Fuji X-H1 with IBIS

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18567644
I don't doubt that at all, but things are getting closer as time moves on. The X-H1 is faster than the X-T2.

AF faster? Do you know if Fuji have published any specs on it as a comparison to the XT2 and XPro as I went looking for that exact info because I was interested to see how they rated it with other models but the limited search I did I couldnt find any direct AF speed comparison. Maybe they havnt done it ( direct AF etc comparison on speed) because they dont want alienate XT2 Xpro2 owners or I just wasnt looking hard enough .

Osa713 wrote in post #18567157
Ibis looks great for video, I’m interested to see what it does for stills as a faster shutter and technique usually can freeze what ever you are shooting.

Looks even greater when you stick this beast of a lens on it!!....They have just realeased these 2 cinema lens. Fujifilms Fujinon Optics/lens are second to none in the Broadcast lens market catagory and have been for many many years now and its this pedigree Im sure that will ensure the same top quality optics for their cinema lens for the X mount .

Bet canon product marketers in the cinema lens group are sweating on market share in this segment for 2018 ..... Maybe even at point of sending resumes off as I type I know I would if I was Canon or Nikon marketer because its only going to get worse competition wise as these mirrorless cameras get closer and closer to DSLR features and performance . I dont think I can remember a period of time when this level of photographic hardware innovation has been greater than currently. Just staggering the pace that this is going at....

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18567970
AF faster? Do you know if Fuji have published any specs on it as a comparison to the XT2 and XPro as I went looking for that exact info because I was interested to see how they rated it with other models but the limited search I did I couldnt find any direct AF speed comparison. Maybe they havnt done it ( direct AF etc comparison on speed) because they dont want alienate XT2 Xpro2 owners or I just wasnt looking hard enough .

I don’t think they even approach things like that this is a company that is big on progression so I don’t see them making any comparisons like that soon. Usually when camera manufacturers make those comparisons it’s because the new model is completely replacing the old model which this is not the case. They leave that to the YouTube enthusiast that will do it anyway. When the camera is released you will see a flood of “real world” reviews.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18567975
Looks even greater when you stick this beast of a lens on it!!....They have just realeased these 2 cinema lens. Fujifilms Fujinon Optics/lens are second to none in the Broadcast lens market catagory and have been for many many years now and its this pedigree Im sure that will ensure the same top quality optics for their cinema lens for the X mount .

Bet canon product marketers in the cinema lens group are sweating on market share in this segment for 2018 ..... Maybe even at point of sending resumes off as I type I know I would if I was Canon or Nikon marketer because its only going to get worse competition wise as these mirrorless cameras get closer and closer to DSLR features and performance . I dont think I can remember a period of time when this level of photographic hardware innovation has been greater than currently. Just staggering the pace that this is going at....

Hosted photo: posted by clipper_from_oz in
./showthread.php?p=185​67975&i=i99279247
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by clipper_from_oz in
./showthread.php?p=185​67975&i=i165068051
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

No autofocus for documentary use, no nd filters, no timecode input or genlock, same joke batteries. No 30p or 60p in dci 4K.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18567967
Question.....is 50-140 one of Fujis fastest for AF?..I looked at it last year to buy however decided it was a heavy and costly addition to my Fuji x system lens lineup when I mainly used it for a travel and walk around camera instead of lugging around my heavy Canon gear. I have seen the quality of its optics though and I bet even if its af is slow compared to the Canon equivalent lens the images will be very high quality. Especially if teamed with one of the xtrans 3 sensor cameras like the xt2 you have it on?

Although I havnt got the 50-140 yet Im still interested in getting one for the future if I go Fuji 100% so I am interested in your feedback

So I have another question .... how does that fuji combo compare on the AF tracking side of things as against AF tracking with the 70-200II and the 5DMK4 ?

It’s the fastest for Fuji. XTrans 3 is okay. Requires iridient xtransformer to get full quality out of it, making file sizes balloon to 80MB. I would prefer a Bayer sensor at higher resolution tbh. Tracking is not that great, esp. in any low light. Not the worst, but not great either.

idkdc wrote in post #18568001
It’s the fastest for Fuji. XTrans 3 is okay. Requires iridient xtransformer to get full quality out of it, making file sizes balloon to 80MB. I would prefer a Bayer sensor at higher resolution tbh. Tracking is not that great, esp. in any low light. Not the worst, but not great either.

Switch to Capture One

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18568004
Switch to Capture One

X iridient transformer is better from what I hear. I use luminosity blending and xmp metadata anyways. Not interested in a catalog dependent editing workflow.

idkdc wrote in post #18568001
It’s the fastest for Fuji. XTrans 3 is okay. Requires iridient xtransformer to get full quality out of it, making file sizes balloon to 80MB. I would prefer a Bayer sensor at higher resolution tbh. Tracking is not that great, esp. in any low light. Not the worst, but not great either.

why dont you use the incamera decoding?....Reason I ask this is......

as I mentioned in a previous post I had the opportunity to speak to a Fuji product engineer who was attached to the X series development group in Fuji Tokyo HQ when I was there in June last year and I brought up the fact that LR and others were making a terrible time of decoding Fuji RAW and I was really seeing this with mushy foliage etc etc in Lightroom . I even showed him some shots with the Xt-20 I had taken in Tokyo the day before and he made an interesting comment. He first said many users of the Xtrans sensors had been complaining to fuji about this very same issue and he suggested that I try the incamera decoding!!... At the time I just laughed and said you have to be joking. hBut he was vary serious. I said I thought you would recommend Silky Pix ( Fuji worked with Silky Pix initially on the first xtrans sensor release and included it with the camera) and he said no...nothing is as good as Fujis own RAW decoder/transcoder in the camera . And he went on to say that this was a major priority to fix this ( people complaining that LR etc were horrible re Xtrans decoding to Tiff /Jpg ) and to wait as there were developments slotted for release later this year. . At the time he would have known what was going to be released but he kept that to himself except to say when I joked about a camera not being up to the job "dont write off the x series cameras as a RAW decoder because the chipsets and decoding algorithms/software in camera are way more efficient and do a far better job of decoding Fuji RAWs than any PC/ laptop hardware and Photo Apps software combined could do...... especially regarding converting FUJI RAR's in the best way to preserve the image quality when going to Tiff .

At the time I thought he was just inventing an excuse but sure enough enter the software upgrade to combine the camera's cpu/decoding algorithm with a laptop !!....

Only thing was I have the damn Xt20 so they held back on this release until now and the Xt-20 will have this within a months time. And he is right about Fuji being better at decoding their own Raw than a third party because only Fuji know the exact algorithms and source code used ( although they do share some info with Adobe etc). Canon provide their own RAW decoding software also and they argue exactly the same thing . And reason why they do this is so they are not at the mercy of people like Adobe determining what and how the Fuji Canon etc RAWs should look/render as as a tiff . And that was missing with Fuji as they had no software except in camera which was only accessible in a very primitive fashion and nowhere near a viable alternative to pc based apps like Lightroom Capture One etc. And now the the final piece to this puzzle has been addressed by Fuji doing their own RAW to Tiff decoding ( as well as the color JPG presets like velvia etc) in a very smart efficient manner( some people disagree here ) there should not be any more issues with RAR decoding. Infact it should be way better decoding than any third party app given its Fujis own engine thats doing this decoding.

idkdc wrote in post #18567998
No autofocus for documentary use, no nd filters, no timecode input or genlock, same joke batteries. No 30p or 60p in dci 4K.

The MKX line of lenses are cinema lenses so they have a 200º focus throw for follow focus use, there are other lenses if you need to use on AF for your video. The perks of using these lenses are the optical quality, the par-focal design, flange distance adjustment or seamless aperture design for example.

ND filters? in a cinema lens - just pop one on in front and you are done.

External battery power can be used with the X-H1 by inserting a simple power coupler (like any other camera).

Time Code is available on the X-H1, all you have to do is turn it on in the settings.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18567970
AF faster? Do you know if Fuji have published any specs on it as a comparison to the XT2 and XPro as I went looking for that exact info because I was interested to see how they rated it with other models but the limited search I did I couldnt find any direct AF speed comparison. Maybe they havnt done it ( direct AF etc comparison on speed) because they dont want alienate XT2 Xpro2 owners or I just wasnt looking hard enough .

They haven't done a side by side comparison but they did explain how they improved the AF algorithm, I'll try to dig out the slide... But as Osa said I'm sure you will se that on YT soon enough.


I've beed using Iridient beside Lr for a while now. I feel like Iridient is just another step and as of the latest Lr release the 'issues' with using Fuji rafs as not really there. Once you print they disappear anyway.

As an example this is from a few Lr updates ago (July 6th 2016) converted and processed in Lightroom:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/JSeB​n6

The sides are here for the X-H1 Vs X-T1 in AF any other things about the X-H1

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18568078
The MKX line of lenses are cinema lenses so they have a 200º focus throw for follow focus use, there are other lenses if you need to use on AF for your video. The perks of using these lenses are the optical quality, the par-focal design, flange distance adjustment or seamless aperture design for example.

ND filters? in a cinema lens - just pop one on in front and you are done.

External battery power can be used with the X-H1 by inserting a simple power coupler (like any other camera).

Time Code is available on the X-H1, all you have to do is turn it on in the settings.

They haven't done a side by side comparison but they did explain how they improved the AF algorithm, I'll try to dig out the slide... But as Osa said I'm sure you will se that on YT soon enough.

I've beed using Iridient beside Lr for a while now. I feel like Iridient is just another step and as of the latest Lr release the 'issues' with using Fuji rafs as not really there. Once you print they disappear anyway.

As an example this is from a few Lr updates ago (July 6th 2016) converted and processed in Lightroom:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/JSeB​n6 2HS02298 by Kim Farrelly, on Flickr

Zoomed in,

Hosted photo: posted by Two Hot Shoes in
./showthread.php?p=185​68078&i=i135268881
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

Have you tried to decode via the new Xt-2 PC software yet and see how that compares. I cant yet until software is released for the Xt20 however the Fuji engineer was adamant that Fujis own onboard RAW. decoding engine in the camera is far better than LR or iridium etc .

Im most interested in seeing how the fuji decoding overcomes the the dreaded worm effect which I notice is still slightly visible in your lightroom crop( more visible in the mid green area between the two middle ropes) . Mind you the worm effect in your crop is no where near as bad as what I have seen in other Lightroom edits people have been complaining about. I initially also had this issue with the xt-20 however it can be controlled to a certain extent in the 3rd party apps by using some other sharpening tools but it would be very interesting to see what the Xt-2 Decoding does especially when you use more sharpening ( the main culprit that causes the worm effect)

Yep, I had the software and tested it out - works great, it's basically the settings from the camera in an app on your computer, you take any raf that is on your computer and connect the camera, one attached the computer can then process that image, batch processing works too & the results are the same as using the camera to do it so really very good. For workflow reasons I'm sticking to Lr for now.

That image is an example of a file I edited almost two years ago, back when the 'worms' where a apparently huge problem.
I printed some really big images with plenty of detail without any negative feedback from the client, they seem to not be there once you print... Only really an issue if you pixel peep IMO. I'll see if I can connect to the 2016 drive and reprocess that image later tonight, be interesting to see if there is any difference.

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18568078
The MKX line of lenses are cinema lenses so they have a 200º focus throw for follow focus use, there are other lenses if you need to use on AF for your video. The perks of using these lenses are the optical quality, the par-focal design, flange distance adjustment or seamless aperture design for example.

ND filters? in a cinema lens - just pop one on in front and you are done.

External battery power can be used with the X-H1 by inserting a simple power coupler (like any other camera).

Time Code is available on the X-H1, all you have to do is turn it on in the settings.

They haven't done a side by side comparison but they did explain how they improved the AF algorithm, I'll try to dig out the slide... But as Osa said I'm sure you will se that on YT soon enough.

I've beed using Iridient beside Lr for a while now. I feel like Iridient is just another step and as of the latest Lr release the 'issues' with using Fuji rafs as not really there. Once you print they disappear anyway.

As an example this is from a few Lr updates ago (July 6th 2016) converted and processed in Lightroom:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/JSeB​n6 2HS02298 by Kim Farrelly, on Flickr

Zoomed in,

Hosted photo: posted by Two Hot Shoes in
./showthread.php?p=185​68078&i=i135268881
forum: Fuji Digital Cameras

Timecode has no ltc input for timecode generators for sync with second camera and ltc synced sound recorder. I mentioned documentary filmmaking. Also no for including inputs. For indie Cinema this is an okay camera...as long as you didn’t need to sync sound reliably.

Clipper’s post was originally about how this should have folks quaking in their boots. My opinion is that the cinema lenses are good, but not sure if the camera is ready for me to plop down 4K per lens, even if they are bargains for their function. Sony FS7 and Fujinon lenses are probably the better option for now until if and when Fuji rolls out a dedicated camcorder.

clipper_from_oz wrote in post #18568021
why dont you use the incamera decoding?....Reason I ask this is......

as I mentioned in a previous post I had the opportunity to speak to a Fuji product engineer who was attached to the X series development group in Fuji Tokyo HQ when I was there in June last year and I brought up the fact that LR and others were making a terrible time of decoding Fuji RAW and I was really seeing this with mushy foliage etc etc in Lightroom . I even showed him some shots with the Xt-20 I had taken in Tokyo the day before and he made an interesting comment. He first said many users of the Xtrans sensors had been complaining to fuji about this very same issue and he suggested that I try the incamera decoding!!... At the time I just laughed and said you have to be joking. hBut he was vary serious. I said I thought you would recommend Silky Pix ( Fuji worked with Silky Pix initially on the first xtrans sensor release and included it with the camera) and he said no...nothing is as good as Fujis own RAW decoder/transcoder in the camera . And he went on to say that this was a major priority to fix this ( people complaining that LR etc were horrible re Xtrans decoding to Tiff /Jpg ) and to wait as there were developments slotted for release later this year. . At the time he would have known what was going to be released but he kept that to himself except to say when I joked about a camera not being up to the job "dont write off the x series cameras as a RAW decoder because the chipsets and decoding algorithms/software in camera are way more efficient and do a far better job of decoding Fuji RAWs than any PC/ laptop hardware and Photo Apps software combined could do...... especially regarding converting FUJI RAR's in the best way to preserve the image quality when going to Tiff .

At the time I thought he was just inventing an excuse but sure enough enter the software upgrade to combine the camera's cpu/decoding algorithm with a laptop !!....

Only thing was I have the damn Xt20 so they held back on this release until now and the Xt-20 will have this within a months time. And he is right about Fuji being better at decoding their own Raw than a third party because only Fuji know the exact algorithms and source code used ( although they do share some info with Adobe etc). Canon provide their own RAW decoding software also and they argue exactly the same thing . And reason why they do this is so they are not at the mercy of people like Adobe determining what and how the Fuji Canon etc RAWs should look/render as as a tiff . And that was missing with Fuji as they had no software except in camera which was only accessible in a very primitive fashion and nowhere near a viable alternative to pc based apps like Lightroom Capture One etc. And now the the final piece to this puzzle has been addressed by Fuji doing their own RAW to Tiff decoding ( as well as the color JPG presets like velvia etc) in a very smart efficient manner( some people disagree here ) there should not be any more issues with RAR decoding. Infact it should be way better decoding than any third party app given its Fujis own engine thats doing this decoding.

Im not giving up raw workflow and capabilities in photoshop that I’ve mastered just to save a few MB to avoid conversion by iridient x transformer. The whole process is a chore (I know not any of Fuji’a fault per se, Adobe’s just a slow monopoly).

I believe I prefer iridient raw to the in camera jpg anyways.

OK so I pulled that file of the server and re-imported it to Lr Classic CC 7.2 I've shown the sharpening settings I use to ballpark the output. Might be handy here.

Here it is at 3:1