biglouis
Well-known member
I decided to get a second X body for a project I've just been appointed to deliver. It is going to involve a lot of reportage at events which cannot be recreated. Nervous that if I relied on my X-T3 alone I'd be taking a risk I decided to get a second body.
My choice was to go for the X-H1, which arrived yesterday - along with a second hand 16/1.4 and 23/2. I figured as a set-up I'd use the OIS trinity (10-24, 18-55, 55-200) on the X-T3 and the non-stabilised lenses on the X-H1.
Once again (this is the second time I've owned an X-H1, I traded my last one for the GFX50R) I am blown away by this camera. I honestly think I'll use it more on the project than the X-T3. Ergonomics, the quiet shutter, the comfortable grip (less slippery than the X-T3) all make it the camera I most want to pick up. Easily as attractive as the 50R, imho. I'd say the only draw back is the limited AF points (not a problem for the work I am doing but more of a problem for wildlife - where the X-T3 is better) and that the IQ is about one stop noisier than the X-T3 (which I can fix in post with the new Topaz AI if I have to).
Why oh why was this camera less of a success for Fuji than the X-T3? I just do not get it. It is great that the X-T3 has been such a success as I assume it ensures that Fuji will continue to deliver for years but why did the market and the media (represented by YouTubers) give it the boot as soon as the X-T3 appeared?
For me, the X-T3 is an enthusiast camera whereas the X-H1 is much more of a pro-body, in the same league as the D800 or 5DmkX etc. Anyway, I will find it hard to part with this camera body a second time although my intention is use it for the project then sell it.
As enthusiasts it is very easy to get swept up in the latest technology without realising that for all practical purposes all modern digital cameras are sufficient for commercial uses. My client for this work has already been more than pleased with the odd capture I have done with Ricoh GRIII (which can be very handy in reportage situations) so I can't see any reason why they would be displeased with results from the X-H1 over the X-T3 or any other equivalent 'more modern' camera.
The proof of the pudding etc... so here are a few initial captures. I can't wait to test it out on my first assignment which is in March.
X-H1, 5-shots bracketed and merged, 16/1.4 at f16, handheld, the last shot in the sequence was taken at 1/8th second.
X-H1, 23/2 - single shot f8
X-H1, 55-200
My choice was to go for the X-H1, which arrived yesterday - along with a second hand 16/1.4 and 23/2. I figured as a set-up I'd use the OIS trinity (10-24, 18-55, 55-200) on the X-T3 and the non-stabilised lenses on the X-H1.
Once again (this is the second time I've owned an X-H1, I traded my last one for the GFX50R) I am blown away by this camera. I honestly think I'll use it more on the project than the X-T3. Ergonomics, the quiet shutter, the comfortable grip (less slippery than the X-T3) all make it the camera I most want to pick up. Easily as attractive as the 50R, imho. I'd say the only draw back is the limited AF points (not a problem for the work I am doing but more of a problem for wildlife - where the X-T3 is better) and that the IQ is about one stop noisier than the X-T3 (which I can fix in post with the new Topaz AI if I have to).
Why oh why was this camera less of a success for Fuji than the X-T3? I just do not get it. It is great that the X-T3 has been such a success as I assume it ensures that Fuji will continue to deliver for years but why did the market and the media (represented by YouTubers) give it the boot as soon as the X-T3 appeared?
For me, the X-T3 is an enthusiast camera whereas the X-H1 is much more of a pro-body, in the same league as the D800 or 5DmkX etc. Anyway, I will find it hard to part with this camera body a second time although my intention is use it for the project then sell it.
As enthusiasts it is very easy to get swept up in the latest technology without realising that for all practical purposes all modern digital cameras are sufficient for commercial uses. My client for this work has already been more than pleased with the odd capture I have done with Ricoh GRIII (which can be very handy in reportage situations) so I can't see any reason why they would be displeased with results from the X-H1 over the X-T3 or any other equivalent 'more modern' camera.
The proof of the pudding etc... so here are a few initial captures. I can't wait to test it out on my first assignment which is in March.
X-H1, 5-shots bracketed and merged, 16/1.4 at f16, handheld, the last shot in the sequence was taken at 1/8th second.
X-H1, 23/2 - single shot f8
X-H1, 55-200