For some reason there isnt a thread about the new X-H2(s), so I guess I have to start one.
I have to say this is the most disappointing Fujifilm camera in a very long while. I actually have some real complaints about it. Which I dont have about the X100v, X-Pro3, or X-T4.
The X-H2s is for some reason considered the video camera. Well, it has the 26 Megapixel stacked sensor and "only" 6K video. But I would think the X-H2 with the 40 Megapixel non-stacked sensor and 8K video is closer to what a video enthusiast would probably want. Either way these are the two options. Personally I'd definitely get the X-H2s.
So far I only watched the DPReviewTV review of it on YouTube. Based on that:
- I'm not excited about the fact they have mixed memory card slots. That means you have to buy two different kinds of memory cards in order to get backup against card failure. And if you do that, the slower card limits the speed of the whole system anyway, so whats the point of the faster card slot again ? So this really isnt a great solution. All in all already a good reason not to get the X-H2(s) as long as you can get the X-T4 that doesnt have this, but has most of the X-H2 features.
- The electronic shutter only flashsync of 1/150 sec is pretty slow for the stacked sensor, but I dont think thats really something thats under control of Fujifilm. Thats on Sony, who dont want to offer their best features to the competition. Sony really should be broken up and the sensor part isolated from the rest of the company, so such shenannigans are no longer possible. Still, another reason to be somewhat underwhelmed by the X-H2s.
- The flipscreen was IMHO fine for the X-T4. For a camera more dedicated to video I would have expected a regular tiltscreen instead. This flipscreen collides with the video connectors at the side. Not ideal but not really a problem for a general camera like the X-T4, but for the X-H line I dont think thats great. The solution would IMHO be a battery grip that would have the video connectors. Maybe even a permanently attached one ?
- The advantage here is of course you can now mount a small fan to the camera to guarantee low operating temperatures. Not that the camera really seem to need it, in most scenarios. And the fragile flip screen sticks out and is very vulnerable against damage. Frankly I think I would rather get a separate fan instead.
- There was also a surprising number of problems with the camera, like the flickering top display. I hope they fix that at release or at least soon after.
My take is that these are quite good cameras, but...
... there are some real marketing issues with this Fujifilm strategy — not just the XH2 and XH2s division, but relative to the likely XT5 as well. That's a lot of bodies overlapping in their target market appeal from a company that makes fine cameras but which is going to continue to have a small market share behind Canon, Sony, and Nikon.
I know about the interest in doing high end video. But the folks I know who really do that generally prefer dedicated video cameras to the hybrid cameras, even with the hybrids are quite good, as this new Fujifilm camera is likely to be. I'm just not persuaded that there is going to be that big of a market for this in the video world to make it viable to have a separate XH camera that is video-centric.
I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but at the moment I have this feeling that this is not going to be the breakout product that Fujifilm hopes...
The stacked sensor in the XH2s allows for faster video readout with less rolling shutter and better subject tracking, which many video enthusiasts will value over the ability to shoot 8k video (a feature which may not even be available on the XH2).
gdanmitchell wrote:
My take is that these are quite good cameras, but...
... there are some real marketing issues with this Fujifilm strategy — not just the XH2 and XH2s division, but relative to the likely XT5 as well. That's a lot of bodies overlapping in their target market appeal from a company that makes fine cameras but which is going to continue to have a small market share behind Canon, Sony, and Nikon.
I know about the interest in doing high end video. But the folks I know who really do that generally prefer dedicated video cameras to the hybrid cameras, even with the hybrids are quite good, as this new Fujifilm camera is likely to be. I'm just not persuaded that there is going to be that big of a market for this in the video world to make it viable to have a separate XH camera that is video-centric.
I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but at the moment I have this feeling that this is not going to be the breakout product that Fujifilm hopes......Show more →
Well I found this interview with a Fujifilm manager and it was very interesting though not really targeted to me. It looks like they have done a lot of homework on the video side of things even claiming to target productions of under a certain budget ceiling. They feel like they can sell these cameras to users who often rent expensive video equipment to use along side of it. Clearly from a stills perspective it's an action camera that will appeal to people who also do video but I found it interesting how targeted they were on specific types of video shops. It was also interesting to find out that the 18-120/4 powerzoom was parfocal.
rbf_ wrote:
Well I found this interview with a Fujifilm manager and it was very interesting though not really targeted to me. It looks like they have done a lot of homework on the video side of things even claiming to target productions of under a certain budget ceiling. They feel like they can sell these cameras to users who often rent expensive video equipment to use along side of it. Clearly from a stills perspective it's an action camera that will appeal to people who also do video but I found it interesting how targeted they were on specific types of video shops. It was also interesting to find out that the 18-120/4 powerzoom was parfocal.
I think there's a market for it, but I question whether it is as big as they hope and whether folks doing much video are going to prefer doing in on a stills-style camera rather than a video-centric purpose-built system
I have a buddy who does both still photography (he's a successful 'fine art" landscape photographer and author of several books) and who does a lot of video including some of the Nature videos you see on CBS Sunday Morning. I may be unduly affected by his particular perspective, but he carries a mirrorless camera system (from Sony... after continuing to use MF film up until just a few years ago) and separate video camera equipment that is purely for video — not a still camera that also does video.
Anyway, I guess we're all speculating at this point. We'll see how this develops.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I think there's a market for it, but I question whether it is as big as they hope and whether folks doing much video are going to prefer doing in on a stills-style camera rather than a video-centric purpose-built system
I have a buddy who does both still photography (he's a successful 'fine art" landscape photographer and author of several books) and who does a lot of video including some of the Nature videos you see on CBS Sunday Morning. I may be unduly affected by his particular perspective, but he carries a mirrorless camera system (from Sony... after continuing to use MF film up until just a few years ago) and separate video camera equipment that is purely for video — not a still camera that also does video.
Anyway, I guess we're all speculating at this point. We'll see how this develops.
Yeah, definately speculating as I don't have much view into that side of things. A local camera shop said they had a preorder list building for it so we'll see. Hope it works out.
mdude85 wrote:
The stacked sensor in the XH2s allows for faster video readout with less rolling shutter and better subject tracking, which many video enthusiasts will value over the ability to shoot 8k video (a feature which may not even be available on the XH2).
Thanks for the explanation of why the X-H2s is considered the better video camera. That makes sense.
But I would find it VERY odd if they introduce a 40 Megapixel model, but wouldnt give it 8K.
If you look at the history of Fujifilm:
- Used the 16 Megapixel sensor from Sony really until it was no longer available.
- Used the 24 Megapixel Sony sensor until better tech (backlit and dual gain) was available with the 26 Megapixel sensor
- Always said they arent about Megapixels.
Then really the only reason why they would have a 40 Megapixel sensor would be because you need that resolution for 8K video and the X-H line was always supposed to be their video flagship (the X-H1 was the first to have IBIS).
Sauseschritt wrote:
Then really the only reason why they would have a 40 Megapixel sensor would be because you need that resolution for 8K video and the X-H line was always supposed to be their video flagship (the X-H1 was the first to have IBIS).
Another reason would be to compete with the higher resolution offerings from Canon and Sony, which target the professional market.
But yes, it would not be surprising if it could shoot 8k video -- I was just saying that this is still just a rumor.
mdude85 wrote:
Another reason would be to compete with the higher resolution offerings from Canon and Sony, which target the professional market.
That's what Fuji says the GFX line is for.
If they want a high-resolution option in the X line, maybe they could implement pixel-shift multi-shot with motion correction on the existing sensor, like Panasonic has... instead of going to 40MP with a tiny pixel pitch. However, I suspect they will go with 40MP just to be able to market it as an 8K camera.
molson wrote:
f they want a high-resolution option in the X line, maybe they could implement pixel-shift multi-shot with motion correction on the existing sensor, like Panasonic has... instead of going to 40MP with a tiny pixel pitch.
I' not sure that pixel-shift will work with the x-trans filter array.
molson wrote:
However, I suspect they will go with 40MP just to be able to market it as an 8K camera.
That's certainly possible. I also suspect part of the reason to use a 40MP sensor is to compete with the higher resolution offerings from Canon and Sony, but at a much more attractive price than the GFX series and without the "baggage" of medium format. It needs a high resolution camera in the sub $3k category, both for video and for stills, that is also compatible with all the X mount lenses.
But both the GFX and XH series could both feasibly compete with the higher (or highest) end offerings from the big 3. It doesn't have to be one or the other, and ideally, it shouldn't be.
Either way, it's going to be interesting to see what happens in a few months. I don't think I can justify switching from an XT4 to an XH2 just for more resolution. I'm more excited about some of the new lens offerings from Sigma and others coming down the pipeline.
mdude85 wrote:
That's certainly possible. I also suspect part of the reason to use a 40MP sensor is to compete with the higher resolution offerings from Canon and Sony, but at a much more attractive price than the GFX series and without the "baggage" of medium format. It needs a high resolution camera in the sub $3k category, both for video and for stills, that is also compatible with all the X mount lenses.
Fuji's current marketing strategy is to price their products in the same bracket as the cameras they see as their direct competition, so a 40MP camera might not slot into the sub-$3k category.
molson wrote:
I guess I missed this feature amongst all the online previews, but apparently the X-H2S now has pre-shot buffering like the Olympus cameras.
Same as all FujiFilm X series cameras since the X-T3
The X-T4 has an excellent balance of stuff (for now). Stills, videos, IBIS, dials, battery life, price. I think IBIS is really where the big technological leap is, so it might be hard to justify upgrading from X-T4 to X-H2/S since they are all IBIS bodies.
mdude85 wrote:
Either way, it's going to be interesting to see what happens in a few months. I don't think I can justify switching from an XT4 to an XH2 just for more resolution. I'm more excited about some of the new lens offerings from Sigma and others coming down the pipeline.
molson wrote:
Fuji's current marketing strategy is to price their products in the same bracket as the cameras they see as their direct competition.
In that case, the 50S would need to be a sub $3k camera, while the 100S would need to be sub $4k, in order to be consistent with your earlier claim that the GFX line directly competes with the higher (but not highest) end offerings from Sony, Canon or Nikon.
