Between summer camp pickup and soccer practice dropoff, a friendly Mourning Dove landed on my deck. He even sat for me as I opened the door and screen, and let me fire off a few photos.
You can see the bird was shaded, but had some sun on his back. Not great lighting by any means, but better than the hard sun and 100ft photos that I have managed until now, and probably the only opportunity I'll have to use the lens for at least a week.
One thing I noticed with the X-H2S is that Lightroom's default RAW sharpening is not even close to appropriate. It's easy enough to create a sharpening preset, but it made me wonder if LR's processing is also poor for the X-H2S, as is Adobe's reputation with X-Trans sensors. So I shot a RAW, and then used the camera to develop a JPEG. This photo is both of them, side-by-side in LR's compare view. This is a 100% crop at 600mm wide open. RAW on the left:
https://i.imgur.com/jCNVw1a.jpg
I also have a frame at ISO500 and another at ISO2500, and there's no significant noise or resolution difference.
By "default sharpening" do you mean something that Lightroom proposes for Fujifilm cameras, or a generic default setting. (I'm a Photoshop/ACR/Bridge person, so my. experience in LR is limited.)
I always work out sharpening settings specific to different cameras. I think my Adobe Bridge settings are:
Amount: 40
Radius: .5
Details: 25
Be careful of the details setting with x-trans files. If you raise it as high as you might with other cameras/brands you can end up with some artifacts along edges. 25 is the highest I'll go, and I may go as low as 0 "details."
You mention 600mm. is this the new 150-600mm zoom? If so, looks quite good!
It’s the default Lightroom setting, no customization on my part. I just imported an X-H2S RAW file and LR gave me its defaults, which were too low on all three sliders (ignoring masking).
I know the artifacts you’re talking about… I’ve seen making in feathers and “double edges” from X-Trans files before. I didn’t get any of that on this image, but I certainly can’t say I won’t see it in other files.
The lens was the new 150-600, yes. It certainly seems like it can do the job, I agree. I’d love to get some better light and subjects, but I have limited time right now, and I’m more interested in usability versus my Z9 than I am interested in which lens resolves the most lp/mm.
I think that for many, the big question with the Fuji XF150-600 is its performance at f/8 vs the XF100-400 + 1.4X which gives 560mm at f/8. I shoot that combo at f/9 on the Fuji X-H1 and haven't really seen anything posted, yet, that demonstrates significantly better resolution, IMO.
I will probably rent one in a couple of months, along (possibly) with the X-H2S, and then compare the various combinations between the X-H1, X-H2S, and the two Fuji teles. Only way to really tell whether it is worth it as there are other factors such as AF speed, precision, initial focus acquisition time, overall handling, etc. which also contribute to the user experience.
bobby350z wrote:
BTW - Anyone have samples of people shots to share from this camera, at f1.4 etc? Thanks. Just want to see how well eye AF works. I watched a youtube video where it still show quite a few misses.
What are you looking for regarding eye AF, Bobby?
I have a 35/1.4, 56/1.2, and 80/2.8 to test. I don't have any people to shoot for samples (just family and I don't post them), but just pointing the thing at a mirror with my 35/1.4 I can hear the AF motor working overtime during eye detect as if it was going to be all over the place on focus. The resulting burst of 20 frames (15fps) was consistent in AF, but I'd say the focus point was closer to my eyebrow than eyelashes. The 56/1.2 was the same story, although its AF is quieter and faster so it wasn't chattering quite so much.
CKrueger wrote:
What are you looking for regarding eye AF, Bobby?
I have a 35/1.4, 56/1.2, and 80/2.8 to test. I don't have any people to shoot for samples (just family and I don't post them), but just pointing the thing at a mirror with my 35/1.4 I can hear the AF motor working overtime during eye detect as if it was going to be all over the place on focus. The resulting burst of 20 frames (15fps) was consistent in AF, but I'd say the focus point was closer to my eyebrow than eyelashes. The 56/1.2 was the same story, although its AF is quieter and faster so it wasn't chattering quite so much. ...Show more →
Here is my take. Most youtube videos just show a dancing green square on the eye. Honestly using both Fuji as well as Sony, I would say that it means nothing. None of the youtubers share high res shots. Rarely anyone discuss their success rate. I will say that using Sony, their eye AF is good, not as good as some would make it out to be as I still had issues with A7rIV. A1 was a game changer. Now I am not looking that level of performance. Folks saying H2 being stacked means A9/A1 or Z9 performance, I don't think that's going to happen but I would be happy with say 80% of that. If X2H can nail 8 out of 10 shots at f1.2, f1.4 while the subject was doing their things like moving around, I would be happy. I use GFX and it works for my needs but I would still be interested in having a 40MP XT5 if the old style dials remain.
bobby350z wrote:
Here is my take. Most youtube videos just show a dancing green square on the eye. Honestly using both Fuji as well as Sony, I would say that it means nothing. None of the youtubers share high res shots. Rarely anyone discuss their success rate. I will say that using Sony, their eye AF is good, not as good as some would make it out to be as I still had issues with A7rIV. A1 was a game changer. Now I am not looking that level of performance. Folks saying H2 being stacked means A9/A1 or Z9 performance, I don't think that's going to happen but I would be happy with say 80% of that. If X2H can nail 8 out of 10 shots at f1.2, f1.4 while the subject was doing their things like moving around, I would be happy. I use GFX and it works for my needs but I would still be interested in having a 40MP XT5 if the old style dials remain....Show more →
80% hit rate it is not Somewhat of some sloppy tests, but very "real world" in that regard.
CKrueger wrote:
It’s the default Lightroom setting, no customization on my part. I just imported an X-H2S RAW file and LR gave me its defaults, which were too low on all three sliders (ignoring masking).
I know the artifacts you’re talking about… I’ve seen making in feathers and “double edges” from X-Trans files before. I didn’t get any of that on this image, but I certainly can’t say I won’t see it in other files.
The lens was the new 150-600, yes. It certainly seems like it can do the job, I agree. I’d love to get some better light and subjects, but I have limited time right now, and I’m more interested in usability versus my Z9 than I am interested in which lens resolves the most lp/mm. ...Show more →
Yes, I think the detail in your examples is impressive, especially given the sometimes-difficult subject of feathers, which can show up the details problem and can show aliasing effects.
The details issue can be more of a concern at high ISOs where there is a bit more noise. A high details setting will (for lack of a better explanation) increase the "graininess" of high contrast edges. Raising the masking value can limit this to a very narrow range at the edges, but I find that using soft touch with details helps. (I do additional sharpening in photoshop after the main work that I do in ACR.)
I've expressed some reservations about the market prospects of the XH2-series cameras that I won't rehash here. However, it looks like it may get things to a point where, along with the 150-600mm, it could be viable for wildlife photography. I'll be interested to see some examples from folks who photograph birds in flight, since that adds a different challenge beyond that of a static bird.
mdude85 wrote:
I don't really understand the theory that a bunch of different Youtubers are conspiring to fake the AF results of the XH2S.
Wouldn't it just seem a lot more rational that the eye AF is significantly improved?
If you don't want to buy the camera, then just don't buy it, and let others enjoy it.
I don't think anyone is claiming they are faking per se, but most youtubers rely on simply showing the green AF box from the LCD/EVF, which across all brands is NOT an accurate indicator of actual hit/keeper rate. The other issue with Youtubers is they rely solely on the HYPE TRAIN with such videos titles such as "I'M SWITCHING BACK TO FUJI BECAUSE OF THE X-HS2" and the like. It's very had to separate the noise from the signal on Youtube.
Videos like the one I linked above is a much better indicator of performance.
So far, the HS2 does seem to be shaking out as a nice upgrade over the last Fuji gen, but nowhere close to the latest AF from Canon/Sony/Nikon's stacked sensors, which is fine and was expected. It looks like it's shaking out to be a decent value and decent upgrade for those that need it and are unwilling to abandon Fuji.
mdude85 wrote:
I don't really understand the theory that a bunch of different Youtubers are conspiring to fake the AF results of the XH2S.
Wouldn't it just seem a lot more rational that the eye AF is significantly improved?
Most likely both scenarios are true. Well, not the "fake" comment, but these online reviews tend to over-hype the performance of most new products, judging by the last million or so YouTube "reviews"...
If you don't want to buy the camera, then just don't buy it, and let others enjoy it.
That's what I did, and from what I'm hearing, I'm glad I did.
Gotcha, Bobby. I totally agree that a green box doesn't mean good photos. Fuji's green box is particularly scatter-brained in my experience. The results tend to be better than the instrumentation, but it's not exactly confidence-inspiring to watch the box lag behind reality!
I don't know how I could test eye AF in a provable manner that would be helpful to you, to be honest:
1) If I fired off a few headshot bursts and it missed a lot or was inconsistent, it could easily be chalked up to my technique or an iffy lens on my end. (Which is why I bought one to test instead of relying on YouTube "experts").
2) If I came back and told you that it's beyond reproach, you'd (wisely) wonder if I was a brand apologist, didn't know how to judge accurately, or just had looser standards than you.
3) If I shared some images that were sharp, you might wonder if those were hero frames.
Perhaps it's best if I just fired a few frames and showed the eyeball the camera thought it focused on? Hopefully that helps, cause that's what I just did!
https://i.imgur.com/K0pUdU4.jpg
The first two frames are shot from <3ft. The second two frames are shot from ~8ft. All are 100% crops magnified by Lightroom's Survey view. In all four frames the camera had a focus box on this eye. Shot with my 56/1.2 (non APD) at 1/125 f/1.2 ISO160 in S-AF on a tripod with the Bluetooth remote trigger. SOOC "Provia" JPEGs with default settings. Mixed sunlight and daylight LEDs.
RoamingScott wrote:
Videos like the one I linked above is a much better indicator of performance.
Respectfully, I disagree that you can judge performance by watching a failure. A video where someone can't make the camera perform only shows that this person couldn't make this camera perform at this time. There's many things that could have caused the failure, and the camera is generally the least likely culprit.
Let's say Tony Northrup got his hands on this kit and proclaimed "The X-H2S is crap, so you should buy an A1!". The translation that should be in everyone's brain is "you're a sensationalist Sony salesman trolling for clicks, Tony."
We've also all seen some people without much wildlife experience shooting this kit and making judgements. We shouldn't be so quick to accept their findings, positive or negative, because anyone can get a few hero frames, and anyone can screw up a whole day's shoot.
And I suppose it goes without saying, you shouldn't trust a word that comes out of my mouth, either, cause I might also be biased or unskilled.
To abuse a car analogy, you could put me in an F1 car and set me loose on Monaco. Watching me set a four minute lap doesn't mean the car is slow.
I will make this judgement: I've shot great wildlife photos with much less capable hardware than this, and regardless of this kit's place in the market, it's easily good enough to reliably get the photos that I want. Up to 900mm-e at f/8, of course.
I'll also say that it's better than my Z6+100-400, if that's more concrete.
CKrueger wrote:
Respectfully, I disagree that you can judge performance by watching a failure. A video where someone can't make the camera perform only shows that this person couldn't make this camera perform at this time. There's many things that could have caused the failure, and the camera is generally the least likely culprit.
Let's say Tony Northrup got his hands on this kit and proclaimed "The X-H2S is crap, so you should buy an A1!". The translation that should be in everyone's brain is "you're a sensationalist Sony salesman trolling for clicks, Tony."
We've also all seen some people without much wildlife experience shooting this kit and making judgements. We shouldn't be so quick to accept their findings, positive or negative, because anyone can get a few hero frames, and anyone can screw up a whole day's shoot.
And I suppose it goes without saying, you shouldn't trust a word that comes out of my mouth, either, cause I might also be biased or unskilled.
To abuse a car analogy, you could put me in an F1 car and set me loose on Monaco. Watching me set a four minute lap doesn't mean the car is slow.
I will make this judgement: I've shot great wildlife photos with much less capable hardware than this, and regardless of this kit's place in the market, it's easily good enough to reliably get the photos that I want. Up to 900mm-e at f/8, of course.
I'll also say that it's better than my Z6+100-400, if that's more concrete. ...Show more →
We get that you're riding the fence so hard that you're in desperate need of a donut pillow
Gotcha, Bobby. I totally agree that a green box doesn't mean good photos. Fuji's green box is particularly scatter-brained in my experience. The results tend to be better than the instrumentation, but it's not exactly confidence-inspiring to watch the box lag behind reality!
I don't know how I could test eye AF in a provable manner that would be helpful to you, to be honest:
1) If I fired off a few headshot bursts and it missed a lot or was inconsistent, it could easily be chalked up to my technique or an iffy lens on my end. (Which is why I bought one to test instead of relying on YouTube "experts").
2) If I came back and told you that it's beyond reproach, you'd (wisely) wonder if I was a brand apologist, didn't know how to judge accurately, or just had looser standards than you.
3) If I shared some images that were sharp, you might wonder if those were hero frames.
Perhaps it's best if I just fired a few frames and showed the eyeball the camera thought it focused on? Hopefully that helps, cause that's what I just did!
https://i.imgur.com/K0pUdU4.jpg
The first two frames are shot from <3ft. The second two frames are shot from ~8ft. All are 100% crops magnified by Lightroom's Survey view. In all four frames the camera had a focus box on this eye. Shot with my 56/1.2 (non APD) at 1/125 f/1.2 ISO160 in S-AF on a tripod with the Bluetooth remote trigger. SOOC "Provia" JPEGs with default settings. Mixed sunlight and daylight LEDs.
I think you are right, though. Nothing ever gets proven beyond (or even within hailing range of) a reasonable doubt when folks post in photo forums. And if you DO offer something that is more or less incontrovertible proof... you'll get called a "fanboy" and/or they'll change the subject!
Over time we'll probably get a better sense of how the AF on this camera functions, but judging from the interminable Camera Wars rhetoric on just about every topic, nothing will convince the religious to question their preconceptions.
My own view on Fujifilm AF (based mostly on cameras no newer than my XPro2) is that it has generally been, to be honest and polite, "generally effective but hardly industry-leading." Part of that is just the normal evolutionary timeline of advances in AF, but still.
In any case, your test images are pretty encouraging — enough so that I'm bit more optimistic about one option I'm considering going forward. All of the pieces aren't in place for it yet, but one option I've considered is a GFX system for landscape and similar photography accompanied by a x-trans system for lots of other stuff. Two things have held me back. One is that the GFX can't cover my needs for long focal lengths and system speed (modest need, but faster than GFX) at this point. The focal length issue still isn't solved for me, but if I took my wildlife photography (currently done on a FF system) out of the equation the system speed issue wouldn't be such an issue.
If it turns out that the XH2-style AF system performs well — and, again, your tests and other reports give some optimism — then that or anohter Fujifilm system (XT5?) plus the 150-600 could work for me.
(I'm at a sort of gear inflection point. My FF system is a high resolution Canon FF system based on EF L lenses. I'm currently waiting to see what Canon does with a future high-MP mirrorless model in the 5Ds/5DsR lineage. But since that would likely entail replacing a whole slew of lenses eventually, I'm more open to considering other non-Canon systems for my larger format system.)
We'll see.
One other thing. As you point out, there are so many variables when using an advanced AF system that it is really hard to tease out the precise performance capabilities. Anyone who has dealt with subjects like birds-in-flight, various high-speed sports, and similar understand that it isn't as simple as "select the right mode and go." There's actually a degree of technique involved in _how_ you use these AF modes.
That would certainly be a contender for worst ergonomic combo of all time
Hopefully add on grips will still be available. The X-H2 would be a much more logical pairing for that lens, if all other specs are supposedly the same.
RoamingScott wrote:
I don't think anyone is claiming they are faking per se, but most youtubers rely on simply showing the green AF box from the LCD/EVF, which across all brands is NOT an accurate indicator of actual hit/keeper rate. The other issue with Youtubers is they rely solely on the HYPE TRAIN with such videos titles such as "I'M SWITCHING BACK TO FUJI BECAUSE OF THE X-HS2" and the like. It's very had to separate the noise from the signal on Youtube.
Videos like the one I linked above is a much better indicator of performance.
So far, the HS2 does seem to be shaking out as a nice upgrade over the last Fuji gen, but nowhere close to the latest AF from Canon/Sony/Nikon's stacked sensors, which is fine and was expected. It looks like it's shaking out to be a decent value and decent upgrade for those that need it and are unwilling to abandon Fuji....Show more →
gdanmitchell wrote:
One other thing. As you point out, there are so many variables when using an advanced AF system that it is really hard to tease out the precise performance capabilities. Anyone who has dealt with subjects like birds-in-flight, various high-speed sports, and similar understand that it isn't as simple as "select the right mode and go." There's actually a degree of technique involved in _how_ you use these AF modes.
Dan
Just going by my experience of using Sony for 2 years. All you need to do is setup a button for eye-AF and shoot in AF-C mode. Then as long you press that button the camera will just track it very nicely. I do agree that one needs to be aware of these nuisances and unless you configure that separate button for eye-AF you will struggle.
RoamingScott wrote:
We get that you're riding the fence so hard that you're in desperate need of a donut pillow
That's incorrect. I bought a camera to test, I did my tests, and made my decision. At this point I'm just trying my best to share what I've learned in hopes it helps someone else in their decision-making. I'm not going to make a big deal about making a choice, because I don't give a rip which camera anyone else uses, and I hope nobody cares which one I use, either.
If this conversation is just another "Hot or Not" thread for the X-H2S, I'll show myself the door.
Somewhat of some sloppy tests, but very "real world" in that regard.
