Fuji X-H1

[retow]

This opinion is unfortunately what is repeated far too often all around the web again and again - I have a completely different view and actually that is not just my view because it is reality!

The telelenses and and actually all lenses are smaller the smaller the sensor format. Take a 2.8/40-150 from Olympus, that equals a 2.8/80-300 in FF and while such a FF equivalent does not exist, it would be 3-4 times the size and weight of that Olympus m43 lens. Same is true for APSC versus FF although the differences in size and weight are smaller. Or take for example the new Olympus Pro 1.2/45 that equals a 1.2/90 in FF - even the 1.4/85 from Nikon or Canon are substantially larger, etc., etc.

So size advantages exist and can be seen and felt very well.

The difference in our conclusions seems to be based on different views on "equivalence", a term I used in my statement. With that in mind I prefer e.g. a Batis 85 f1.8 on a FF sensor in lieu of trying to partly catch up with a 45mm f 1.2 for mft.

 

[ptomsu]

The difference in our conclusions seems to be based on different views on "equivalence", a term I used in my statement. With that in mind I prefer e.g. a Batis 85 f1.8 on a FF sensor in lieu of trying to partly catch up with a 45mm f 1.2 for mft.

I was never attracted by these 1.8 FF lenses - owned several of them but they never did speak to me. Loved my Canon 1.2/85 and my Nikkor 1.4/85 (G and pre G) and since I really liked them I used them. The Nikkor 1.8/85 or 1.8/35 never spoke to me and hence I did not use them. And BTW I could not care less about effective DOF etc., etc.

I could see the Olympus 1.2/45 or the Nocticron 1.2/42.5 speak to me as also the Fuji 1.2/56 spoke to me when I used it - this is as simple.

But you are right, I think we have very different views of different things and also are emotionally very different and this is not only ok, this is actually great :clap:

 

[iiiNelson]

My opinion about this is that APS-C and Micro 4/3 is having a transformative maturation of lens and camera body design similar to what we’ve seen with Full Frame 35mm 5-10 years ago when the rumors of high megapixel bodies were beginning to trickle out. The lenses are getting larger so that optically the smaller sensored cameras can compete more effectively in image quality with larger sensored cameras from 2+ generations back.

Regarding the XH1... it seems to be about the same size as an A7RII roughly but maybe a smidge wider. Larger sensored cameras tend to have high end glass that’s a bit better but what’s available for Fuji and Micro 4/3 is good enough. Now the interesting thing is that the best Fuji and Micro 4/3 lenses tend to be priced comparably to the FF lenses of similar DoF but no complaints there as it mostly seems to be fairly priced. What I would like to see Fuji release is a 23/1, 33/1, and a 70/1.2 all weather resistant or updates to the older lenses with the new linear motors as that would round out the lineup a bit more for those coming from FF systems.

 

[Shashin]

The Fuji 14mm f/2.8 is more reasonable than a 21mm f/2.8 35mm lens. With a 23mm/35mm f/2 lens comparison, Fuji seems to be about the same or cheaper than then 35mm sensor equivalent depending on the age of the lens--older Nikkors seem to be in the same range, newer lenses are more expensive. I have few complaints with my Fuji optics.

F/1 lenses are really expensive regardless of the format. If you what a narrow DoF, then go to a larger format. At some point, it is just going to be too inefficient to design lenses to have similar DoFs to other formats. Buy a format that has the qualities you want, rather than trying to make a format look like something it is not.

 

[iiiNelson]

The Fuji 14mm f/2.8 is more reasonable than a 21mm f/2.8 35mm lens. With a 23mm/35mm f/2 lens comparison, Fuji seems to be about the same or cheaper than then 35mm sensor equivalent depending on the age of the lens--older Nikkors seem to be in the same range, newer lenses are more expensive. I have few complaints with my Fuji optics.

F/1 lenses are really expensive regardless of the format. If you what a narrow DoF, then go to a larger format. At some point, it is just going to be too inefficient to design lenses to have similar DoFs to other formats. Buy a format that has the qualities you want, rather than trying to make a format look like something it is not.

Well Fuji had the 33/1 on their roadmap so that’s why I brought it up and it is more of a desire of mine to have in addition to the f/2 primes.

As for the 70mm I don’t believe enough companies produce lenses in the 100-110mm range any longer and it was always a staple. Nikon has their 105/1.4 , Sony has their STF (that should’ve been a f/2), and Zeiss has their 100/2 Planar manual focus lens and that’s about it in modern designs. You usually see something in the 85-90 range then they jump to 135. I think the 100-110 focal length is ideal for portraits and working with models at a more comfortable distance where you aren’t too close are not too far. Newer models or subjects tend to feel more comfortable in that space. Not trying to change the system but once it’s built out and lenses are updated I’d assume it’s time to get into those specialty type lenses that drive more conversation over the Fuji system.

 

[retow]

The Fuji 14mm f/2.8 is more reasonable than a 21mm f/2.8 35mm lens. With a 23mm/35mm f/2 lens comparison, Fuji seems to be about the same or cheaper than then 35mm sensor equivalent depending on the age of the lens--older Nikkors seem to be in the same range, newer lenses are more expensive. I have few complaints with my Fuji optics.

F/1 lenses are really expensive regardless of the format. If you what a narrow DoF, then go to a larger format. At some point, it is just going to be too inefficient to design lenses to have similar DoFs to other formats. Buy a format that has the qualities you want, rather than trying to make a format look like something it is not.

Your last statement is interesting as it nails exactly what f1.2 mft lenses seem trying to do, i.e. to close the gap to FF for DOF control and amount of light passed on to the sensor somewhat. Yet the DR, tonal transition of a FF sensor remains out of reach. And the cost are increases in weight, bulk and price.

 

[Shashin]

Your last statement is interesting as it nails exactly what f1.2 mft lenses seem trying to do, i.e. to close the gap to FF for DOF control and amount of light passed on to the sensor somewhat. Yet the DR, tonal transition of a FF sensor remains out of reach. And the cost are increases in weight, bulk and price.

Exposure is simply based on f-number. An f/2 lens is an f/2 lens. Perhaps Olympus and Panasonic are making fast lenses for the benefits to exposure. There can also be benefits to resolving power, which small sensors need.

I am simply talking about DoF. But there is no "correct" DoF, so to say one format is superior because it has more or less DoF is simply a preference. In my case with my X Pro2, I prefer the gain in DoF with a given aperture. I also have 35mm and MFD cameras. I doubt Olympus and Panasonic are trying to make their u4/3 cameras into 35mm ones. Having an f/1.2 lens is not uncommon in a lens line. It is kind of a jump to say that camera companies are designing products based on "equivalence." They could simply be doing what other companies do and giving their customers a choice.

DR is a product of the pixel. So format does not in and of itself determine DR. Frequency and contrast does change with sensor size, I guess that is your tonal transition. But comparing 35mm and APS-C size sensor, the quality of light and the skill of the photographer will be a larger factor in image quality, especially since there are digital ways to enhance low- and high-frequency contrast. When I went to Fuji, my quality test were a series of 40" prints. I think there are other criteria that are more important today than simply the size of the format, not that it isn't relevant, it is just not that relevant.

 

[Vivek]

..

I AM LOOKING AT YOU SONY

A 2 year old Sony FF (@60% debut price), to me, is still preferable to any of the smaller format new offerings. Too good.

There are tons of improvements needed from Sony but they still have the overall edge, AFAIC.

 

[iiiNelson]

A 2 year old Sony FF (@60% debut price), to me, is still preferable to any of the smaller format new offerings. Too good.

There are tons of improvements needed from Sony but they still have the overall edge, AFAIC.

I would tend to agree as it applies to pure image quality potential. With each passing generation, the gap is getting smaller to where some of the better APS-C bodies are producing images better than say the original 5D was and approaching the image quality potential of lower resolution FF cameras from 5 years ago like say the D600, A7, or 6D.

Part of that is lens systems, forgoing AA filters, and Sony developing better APS-C sensors at a high rate. One of the benefits to them putting out yearly updates to cameras in the past.

 

[ptomsu]

A 2 year old Sony FF (@60% debut price), to me, is still preferable to any of the smaller format new offerings. Too good.

There are tons of improvements needed from Sony but they still have the overall edge, AFAIC.

Why that might be technically true, you would have to kill me to take again one of the S.... B...S.... cameras in hand. Never say never again - but I think I am done forever with Sony.

So here you have it - remains Fuji and m43 - till hopefully Nikon appears with a FF mirrorless offering :toocool:

PS: and yes there is Leica with the M10 and the SL, but that's a different story and price region :facesmack:

 

[Vivek]

There are two sets of people I am quite appreciative of:

1. Those who Sony beta testers (aka preorder customers). They help innovation.
2. Those who hate anything Sony made. These keep pressure on them to improve.

Leica, who?

Dump the lenses while they still have some value and move on to real photographic gear.

Why that might be technically true, you would have to kill me to take again one of the S.... B...S.... cameras in hand. Never say never again - but I think I am done forever with Sony.

So here you have it - remains Fuji and m43 - till hopefully Nikon appears with a FF mirrorless offering :toocool:

PS: and yes there is Leica with the M10 and the SL, but that's a different story and price region :facesmack:

 

[ptomsu]

There are two sets of people I am quite appreciative of:

1. Those who Sony beta testers (aka preorder customers). They help innovation.
2. Those who hate anything Sony made. These keep pressure on them to improve.

Leica, who?

Dump the lenses while they still have some value and move on to real photographic gear.

You bet it, I was already thinking about selling some of my Leica gear - and .... move on to either Fuji or Nikon. So I will wait till the introduction of the Nikon FF mirrorless before I do anything. Meanwhile I still have my inferior EM1.2 and Olympus Pro lenses to survive the next months

WRT Sony: I was so pissed by this company when they abandoned the Alpha mount (actually not really but what came in the last 4-5 years?). So I got rid of all that crap and decided to stay away from them just to avoid any further frustration. And from what I have seen over the past years I was right - at least for me!

 

[rayyan]

I will buy this cam; once the dust has settled. And further real world reviews are on hand.

I have 2 Fuji lenses that are enough to go anywhere with me. But I have not traveled with them as they are big and lack OIS.

Now with this cam my 16-55 and my 90mm lenses are sufficient for most of my photography except perhaps macro ( 80mm macro is appealing ).

Of course, I wouldn’t leave home without the wonderful 35/1.4

2 cams. 2 lenses. OIS in one. 35/1.4 on the other. Bring it on!

 

[iiiNelson]

You bet it, I was already thinking about selling some of my Leica gear - and .... move on to either Fuji or Nikon. So I will wait till the introduction of the Nikon FF mirrorless before I do anything. Meanwhile I still have my inferior EM1.2 and Olympus Pro lenses to survive the next months

WRT Sony: I was so pissed by this company when they abandoned the Alpha mount (actually not really but what came in the last 4-5 years?). So I got rid of all that crap and decided to stay away from them just to avoid any further frustration. And from what I have seen over the past years I was right - at least for me!

Technically they haven’t abandoned A-mount but what they did was invest more deeply into E-mount if for no other reason than because A-mount lens system was/is mostly built out. As for bodies, the A99II was released last year and for all intents and purposes it’s a better version of the A7RII that the A7RIII borrows heavily from. So I wouldn’t say that A-mount is dead but rather in its mature phase

 

[ptomsu]

Technically they haven’t abandoned A-mount but what they did was invest more deeply into E-mount if for no other reason than because A-mount lens system was/is mostly built out. As for bodies, the A99II was released last year and for all intents and purposes it’s a better version of the A7RII that the A7RIII borrows heavily from. So I wouldn’t say that A-mount is dead but rather in its mature phase

Depends on how you see it - glass half full or empty - but for me the A-mount is dead. especially as there are no more lenses to expect for this mount. Also meanwhile I am over DSLR-type cameras and would definitely not go back again, this is also the reason why a Nikon D850 is of no interest for me, although it is an excellent and very capable machine for both video and stills.

 

[ptomsu]

I will buy this cam; once the dust has settled. And further real world reviews are on hand.

I have 2 Fuji lenses that are enough to go anywhere with me. But I have not traveled with them as they are big and lack OIS.

Now with this cam my 16-55 and my 90mm lenses are sufficient for most of my photography except perhaps macro ( 80mm macro is appealing ).

Of course, I wouldn’t leave home without the wonderful 35/1.4

2 cams. 2 lenses. OIS in one. 35/1.4 on the other. Bring it on!

Very good decision.

I am also waiting how the next few months pan out for the X-system and then depending on what Nikon is doing with their FF mirrorless I might totally jump into the X-system and even leave m43 - who knows.

My preferred X-lineup would be X-H1, 16-55, 10-24, 100-400 for the zooms and 56, 80, maybe 1.4/23 for the primes. Good to have plans and options

 

[iiiNelson]

Depends on how you see it - glass half full or empty - but for me the A-mount is dead. especially as there are no more lenses to expect for this mount. Also meanwhile I am over DSLR-type cameras and would definitely not go back again, this is also the reason why a Nikon D850 is of no interest for me, although it is an excellent and very capable machine for both video and stills.

Well I try not to be pessimistic but that’s just me. Too much negativity in real life generally speaking.

Regarding DSLR’s I think there are extremely capable machines but I tend to agree that mirrorless is the future and it’s a reason I haven’t owned one (outside a short stint with the A77mkI) since I bought the Panasonic G1. As much as we talk about the camera bodies what people choose to shoot ultimately has to be a choice about lenses available and lighting support. I’m not saying the body is not important, because it’s the medium that we interact with and allows us to make or miss the shot, bit of native lenses aren’t available then you better have a way to adapt IMO.

In any case I’m on my way to the store to actually handle the XH1. I’ll report back on my subjective thoughts later on.

 

[ptomsu]

Well I try not to be pessimistic but that’s just me. Too much negativity in real life generally speaking.

Regarding DSLR’s I think there are extremely capable machines but I tend to agree that mirrorless is the future and it’s a reason I haven’t owned one (outside a short stint with the A77mkI) since I bought the Panasonic G1. As much as we talk about the camera bodies what people choose to shoot ultimately has to be a choice about lenses available and lighting support. I’m not saying the body is not important, because it’s the medium that we interact with and allows us to make or miss the shot, bit of native lenses aren’t available then you better have a way to adapt IMO.

In any case I’m on my way to the store to actually handle the XH1. I’ll report back on my subjective thoughts later on.

Thanks, and really looking forward to your thoughts!

 

[iiiNelson]

So I just tried out the XH1 (and the entire Fujifilm lens lineup).

If you are used to using the larger Fujifilm lenses then you will reallly like this camera. Ergonomics has a large effect on how heavy a camera feels (weight) compared to its actual mass. Comparing the XH1 to the Graphite XT2 that was next to it (which looks so much better in person BTW) I really couldn’t tell much difference in weight when holding the camera up to my eye (though I realize there is a difference). The 10-24, 16-55, 18-135, 16/1.4, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, and 90/2 really balance well and naturally on the XH1. The 80/2.8 and 50-140 are slightly front heavy large lenses but they’re manageable on the XH1 even without the grip on. The 100-400 is large no matter what and and I would likely not shoot it without the grip for comfort personally speaking. The 18, 23, 27, 35, and 50mm f/2 primes are dwarfed on this body but perform well.

The new EVF is really nice and seems to be the same one from the GFX but with a noticeably higher refresh rate. It would be hard to image those that are anti-EVF disliking this one unless they are just set on OVF or nothing. The touch focus was responsive enough for most shooting. There seemed to be a very slight delay in touch to focus then the focus box moving. It’s perceptaible but not a deal breaker to me. The joystick is still there for those that care. The Wxposure compensation button is placed nicely IMO and falls exactly where my index finger would be if I lift my finger from the shutter and bend it. The dials on the front and back of the camera felt nice and were positioned where I’d like them.

The shutter is incredibly quiet and has a really soft feel similar to using a soft release on a Leica M IMO. When I first took a shot it had about the same loudness volume as a lens focus motor. Perceptible to the shooter but unlikely to be heard by anyone without the ears of a dog on the streets. Rear LCD quality is about equal as the XT2. The camera reacts faster though for instance when you rotate it to portrait mode the information realigns more quickly than the XT2.

All in all its it’s a great effort by Fuji and the camera is their most comfortable to hold IMO (besides the GFX). If I had to compare it to other mirrorless cameras then I’d say it felt like a slightly taller and slightly wider A7RII. I didn’t preorder one yet (mostly because I’m mulling over lens selection after using them all today) but the Fuji rep mentioned that they’re shipping a large amount of bodies stateside and they expect that it will be a hit with photographers. As for now I imagine the 16-55 and/or 50-140 are must buys for me and I’m leaning towards adding the 56 and 90 as well. Generally I’d like to have a 35 and or 50 equivalent but I didn’t really love either of Fuji’s offerings in f/1.4 or f/2. I realize this is subjective but they don’t compare favorably optically with my Sony lenses in that range from what I could tell. I will likely look at samples on Flickr to make a decision but I’m leaning towards one of the 35’s or maybe just the 23/1.4... oh but the 16/1.4 is really nice IMO too.

 

[ptomsu]

So I just tried out the XH1 (and the entire Fujifilm lens lineup).

If you are used to using the larger Fujifilm lenses then you will reallly like this camera. Ergonomics has a large effect on how heavy a camera feels (weight) compared to its actual mass. Comparing the XH1 to the Graphite XT2 that was next to it (which looks so much better in person BTW) I really couldn’t tell much difference in weight when holding the camera up to my eye (though I realize there is a difference). The 10-24, 16-55, 18-135, 16/1.4, 23/1.4, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, and 90/2 really balance well and naturally on the XH1. The 80/2.8 and 50-140 are slightly front heavy large lenses but they’re manageable on the XH1 even without the grip on. The 100-400 is large no matter what and and I would likely not shoot it without the grip for comfort personally speaking. The 18, 23, 27, 35, and 50mm f/2 primes are dwarfed on this body but perform well.

The new EVF is really nice and seems to be the same one from the GFX but with a noticeably higher refresh rate. It would be hard to image those that are anti-EVF disliking this one unless they are just set on OVF or nothing. The touch focus was responsive enough for most shooting. There seemed to be a very slight delay in touch to focus then the focus box moving. It’s perceptaible but not a deal breaker to me. The joystick is still there for those that care. The Wxposure compensation button is placed nicely IMO and falls exactly where my index finger would be if I lift my finger from the shutter and bend it. The dials on the front and back of the camera felt nice and were positioned where I’d like them.

The shutter is incredibly quiet and has a really soft feel similar to using a soft release on a Leica M IMO. When I first took a shot it had about the same loudness volume as a lens focus motor. Perceptible to the shooter but unlikely to be heard by anyone without the ears of a dog on the streets. Rear LCD quality is about equal as the XT2. The camera reacts faster though for instance when you rotate it to portrait mode the information realigns more quickly than the XT2.

All in all its it’s a great effort by Fuji and the camera is their most comfortable to hold IMO (besides the GFX). If I had to compare it to other mirrorless cameras then I’d say it felt like a slightly taller and slightly wider A7RII. I didn’t preorder one yet (mostly because I’m mulling over lens selection after using them all today) but the Fuji rep mentioned that they’re shipping a large amount of bodies stateside and they expect that it will be a hit with photographers. As for now I imagine the 16-55 and/or 50-140 are must buys for me and I’m leaning towards adding the 56 and 90 as well. Generally I’d like to have a 35 and or 50 equivalent but I didn’t really love either of Fuji’s offerings in f/1.4 or f/2. I realize this is subjective but they don’t compare favorably optically with my Sony lenses in that range from what I could tell. I will likely look at samples on Flickr to make a decision but I’m leaning towards one of the 35’s or maybe just the 23/1.4... oh but the 16/1.4 is really nice IMO too.

Thanks, indeed very valuable update on the X-H1 capabilities. Reflect my feelings about that camera as a former X-T2 owner.

The 16-55 and 50-150 seem to be no brainers, the 100-400 if you are into sports and wildlife - I loved it on the X-T2, so I only can imagine how wonderful it must feel on the X-H1. I owned the 1.4/23 and the 1.2/56 and while they were slow focussing on the X-T1 they should be pretty perfect on the X-H1 - both exceptionally sharp and capable. I would consider the 2.8/80 instead of the 2/90 as it has OIS and is a macro and the results I have seen from this lens are simply stunning! I would definitely buy the X-H1 in combination with the hand grip as it offers so much more flexibility and much better ergonomics for certain situations and combination.

Wish you all the best luck with your decision, but if I were you I would go solely Fuji - GFX and X-H1.