people consumed films at home on really awful pokey black & white TVs but Kubrick did not decide to downgrade his camera as a result

[rainbowmerlin]

On 4/11/2020 at 3:02 PM, Andrew Reid said:

Fuji did an interview with MapCamera in Japan.

Translation: https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-manager-talks-x-t4-and-more-we-want-to-make-fujifilm-x-h2-fujifilm-x-t3-firmware-update-under-consideration/

"The mere difference in design and operability does not make it possible for the X-H and X-T series to coexist. Fujifilm is currently studying these issues"

So this could explain the delay and rumours of cancellation.

I'm wondering Andrew if the above quote was a typo on FujiRumors? From the context of the interview, it would logically make more narrative sense for it to be 'does not make it IMpossible' for them to co-exist. I've contacted Patrick at FujiRumors to float this, will let you know what he says.

I do think there is definitely a gap in the market for a highly video-centred X-H2, particularly as Fuji doesn't have higher level cinema cameras to 'protect'. I've decided to hold off buying an X-T4 (keeping my X-T3) for an X-H2, which FujiRumors has been very consistent in saying would come out in 2021 (I'm guessing first half of the year).