of course FF can take shots the crop cameras can't, and that is why I'm keeping the A7 II. Finally, no, you're wrong, the FF50mm 1.8 on crop body will not crop anything, physically same hole, same light coming through. I have a Sony A9, so fully understand what you mean -- and I have the Sony 28mm, 50mm macro and 85 lenses. Looks like there is some opportunity there to manage those stresses. And (for example) the FF 24-105F4 is equivalent to APS-C 16-70F2.5, which can't be smaller or lighter or cheaper. And you can't apply it for just one thing (like focal length) while ignoring the rest.56F1.2 on crop is not equal to FF 85F1.2, because it is equal to FF 85F1.8.56F1.2 ISO400 on crop is not equal to FF 85F1.2 ISO400, because it is equal to FF 85F1.8 ISO1000. The only caveat for me on a camera which is video focused are the hard jumps between aperture, shutters speed and ISO levels when shooting video. It should be F2.5. exactly, why should I care as long as the end result is the same, the picture is not underexposed? The Sony A7/9 series obviously have excellent sensors but ergonomically they're a bit of a pain to handle. Donât look at the camera itself. Sony's fifty is $20 less than Nikon's. f2.5 doesn't make any sense as a specification for a zoom lens and again, for a UWA lens aperture is only about bringing more light, as you're not looking for DoF or best bokeh. The older a7II sensor was a joke and in no way better than "APC-C": https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d7200&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&normalization=full&widget=590&x=-0.5585297642828606&y=0.24054306938426123. F1.2 can't be as good as F1.8 optically, but F1.8 on FF gets equivalently as much light as F1.2 on APS-C. Their F2 primes are sharp and error-free (partly due to in-camera processing) but lack character and can only produce a DoF equivalent to F2.8. The "H" stands for "high performance," per Fujifilm, and the specifications and overall design of the camera backs up their claim. That's ok, the X-H1 wouldn't go out with you anyway. Since then they improved their IQ by a good margin, at least on par with average APS-C but to appeal to pros, they started making monstrous, expensive lenses. Now, if you down-sample the FF image 2.35 times (or whatever number, down to crop's resolution), you get a much refined image quality. they're using the same design with additional measures to handle the heat stress. Why is that XF 35F1.4 equivalent FF lens costs $100-$200 and not $600 like the Fuji? Enhanced compression options allow capture at up to 200 Mbps and it can also capture F-Log footage internally. That's the reason the XH line is created.There will be a XT3, wait for it... XH line is not for you. Have a look at our initial sample gallery taken on a full-frame Sony body. I find the combo of either XH1 and X100F ... or now the little XT200 very useful with small primes. XH1 did not earn gold award is because of its higher selling price and steep competition (thanks to Sony A7iii). I've heard plenty of stories like - "I tried some $1000 PCs and they were meh ... , but then I bought $5000 Mac and it's so much better". View both images at the same size and they will look similar in almost every respect. In fact , the truth is, except for special cases, apsc delivers enough image quality (and especially when used with good fast prime lenses) into a smaller package vs full frame. It also helps explain the great dynamic range: if both sensors can tolerate the same number of photons per sq mm before clipping, then the large sensor still records more light about each object, before clipping. Saying that MFT are getting closer to FF is just like saying that stitching 4 MFT images together doesn't increase image quality, which would be very silly. When you talk about logic I'm sure you understand that "not everyone needs to put that kind of money for DoF and, depending on the body and lens, better IQ" is not the same as "nobody needs that". I can't. You need to re-learn the whole thing from the beginning. Because getting ready pictures in only a few clicks as opposed to intense editing is a huge time saver. Let's say it receives x photons per sq mm (eg you're pointing at a featureless grey sky). qualifiers like "possibly" and "looking like" means you haven't used it. Math doesn't change, only some relative and made up numbers change, while the amount of light stays the same. Exactly, so exposure is the same. Ergonomy, AF, dependability, real weather sealing, good touch screen, smaller and lighter lenses, better IS may be more important for many people. Gh5 for example priced the same, but it has a killer video features so the price is excusable. Funny after all these years people are still repeating this "fake/cheat ISO" FUD.Probably intentionally. Why do you think that A. A7s has only 12mpix ? alright, fuji brings out XT3 but what if it doesn't have IBIS and ergo of XH1. The Fuji X-H1 is Fujifilm's new X-series flagship, with first-ever in-body image stabilization, greatly improved autofocus and serious video features including 4K recording in DCI format. Combining a 37MP full-frame sensor, minimalist controls and Lightroom Mobile built in, it's a refreshing – if a bit quirky – take on the smartphone-meets-camera concept. Fuji needs it ASAP IMO. Then the controls remain a huge difference: I love the aperture ring and SS knob, much more than a PSAM dial. Its weight is pretty comparable to the larger APS-C and MFT bodies, too. Now that the Sony A7-3 is out with a full frame sensor and fast/accurate auto-focus, the Fuji X-H1 is really nothing special. Fujifilm announces new firmware for GFX 50S, X-T3, and X-H1, Fujifilm firmware update adds internal Log and 120 fps video to X-T2, Fujifilm interview: "We will work hard to keep our uniqueness", Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN Sample Gallery (DPReview TV), Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN Sample Gallery (DPReview TV), Laowa 15mm F4.5 Zero-D Shift lens sample gallery (DPReview TV). I agree with most of your findings. the hole will have the same size as for FF so I'd rather say the light outside the sensor is lost. The e shutter is essential for silence, obviously, and the Fuji lens system optimized for the bodies present spectacular results. Whenever a new iPhone is released, it's more expensive than the previous one and they keep selling older models at high prices. Sample Images Intro Grip Specs Performance Compared User's Guide Recommendations More Fujifilm X-H1 (23.8 oz./674g with battery and card, $999 new or about $850 used if you know How to Win at eBay) and Fujifilm 16mm f/2.8. Agree on that aspect. At home I'm using the Sony A7 II or now the D800. Just stop ignoring it.If there was a huge, heavy and (I imagine) crazy expensive XF16-50F1.8, which could produce images very similar to FF 24-70F2.8, would you still buy one? Compare just the xt3 and xh1 with the Nikon D7200 the dynamic range and iso-invariance and then never write again how great is the Fuji sensor!!! Enjoy your new kit." But I can handhold the E-M1 II + 12-100mm for 3s at least (some say 5s) and get a sharp picture when the FF would produce a blurry picture to match the exposure... Also, is it worth spending $2000 to $3000 for the camera (Sony prices as a base), $2500 for the 16-35mm 2.8, $2000 for the 24-70mm 2.8 and $2500 for the 70-200mm 2.8 when you don't get paid from the 'superior' photos you're taking and you're never making any big prints? @Marksphoto: IQ as good as what? - No. Back in the 90s it really felt like everyone was getting a computer but nobody had a clue how it worked. There are still some features on the X-H1 that don’t appear on the X-T3, yet the X-T3 is simply superlative when it comes to autofocus speed and high-end video specs. I see that your 16-35F4 has less CA than 19F2.8.About that price difference. "Base" ISO doesn't mean equal ISO. and even their APS-C line any new camera is more expensive than the previous one. The rear camera (or cameras) on an iPhone has all the latest bells and whistles, but how do you use them to capture a selfie or record a video of yourself? What makes Fuji different is that they have really focused on making a quality crop sensor camera that is both portable and easy to use and produces 'trendy' looking images with their 'filters'. No, I would not buy a XF 16-50 f1.8 because obviously I could find a better option on the A7 II. Additionally, you can set up the EVF to “Dual Mode” (switch to manual focus, then toggle with the “DISP BACK” button on the back of the camera), which splits the viewfinder into two separate images. Any APS-C or even FF jumping from a D500 will NOT be impressive. Something that might not be welcomed by many. @MarksphotoSuperior IQ in what terms? An apsc for the price of an full frame...that is overpriced! Nikon doesn't have a horse in the mirrorless race. They outperform Sony's Zeiss labeled lenses. Here we are comparing two cameras with different body types: Fujifilm X-H1, which was introduced in February 2018 is a Pro Mirrorless camera with a 24.0MP APS-C sensor whereas Nikon D500, which was introduced in January 2016 is a Advanced DSLR camera with a 21.0MP APS-C sensor. See more like this. This occurs regardless of pixel size and is the main reason larger sensors are able to take cleaner images. They are also riding the vintage wave of marketing. Similar to D850 case. The only A7 bodies worth buying is the A7SII, A7RII and the 3rd gens. Does "good enough" include "good" and "fine"? If I was worried about every last ounce, I'd go for the XT2 (the Oly if I didn't have to make a living), but practically there's not much in it. To get similar results from a crop camera you must buy some ridiculously overpriced toys. When using long and heavy lenses, you don't hold the lens with the camera grip. Get them when their cheap now, before the XH-2 comes out at a higher price.No, never mind. Well, maybe 1s is the safe limit for some, which is great. Fujifilm says it can be used as an end-point in itself or to give yourself a degree of latitude for color grading. The explanation for this is that the unstabilized lenses tend to be primes and are generally relatively wide focal lengths, both of which mean they're more likely to project a larger image circle than the sensor requires. And I'm talking about real difference, not cooked raw files and 'waxy' skin tones. It's a bit muted in color tone, and lifts up the blacks to show better detail in shadows. Just for a smaller package? So, yeah it's not going to sell very well. These are facts, not fairy tales, facts. Review: Does the Canon Rebel T8i DSLR make sense in an increasingly mirrorless world? With 91 focus points (up to 325 points), the camera has a phase detection AF area that covers 50% (side to side) and 75% (top to bottom) of the frame to achieve fast and accurate autofocus. It is a very medeocre camera with not so good IQ, especially for the size or cost. In Use..., Autofocus, Image Stabilization, Image Quality, Dario's desk (because I don't have one) by adriparro, 5-axis in-body image stabilization (rated at 5EV), Touch sensitive rear LCD with two-axis tilt, Wi-Fi with Bluetooth for constant connection, Peripheral light correction (vignetting ). "Dynamic range is also good: a little behind the very best of its APS-C peers.". If the future is full frame then they will have to figure out how to make smaller lenses. Some of their features are only for the newer models, even though the hardware would allow it on older models.The high price tag is justified by the unique specs/performance but like the obsession with thinness on Apple side, Sony releases a very fast AF on RX100 V with a price tag above $1000, when that kind of money can buy you a decent camera and a decent lens, with more possibilities.Finally whenever you ask a Macbook owner, they never had an issue with it, they never heard of anyone having an issue with it, and it makes them feel more productive than anyone else. Some will consider a camera that is the best it could be within a set of specifications shared by its peers (I'd nominate RX10 M3/4, Ricoh GR, maybe A7 III...).And we've been over it a thousand times: larger sensors produce better quality images among the same generation, quality of lens, price range, zoom vs prime, etc... an average lens on FF (and/or old camera) won't 'destroy' a decent combination on APS-C. And if you've printed 1m wide on APS-C (on a recent camera) and it wasn't good enough, ok. @larkhonI can't make you see the difference. What’s the best camera for around $2000? And a lot of people prefer Fuji colors even over Nikon colors. If ON WHEN PRESSING is selected, exposure compensation can be adjusted by holding the button while rotating dial; if ON/OFF SWITCH is selected, exposure compensation can be set by pressing the button once, rotating the dial, and then pressing the button … In short, the AF system on the X-H1 is more than sufficient for most photography needs, including mine. The specific lens characteristics and the specific sensor performance will affect how much of that potential you can get. X-Pro users are in a completely different demographic altogether, and the hybrid viewfinder is of key importance. The Fujifilm X-H1 is the company's newest flagship X Series camera. The X-H1 has a new option, Eterna, which is modeled after Fujifilm's motion picture stock. I tried and tried pushing the look to a sharper, wide, more composition-oriented look but no... We want that 5DII+50/1.8... Just pointing out the importance of the FF look (unobtainable shallow DOF with other systems inc. MF) for many, especially in developing countries where technology/knowledge is always a few years behind. Same with the 70-200F2.8. It is a shame indeed that Canon wasn't more ambitious with its follower. Its thicker sure, but that was to be expected by adding IBIS, and it has a bigger grip sure, but it's not significantly larger than the X-Pro which was Fuji's largest body. You can adjust every mid to high-end camera to do this in-camera and I personally prefer this route as opposed to allowing a camera to dictate my color choices through suggestion. It's based around the same 24MP sensor as the X-T2 but adds in-body image stabilization as well as a more comprehensive set of video options. Nonsensical propaganda - wrong (and an insult). All the major manufacturers offer high-quality tools for making top-level photos. Now... they mate the Gfx and this lovely darling and the baby would be a 24x36mm 40 Mp slightly upscaled model. f/4 from FF won't beat f/2.8 from Fuji. Cheating ISO and different metering behavior aren't the same thing. I'm not sure what it is, It seems like some sort of weird sharpening going on there. Because you can have one with a lens or two for less than a grand. Will someone from this site, explain to me how that can even be explained? I'm thoroughly enjoying my X-H1, which I purchased for it's video, sports and wildlife shooting capabilities. BECAUSE IT GATHERS LESS LIGHT.D. I still have the xt1 and not in a rush to upgrade the body, but if XT3 will IBIS then it would be tempting. Your Fujifilm camera has three basic focus modes. i often cringe at how poorly the photos are and how inappropriate they seem to express the qualities we look for when judging a cameras iq ... no rhyme or reason no good for judging iso shadow behavior color and other metrics. I find funny the price comparison between Sony and Fuji lenses based on aperture equivalence. And putting an expensive F4 zoom at F8 against a cheap prime isn't fair either. I'm actually using the Olympus 12-100mm less and less since I got the RX10 m3. Portable ? The X-E3’s video specifications were already pretty good, being able to shoot … It's based around the same 24MP sensor as the X-T2 but adds in-body image stabilization as well as a more comprehensive set of video options. on the FF side. But I understand that IBIS requires more room in the camera body, and if I had to trade, I'd prefer to keep the current X-T body shape and size. The problem is that nobody is buying $5000 PCs to begin with. Fujifilm will be releasing firmware updates for six cameras in April in May. Ok, A7r II and later cameras do have one stop advantage in ISO sensitivity but at what cost? "... Fuji 50mm f2 ..." ($450) - Why would you need a "cheap" FF 75F3.1 anyways? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZ34wwnDPh0. Why would I want to deal with a company that doesn't respect its customers? But the negative response is because we'd like for a Fuji mirrorless with IBIS, but still maintaining the size and weight advantages of a mirrorless. Well, Leica is overpriced, for its image quality and performance. Perhaps you are not ready for it yet. In the 2 years I owned the camera it depreciated to the point of almost being worthless. Also forums are full with people bashing Canon for the DR of their (older) cameras, entry-level DSLR have a wider DR than Canon 6D for instance.What I mean is that there is a base rule that larger sensors will make it easier to deliver the expected IQ, smaller sensors might beat them on some aspects, not all of them obviously, and even if the bigger sensor is better there is a big range of pictures where the disadvantages of the smaller sensor won't matter. Boosting all of my lenses by a stop (compared to APS-C) is enough to justify the price of FF, which, for me, makes the crop system an overpriced scam. You said Fuji's bigger size is a con, but there are many photographers who find the Sony to be cramped. Aiming to save photographers carrying a cable and a charger for every battery they use, this device handles up to four batteries at the same time and can charge at home, in the car and via a USB power bank. > B. a7III better than a7II, but they both are way better than APS-C. The other poster is correct, a big heavy lens supports the camera, not the other way around. The X-H1 will be its own flagship, and I respect that. That level ignorance just requires special kind of attention. The company says it's made further improvements to its AF system and says the new camera will be able to focus in lower light and with smaller apertures. PS: another thing in common with die hard Apple users is that if you don't see why it's so great it's probably that you don't get it... does it remind you anyone? Demand dictates supply and price.Apple is the "APS-C". For photographers who also need to shoot video, Fuji brings brilliant lenses for the price to an APSC mirrorless package, with good enough autofocus. The ability to print larger comes from the larger amount of data in the image. That's because it has a key "buzzword"....MIRRORLESS.That's like when the smartphone prices go up because theyhave the key words "colorful, thin & stylish". However, as with the X-T2, there's an optional battery grip that lets the camera cycle between drawing power from each of three batteries. I know the theory of that one stop advantage. So, if we assume you're not always going to print/view images from APS-C cameras 58% smaller than you print and view a full frame image, this information doesn't tell you much. They are selling BS, just like Fuji. Why stop on good enough? And how does the biggest lens from one system being smaller than the biggest lenses from other systems make it a better system? Because a7S is meant to shoot 4K at native sensor resolution, which happens to be 10-11mp. Nevertheless, I think mirrorless is the future. Set them to the same F-number (let's say F4). Weather Sealing, EVF, Battery Life and Menu, Z6 II vs. Z7 II – advice on which one better for enthusiast level, To watermark or not to watermark on prints. And once more, I agree that top lenses on crop are too expensive. That's why I reacted, one cannot compare lenses/systems solely on f-stop equivalence, that's how you feed the upgrade path myth, FF will always win in the end, if not MF. Video Specifications. it's small! Sometimes not seeing the problem is the problem. Even if it's a 3-axis stabilization, or up to 2-3 stops as compared with 5.5, it's still more than good enough for most of us. On the 6D it was focusing way faster in the same conditions. You can turn a completely black frame into white frame, no problem. If something stands in the way of getting a better image, then it's wrong. You can shoot worse pictures with better cameras too. But the FE 28mm was more convenient. Careless people just don't want to to learn anything. The new DJI Mavic Mini 2 includes several notable improvements over the original Mavic Mini, including 4K video, Raw photo capability, and DJI's robust OcuSync 2.0 transmission system. Technically, image quality isn't quantifiable by just high ISO noise or DR. I need/want my images to be at least 1 meter wide and excellent (even up close). I may not need the best glass (well, I don't own any), but at least I want to exploit the potential of what I can afford. More facts! !The picture of that guy, it is trying to tell us just that. Is this disadvantage meant as general the difference between APS-C and full frame or is it about the specs and features? If it missed gold, not by much. X-H1 does everything that X-T2 can but also delivers lot's of new in terms of video. And I kind of like such an approach.Back in the days I've bought my 7D twice, while waiting for a good deal on 5D2 :). If I really want, I could still pick up a smaller X-E2 or 3 too, and still use all my lenses if I know video isn't a concern that day. I doubt anyone will buy the X-H1 now. These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. I have it in all my cameras. One aspect I practically never see mentioned with the Fuji-retro-styling is how the retro-controls impact on ergonomics. On the one hand, the X-T3 focus seems a bit snappier, while the IBIS in the X-H1 gives you confidence to shoot quickly with the 100-400 long zoom. Now stop screwing around, get back to work and build me a killer X-T3. This results in reduction of back focus distance, achieving high resolution extending to the image edge areas, and reducing vignetting and colour shading. The Oly fits my hand nicely, the 2x2 control system rocks and the lenses are tack-sharp, light and compact. Yeah before preordering the X-H1, I considered this. The FUJIFILM X-T3 came out in … They have taken the jpg colour science that is so appreciated by their users and provided it for video too - without having to dick around with camera colour settings. Laws of physics are not compatible with such delusional nonsense. But to me it makes less sense to buy only into FF considering the size, weight and price when alternatives are available and good enough for what I'm intending to do with it. I have other cameras that have IBIS, and it's wonderful, of course. If you switch to Single or Continuous AF, toggling the “DISP” button will not show this mode. When APS first came out in digital I waited for FF, but it was only because of wide angle lens. That's it? It can only be one of it. It's available in Canon EF, Fuji X, Leica M, M42, MFT, Nikon F, Pentax K and Sony E mounts and the first units are expected to ship in January 2021. If you plan to swap back and forth between stills and video shooting, the camera's new 'Movie Silent Control' mode is one way around this. The stiffness required can't be overstated, as the new long, heavy primes will exert a lot of force (load) on the lens mount. I'll do another test, just for sake of arguing... in the meantime, I'd say I compared some time ago a FF + f2.8 lens and the Sony RX10 with the same ISO, same shutter speed, at f2.8. From what I read, different sensor size, equivalent f-stop on lens, same aperture diameter, same amount of light. The Laowa 15mm F4.5 Zero-D Shift lens lets you shift perspective without moving the camera, correct for converging lines and more. $450 for XF 23F2, while my tiny little 40F2.8 FF pancake is only $150-$180? All that "smaller size" mythology is ridiculous. Pro chose ergonomics, reliability, service, lens selection. The Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN is for the photographer who wants a focal length that falls squarely between 50mm and 85mm. And while the battery grip will give you better performance it is not a necessary thing for the most photography. Being the first Fuji camera to feature IBIS, it had its problems in the beginning, but those problems were all addressed via firmware updates. It's funny that people are saying, about Fujifilm's firmware upgrades, that they should have released a proper camera from the start but when Sony releases a camera with a frustrating AF (I've used at the zoo, it's tough to follow BiF or fast moving animals. Wonderful shutter. What changed the game for you? With this release, they are getting out of their niche by offering a large and bulky camera that offers zero innovation and its tech is actually quite dated now. I think you forgot to add "...if you use Fuji's largest lenses.". The question is , do you need this extra image quality and can you appreciate it? If 9 people in a row say that milk is blue, then the #10 just repeats that same nonsense, because he starts to doubt his own judgement. nope, I shoot RAW, flourescent light in fuji is aweful and can't be corrected as well as Canon files are. Despite being based around the same sensor and processor, the X-H1 promises significantly improved video performance, with the range of shooting options extended to include DCI as well as UHD 4K shooting, bitrates up to 200 Mbps and the ability to record F-Log footage internally. Comparing 40mp FF vs 20mp APS-C without scaling down the larger image is silly. The full frame sensor sees the world through a 4.5mm diameter aperture. How many pro bought the A9? Looks like a swell camera though. Now that the X-T3 is out and boasts superior stills and video features compared to the X-H1 but at a lower cost, it really complicates buying decision-making. As with all CIPA ratings, the performance is likely to be lower with very wide or long lenses. But it's not a solution. You think that nobody needs better cameras than you do.The amount of light has little to do with image brightness. You think in the "film days" people argued over the dynamic range and auto focus, they just made good photos. To me it's like saying I won't be the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 because this is actually a 80-300mm f5.6 so it won't be better than my Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6. I will give you another $1000 if you can look at multiple photos and tell me which ones are taken with a crop sensor camera and which ones are taken with FX or even medium format sensors. As I have already pointed out earlier, the X-H1 is the first Fuji mirrorless camera to feature In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) and as of early 2019, the only camera to have it. Sorry for the bad FoV equivalence. It was a thing because early RAW converters did not interpret the compensation needed encoded in the RAW tag 0x9650. When I'm shooting close-ups from a tripod, no flash, most often I'm using 10s-15s exposures.I'm sure IBIS works great for all the snap-shooting. (agreed a different type of) And not wishing at all to make the change! This "compensation tag" is just more BS to cover the previous BS. Maybe it wasn't really possible to make those for the DSLR, but for mirrorless the only issue is greed.
2020 fujifilm x h1 autofocus