Fuji X-H2 dead in 2021

[BrunoCH]

44 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

Interesting, what about for HD or 24p 4k?

I don't know. For my short fiction work, now I don't think I'll ever go over the threshold of overheating. I'm very happy with this update. 

[Jay60p]

5 hours ago, androidlad said:

There are two prototypes being developed, one is 8k capable and the other is not.

Do you mean sensor prototypes or X-H2 prototypes?

I took it to mean sensors at first, Andrew is assuming X-H2.

 

 

[Andrew Reid]

I see it come up a lot on rumours sites... Company X has developed 12 completely different products and only one will make it across the line!

It is just the rumour mill covering all the bases in case one turns out to be right.

Do you think Fuji planners sit down together and go... hmmm... we can't decide whether to go 4K or 8K, so let's pile money into both of them, order two completely different sensors, and then decide afterwards!

It just doesn't work like that.

[Jay60p]

36 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I see it come up a lot on rumours sites... Company X has developed 12 completely different products and only one will make it across the line!

It is just the rumour mill covering all the bases in case one turns out to be right.

Do you think Fuji planners sit down together and go... hmmm... we can't decide whether to go 4K or 8K, so let's pile money into both of them, order two completely different sensors, and then decide afterwards!

It just doesn't work like that.

Yes, It doesn’t make sense to be developing two X-H2 prototypes.

But different sensors, maybe. Today Fuji Rumours has yet another message:
Future Fuji X cameras will no longer use X-trans IV sensors.

In that case it would make sense for them to to be developing a new 8K sensor and a new 4 or 6K sensor, to cover entry level 4K bodies as well as 8K top-of-the line X-H2.

(I'm assuming the 4-6K sensor has a lower manufacturing cost than the 8K!)

[tomsemiterrific]

17 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

If Fuji didn’t have record limits I’d buy one again. They are great stills cams and the video is good enough to be a B cam to my S1. My complaints with Fuji is their processing is more artificial compared to Panasonic full frame. The IBIS isn’t as good. And they have the damn record limits even in HD.

I completely agree. The video looks a little over-processed to me---something artificial but I can't say specifically what causes it---colors are lovely---I've found the peaking is among the very best in the industry and you can punch in and refocus anytime while rolling---you can't beat it. Only Blackmagic allows you to do that. But the IBIS latency ruins a lot of shots. Keep the camera moving and you're okay. Stop and when you start again the image will lag---made me a little crazy.

[tomsemiterrific]

No 8K...PLEASE!

[Jay60p]

I would find 8K captures useful for my 4K timelines,
And even more so for 2K:

Software pans, tilts, zooms, possible inside the 8K frame.

No loss in picture quality from stabilization with 6 or 8K reduced to 4K.

Super clean chromakeys.

Thats the sort of thing I look forward to, not 8K timelines.

 

[IronFilm]

15 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I need unlimited recording for my work. 

You'll get that in Antarctica! 😉 Go do a nature documentary. 

[Andrew Reid]

13 hours ago, Jay60p said:

Future Fuji X cameras will no longer use X-trans IV sensors.

X-Trans has probably served its purpose now and was never a big advantage for video. With the X-H2 being a video orientated model, it may be that the rumour mill is just picking up on the fact that it will use a normal bayer pattern and high speed readout, and that the photography orientated models are all up to date for 2021 so there won't be any more in the near future. This does not mean to say X-trans is dead forever.

Originally a way to minimise moire with no low pass filter, you probably don't see the effect much in video mode or on a higher 8K+ resolution sensor. At these resolutions the debayering becomes more processor intensive for X-Trans too vs normal bayer.

[MaverickTRD]

I imagine they will use the 43mp Sony 8k 12 bit sensor with some form of “x-trans V” and a new processor. 
probably get 8k24 with a limited recording time

6k60, 4k120 and much improved autofocus. 
hopefully unlimited recording in 4k60 and less
those are just my guesses 

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

I would love a video oriented X-H2. A model with easy TC-in, nice audio inputs and most important: easier menus. I love the images my X-T3 produces, but I hate the menu system. 

[RogerRabbit]

They're being overly ambitious with the X-H2 when really all they needed was the X-T4 in the X-H1 body. Does the consumer really want even more bells and whistles and a much bigger body? 4k 60p at 10bit is already stellar.

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, RogerRabbit said:

They're being overly ambitious with the X-H2 when really all they needed was the X-T4 in the X-H1 body. Does the consumer really want even more bells and whistles and a much bigger body? 4k 60p at 10bit is already stellar.

I agree!

X-T4 ergonomics not as nice as original X-H1 and feels cheaper too

[MrSMW]

58 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I agree!

X-T4 ergonomics not as nice as original X-H1 and feels cheaper too

If only they would build what the majority would like and this would be about it for most.

But as with so many things, they go too far and wreck it by adding stuff that isn't needed.

Maybe 4k 120p would be nice... In fact it would be nice, but not a deal-breaker. But go all 8k and sacrifice a lot of other 'stuff' as a result would IMO be a negative.

[Jay60p]

On 5/17/2021 at 10:23 AM, MrSMW said:

If only they would build what the majority would like and this would be about it for most.

But as with so many things, they go too far and wreck it by adding stuff that isn't needed.

Maybe 4k 120p would be nice... In fact it would be nice, but not a deal-breaker. But go all 8k and sacrifice a lot of other 'stuff' as a result would IMO be a negative.

I don’t see any sacrifices yet, unless you mean a lower price.

If I recall correctly, you had wanted a specific type of zoom lens for your wedding work
that was not available for the X-T3. Was it for a stand-alone tripod set-up?
With 8K you might only need a prime lens.

In an event situation where an unmanned camera is set up for an overall master
shot without an operator, 8K allows you to pick and choose the view afterwards,
at your leisure in your NLE software. A lot of us have already
done this with 4K in a 2K timeline, but only within 2X magnification.

With 8K In 2K timeline, you have the ability to do a smooth zoom or cut up to 4X magnification, which is more than the Fuji cinema zooms can do (3X), by just using a sharp prime lens. Plus you can pan sideways at the same time, with software keyframes.

Start with an 18mm prime, you can scale it to any focal length up to to 72mm inside an 8K frame.
A 50mm prime will cover 50 to 200mm. You pick the prime for the area the camera will need to cover.

Try a 400% scale-up zoom to see the power this can have.
The 8K frame covers four 2k frames in a row.

I have shot school plays and concerts and sports where I have a seat in the audience and
one camera, and a small tripod. Everything will happen inside a limited space.

I have two options: letting the camera run in wide angle to cover the entire stage, which gets old pretty fast. But it allows me to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show.

Option 2 is to manually run the camera to follow the action with tighter shots, which gets you in closer but often misses things suddenly happening stage left!

With 8K for 2K I can do both, relax & watch the show and cover the action later in software,
And not have to miss anything unexpected happening just out of my zoomed-in view.

This is a fantastic option 8K gives me.  I wish it was available years ago, at my price range, around $2K.

So, for me, 8K for unmanned event coverage is like slow motion, something which you might not use 95% of the time, but in that other 5%, it's an amazing option.

[MrSMW]

55 minutes ago, Jay60p said:

I don’t see any sacrifices yet, unless you mean a lower price.

I mean more like factors such as:

If it was a case of 8k 30p vs 4k 60p, I'd take the 4k every time.

If it meant larger file sizes that require more storage/download time/faster PC etc, I would not welcome that.

If it meant low light resolution was not improved just so it could say 8k on the box, no thanks.

If it meant overheating and reduced operation and reliability, again no.

The price is not really an issue to me. Not that I could just splurge for no reason, but whether a body costs me 2k or 5k, spread over 3 years, the depreciation even if I run it into the ground vs 250k turnover, doesn't really matter.

I would like to see faster zooms such as Sigma's 18-35mm and 50-100mm f1.8 pairing in X Mount. I think that would be the ideal pairing for me. Updated as they are quite old now and the size and weight of the latter especially is commented on quite frequently, but the reality is it's no different to most FF 70-200's.

These days however, 2 factors principally come in to play for me.

1: I'm not prepared to sit around and wait for speculated kit any more. That ended for me with the S5. I did think prior to knowing the exact spec it would probably work for me and such has been the case...except now I have also added an S1H and the S5 has been relegated to B cam.

2: Other than tracking AF, I am at 'peak camera' for my needs with the S1H especially. The S5 can't be...quite...as the EVF and a couple of things are not quite good enough for me, but the S1H just quietly makes up all the things 'missing' from the S5, though those 'missing' things are hardly anything large.

So for me, especially now, it mostly keeps coming back to the same thing and it's not the cameras, it's the glass.

I have extensive experience with the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 adapted to both my previous XH1 and then XT3 and that combo to date has produced visually, fantastic results. At least by my standards.

I really would like to try one again on the S1H and the 50-100mm f1.8 because I shoot in APSC crop/Super 35 mode anyway, both video and stills (using Jpeg + raw for stills so I actually have the latitude of full frame files, but simply see in cropped terms) even though I know it will auto-focus slower than two mating snails.

[Jay60p]

59 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

I mean more like factors such as:

If it was a case of 8k 30p vs 4k 60p, I'd take the 4k every time.

 

I agree there, the 8K will probably not be 60p. My normal everyday video will still be 4K60 with X-H2,

 

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

If it meant larger file sizes that require more storage/download time/faster PC etc, I would not welcome that.

If it meant low light resolution was not improved just so it could say 8k on the box, no thanks.

If it meant overheating and reduced operation and reliability, again no.

 

We won't know the details till maybe next year. Its a new sensor.

 

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

1: I'm not prepared to sit around and wait for speculated kit any more. That ended for me with the S5. I did think prior to knowing the exact spec it would probably work for me and such has been the case...except now I have also added an S1H and the S5 has been relegated to B cam.

2: Other than tracking AF, I am at 'peak camera' for my needs with the S1H especially. The S5 can't be...quite...as the EVF and a couple of things are not quite good enough for me, but the S1H just quietly makes up all the things 'missing' from the S5, though those 'missing' things are hardly anything large.

 

Yes you have a great setup for your work now.

Same here, for 95% of my stuff the X-T3 is still more than enough. Even if X-H2 is what I expect it will be, I still will probably wait till it's been out long enough for the first discount at B&H.

 

 

[androidlad]

X-H2 to debut X-Trans V - a dual aspect 3.2um pixel size stacked sensor.

7332x4888, up to 96fps readout at 12bit (3:2)
7680x4320, up to 110fps readout at 12bit (16:9)

[Andrew Reid]

On 6/19/2021 at 12:04 PM, androidlad said:

X-H2 to debut X-Trans V - a dual aspect 3.2um pixel size stacked sensor.

7332x4888, up to 96fps readout at 12bit (3:2)
7680x4320, up to 110fps readout at 12bit (16:9)

Source???

[BTM_Pix]

11 minutes ago, folksur said:

its still working fine for me. 

Please fuck off with the "inserting dubious link into my quoted message" stuff.